The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

[Liminal]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

The desire to invade was long present before 9/11. 9/11 was just good timing to those wishing to make money from yet another war. If we don't have regular wars and other conflicts, defense contractors have no chance to sell their wares. Just as if automobiles were built so well you never had to buy a newer model car makers would go out of business so they're made to fail.

 

[Liminal]

We were told there was a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. That turned out to be false.

Gotcha, using WMDs didn't prove he had them, that takes a UN inspection. Proving Ed's point...

We were specifically told there were nuclear weapons, so we had to invade immediately. Remember? Where are the nuclear weapons? They already knew for sure that Iran had a nuclear program, why not invade them?

 

[Edgetho]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

Only an IDIOT of monumental proportions that should be sterilized to prevent its defective genes from infesting the gene pool believes shit that stupid.

In order to bellieve that, you'd have to believe Mossad was in on it (plausible but not likely), that MI-6 was in on it..... Implausible and HIGHLY unlikely, that the Russian FSB was in it (absurd) that the Iranian Intelligence Service was in on it, (plausible but unlikely -- Iran hates us more than they hated their Sunni rivals), that Pakistan ISI was in on it (stupidity) and that Indian Intelligence was in on it (absurd) and French Surete was in on it as well as the Italians.

None of those entities has come out to tell us that some rogue agents or analysts were in on the deception...... As much as the current worm in the White House would like for them to.

So, IOW, anyone that believes that Bush concocted some sort of 'Grand Deception' is stupid enough to be a Truffer.

Which.....

More than half of Democrats believed Bush knew - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

There aren't a lot of great public numbers on the partisan breakdown of adherents to that conspiracy theory, but the University of Ohio yesterday shared with us the crosstabs of a 2006 poll they did with Scripps Howard that's useful in that regard.

"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?" the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was "very likely." Another 28.2% called it "somewhat likely."

That is: More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth

Period

 

[Liminal]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

The desire to invade was long present before 9/11. 9/11 was just good timing to those wishing to make money from yet another war. If we don't have regular wars and other conflicts, defense contractors have no chance to sell their wares. Just as if automobiles were built so well you never had to buy a newer model car makers would go out of business so they're made to fail.

Defense contractors don't make war, your elected representatives do.

 

[boilermaker55]

Your kind have more than nerve to make that statement about attacking a president.
So with that in mind, the credibility of the OP and those like yourself have no CREDIBILITY!

Thank you for posting this.

I get so sick and tired of the Left attacking a president who did what he thought best to defend American people – the very thing he swore to do when he took office. This story comes from someone who was THERE and reviewed the same information available to the president.


It's not a matter of whether or not Hussein had the weapons, it's that the left continues to support lies in trying to make them fact. It's dangerous.

 

[Liminal]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

Only an IDIOT of monumental proportions that should be sterilized to prevent its defective genes from infesting the gene pool believes shit that stupid.

In order to bellieve that, you'd have to believe Mossad was in on it (plausible but not likely), that MI-6 was in on it..... Implausible and HIGHLY unlikely, that the Russian FSB was in it (absurd) that the Iranian Intelligence Service was in on it, (plausible but unlikely -- Iran hates us more than they hated their Sunni rivals), that Pakistan ISI was in on it (stupidity) and that Indian Intelligence was in on it (absurd) and French Surete was in on it as well as the Italians.

None of those entities has come out to tell us that some rogue agents or analysts were in on the deception...... As much as the current worm in the White House would like for them to.

So, IOW, anyone that believes that Bush concocted some sort of 'Grand Deception' is stupid enough to be a Truffer.

Which.....

More than half of Democrats believed Bush knew - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

There aren't a lot of great public numbers on the partisan breakdown of adherents to that conspiracy theory, but the University of Ohio yesterday shared with us the crosstabs of a 2006 poll they did with Scripps Howard that's useful in that regard.

"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?" the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was "very likely." Another 28.2% called it "somewhat likely."

That is: More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth

Period

I read the first line and then stopped. I can't take you seriously.

 

[Delta4Embassy]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

Only an IDIOT of monumental proportions that should be sterilized to prevent its defective genes from infesting the gene pool believes shit that stupid.

In order to bellieve that, you'd have to believe Mossad was in on it (plausible but not likely), that MI-6 was in on it..... Implausible and HIGHLY unlikely, that the Russian FSB was in it (absurd) that the Iranian Intelligence Service was in on it, (plausible but unlikely -- Iran hates us more than they hated their Sunni rivals), that Pakistan ISI was in on it (stupidity) and that Indian Intelligence was in on it (absurd) and French Surete was in on it as well as the Italians.

None of those entities has come out to tell us that some rogue agents or analysts were in on the deception...... As much as the current worm in the White House would like for them to.

So, IOW, anyone that believes that Bush concocted some sort of 'Grand Deception' is stupid enough to be a Truffer.

Which.....

More than half of Democrats believed Bush knew - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

There aren't a lot of great public numbers on the partisan breakdown of adherents to that conspiracy theory, but the University of Ohio yesterday shared with us the crosstabs of a 2006 poll they did with Scripps Howard that's useful in that regard.

"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?" the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was "very likely." Another 28.2% called it "somewhat likely."

That is: More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth

Period

I read the first line and then stopped. I can't take you seriously.

Read more than me. Keep getting false alerts because one of my posts was present somewhere in the reply-chain.

 

[Edgetho]

[

I read the first line and then stopped. I can't take you seriously.

You don't take anything else seriously; why should I be an exception?

 

[Liminal]

Isn't retroactively changing historical facts exactly the premise of "1984?"

Bush lied about Iraq to justify the war. That's not subject to historical revision or right-think. It's fact. Come along later and try to convince people it isn't because his idiot brother wants to run is pretty obvously what you're doing. Oh don't elect Jeb, his brother lied about Iraq to justify a war. I can see how that'd be politically inconvenient, but trying to edit history for the benefit of his contemporaries is so pathetic and obvious you're hurting your cause even more assuming people are THAT stupid.

I think it's safe to say that there exists some room for doubt as to whether or not the intelligence was manipulated to fit an agenda.

Only an IDIOT of monumental proportions that should be sterilized to prevent its defective genes from infesting the gene pool believes shit that stupid.

In order to bellieve that, you'd have to believe Mossad was in on it (plausible but not likely), that MI-6 was in on it..... Implausible and HIGHLY unlikely, that the Russian FSB was in it (absurd) that the Iranian Intelligence Service was in on it, (plausible but unlikely -- Iran hates us more than they hated their Sunni rivals), that Pakistan ISI was in on it (stupidity) and that Indian Intelligence was in on it (absurd) and French Surete was in on it as well as the Italians.

None of those entities has come out to tell us that some rogue agents or analysts were in on the deception...... As much as the current worm in the White House would like for them to.

So, IOW, anyone that believes that Bush concocted some sort of 'Grand Deception' is stupid enough to be a Truffer.

Which.....

More than half of Democrats believed Bush knew - Ben Smith - POLITICO.com

There aren't a lot of great public numbers on the partisan breakdown of adherents to that conspiracy theory, but the University of Ohio yesterday shared with us the crosstabs of a 2006 poll they did with Scripps Howard that's useful in that regard.

"How likely is it that people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East?" the poll asked.

A full 22.6% of Democrats said it was "very likely." Another 28.2% called it "somewhat likely."

That is: More than half of Democrats, according to a neutral survey, said they believed Bush was complicit in the 9/11 terror attacks.

dimocraps are the scum of the earth

Period

I read the first line and then stopped. I can't take you seriously.

Read more than me. Keep getting false alerts because one of my posts was present somewhere in the reply-chain.

That's unfortunate, sorry you have to read that crap.

 

[Liminal]

[

I read the first line and then stopped. I can't take you seriously.

You don't take anything else seriously; why should I be an exception?

From what I've seen you only have two responses, angry and angrier.

 

[kaz]

We were told there was a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. That turned out to be false.

Gotcha, using WMDs didn't prove he had them, that takes a UN inspection. Proving Ed's point...

We were specifically told there were nuclear weapons, so we had to invade immediately. Remember? Where are the nuclear weapons? They already knew for sure that Iran had a nuclear program, why not invade them?

No, I don't remember him having nuclear weapons, can you link that? I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them. f you read the threads, you know I don't ask for links if I can find them myself. I can't find that.

 

[Liminal]

We were told there was a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. That turned out to be false.

Gotcha, using WMDs didn't prove he had them, that takes a UN inspection. Proving Ed's point...

We were specifically told there were nuclear weapons, so we had to invade immediately. Remember? Where are the nuclear weapons? They already knew for sure that Iran had a nuclear program, why not invade them?

No, I don't remember him having nuclear weapons, can you link that? I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them. f you read the threads, you know I don't ask for links if I can find them myself. I can't find that.

Bush s Claims About Iraq s Nuclear Program

 

[Liminal]

No WMDs in Iraq

 

[kaz]

We were told there was a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. That turned out to be false.

Gotcha, using WMDs didn't prove he had them, that takes a UN inspection. Proving Ed's point...

We were specifically told there were nuclear weapons, so we had to invade immediately. Remember? Where are the nuclear weapons? They already knew for sure that Iran had a nuclear program, why not invade them?

No, I don't remember him having nuclear weapons, can you link that? I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them. f you read the threads, you know I don't ask for links if I can find them myself. I can't find that.

Bush s Claims About Iraq s Nuclear Program

OK, thanks for a link showing what I told you, "I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them."

Now you got one that shows your statement that he actually had nuclear weapons?

 

[Liminal]

We were told there was a nuclear weapons program in Iraq. That turned out to be false.

Gotcha, using WMDs didn't prove he had them, that takes a UN inspection. Proving Ed's point...

We were specifically told there were nuclear weapons, so we had to invade immediately. Remember? Where are the nuclear weapons? They already knew for sure that Iran had a nuclear program, why not invade them?

No, I don't remember him having nuclear weapons, can you link that? I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them. f you read the threads, you know I don't ask for links if I can find them myself. I can't find that.

Bush s Claims About Iraq s Nuclear Program

OK, thanks for a link showing what I told you, "I recall he had a program they were afraid would become nuclear weapons. I do not remember him actually having them."

Now you got one that shows your statement that he actually had nuclear weapons?

You want to play stupid? You can do that on your own, I'm done playing games with you.

 

[Political Junky]

 

[Dante]

Yes, it is dangerous. But for dimocraps it's a convenient lie. A lie that Republicans are tired of fighting.
...

Read my lips: no new taxes.

I actually think what people like you call a lie is nothing but a misstatement or a change in position. You trivialize true lying to the point where it all becomes useless to hold truth telling up as a value

 

[Dante]

hmm,

I think this editing is a shit job and disingenuous

 

[Kosh]

Obama lied and people died!!