People who claim that Bush lied about WMD are lying themselves?

[XZeroII]

It really irks me how people can continue to claim that Bush lied about Iraq having WMD! A lie is when you knowingly say something that you know is not true. Go back to before all this started and Bush did not know that Iraq did not have WMD. Based on the info he had at the time, there was a good possibility that Iraq did have them. Thus, it was not a lie. For those who still don't understand, let me clarify a bit more. If Bush had known for sure (100% sure) that Iraq did not possess WMD and he claimed that they did, that would be a lie. This was not the case. Bush actually thought that they did, thus it was not a lie.

Now, despite the fact that this has been brought up before, I will assume that no one actually knew what a lie actually was when they were making their claims, so you all were not actually lying. Just like Bush, you were all just making a false statement because you had incorrect information. However, from now on, I would expect that you keep this in mind when you're off making some grandios claims about how someone lied.

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
It really irks me how people can continue to claim that Bush lied about Iraq having WMD! A lie is when you knowingly say something that you know is not true. Go back to before all this started and Bush did not know that Iraq did not have WMD. Based on the info he had at the time, there was a good possibility that Iraq did have them. Thus, it was not a lie. For those who still don't understand, let me clarify a bit more. If Bush had known for sure (100% sure) that Iraq did not possess WMD and he claimed that they did, that would be a lie. This was not the case. Bush actually thought that they did, thus it was not a lie.

Now, despite the fact that this has been brought up before, I will assume that no one actually knew what a lie actually was when they were making their claims, so you all were not actually lying. Just like Bush, you were all just making a false statement because you had incorrect information. However, from now on, I would expect that you keep this in mind when you're off making some grandios claims about how someone lied.

You better duck, inbound WMD in 45 minutes.

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Here's the major flaw in your logic . . . there was plenty of information that cast doubt on the administration claims . . . particularly the nuclear claims. Yet the administration: 1) vigorously pursued (and disseminated) somewhat confirmatory information, 2) universally interpreted ambiguous information as confirmatory, and 3) ignored or attempted to discredit exculpatory findings.

I saw nothing from JAN02-MAR03 that substantiated the urgency or degree of intervention by the US government under the auspices of protecting US citizens (or even Israeli citizens) . . . and it's for damn sure we didn't do this for Syria, Jordan, or Iran. Everyone that took issue with the Bushie interpretation (ie those of us intelligent enough to think for ourselves) were told, "just wait . . . you will see . . . the administration has sensitive intelligence (and sources) that cannot be revealed but the weapons are definitely there!". Well . . . we are 9 months out and not only has NO new intelligence been revealed (although Blair did a tease routine in the UK) but no weapons nor substantitive weapons program has materialized.

The only hope Bush has is the benefit of a doubt that he's dumb enough to believe everything his closest advisors tell him. Accordingly, Bush wouldn't be the liar . . . but apparently he keeps a lot of company with them.

 

[tallest1]

If your argument were that sound and that simple, Cad and Co would've thought of it months ago. Now tell me,

If Bush had known for sure (100% sure) that Iraq DID possess WMD and he claimed that they did, that would be a truth. This was not the case (Everyone knows he HAD WMDs but few of his own sources said there were). Bush ignored the building proof against his claim, thus hes an idiot

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
It really irks me how people can continue to claim that Bush lied about Iraq having WMD! A lie is when you knowingly say something that you know is not true. Go back to before all this started and Bush did not know that Iraq did not have WMD. Based on the info he had at the time, there was a good possibility that Iraq did have them. Thus, it was not a lie. For those who still don't understand, let me clarify a bit more. If Bush had known for sure (100% sure) that Iraq did not possess WMD and he claimed that they did, that would be a lie. This was not the case. Bush actually thought that they did, thus it was not a lie.

Now, despite the fact that this has been brought up before, I will assume that no one actually knew what a lie actually was when they were making their claims, so you all were not actually lying. Just like Bush, you were all just making a false statement because you had incorrect information. However, from now on, I would expect that you keep this in mind when you're off making some grandios claims about how someone lied.

A lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive.

Your premise ignores the evidence that Bush and his minions actively manipulated intelligence used to justify their invasion. It ignores the fact that their own experts and other experts around the globe told them they were wrong long before the invasion. It ignores the fact that they not only ignored conflicting information, they vigorously slandered anyone who dared provide contrary information.

Even if Bush and his minions truly believed Iraq retained some WMD capabilities in spite of all the evidence to the contrary, the fact remains they consistently misrepresented and overstated what they had and what they knew in order to convince America to support the invasion. They intended to deceive us about the certainty of their information. They intended to deceive us by making claims that were distorted or omitted key information. They intended to deceive us by using innuendo to suggest connections that did not exist and ideas they knew were not accurate. That is lying, plain and simple.

A lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive.

If you wish to claim that Bush himself didn't know this because he was isolated and fed false information by his minions, so be it. Instead of a liar, that makes him an idiot, an incompetent boob, a brainless marionette controlled by the very people he is supposed to lead. Either way, he is completely unqualified for a position of such responsibility and authority. Personally, I still think he is a liar. If you'd rather think he's an idiot, who am I to disagree?

 

[Gonad the Barbarian]

there was a good possibility that Iraq did have them

Taking a good possibility and presenting it as hard fact is not deceitful?

 

[XZeroII]

I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

LOL..he's not? Show me one Politician who is not a liar! What about all that BS he claimed about the Texas School system when he was running for president? That all turned out to be a bunch of BS!

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

Prove he is not a liar. Show the intel that allowed bush to claim he knew where the WMD were located and all the other BS claims he made.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

 

[busmaster11]

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

Why don't you answer the responses to your intial post instead of uselessly reiterating your conclusion?

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

Lying is intentionally saying something that you know is untrue. Decietful is not caring about truth, but saying it anyway. Could be true or untrue.

 

[tallest1]

So do you, XZeroII, acknowledge that our president has, at the very least, been deceitful?

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: busmaster11

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

Why don't you answer the responses to your intial post instead of uselessly reiterating your conclusion?

What else do I need to say? Everyone else it getting off on tangents. My point is plain and simple with no hidden messages or anything.

The only hope Bush has is the benefit of a doubt that he's dumb enough to believe everything his closest advisors tell him. Accordingly, Bush wouldn't be the liar . . . but apparently he keeps a lot of company with them.

That is a completely different topic.

If Bush had known for sure (100% sure) that Iraq DID possess WMD and he claimed that they did, that would be a truth. This was not the case (Everyone knows he HAD WMDs but few of his own sources said there were). Bush ignored the building proof against his claim, thus hes an idiot

Yes, fine. He is an idiot. Who cares. That's not my point.

If you wish to claim that Bush himself didn't know this because he was isolated and fed false information by his minions, so be it. Instead of a liar, that makes him an idiot, an incompetent boob, a brainless marionette controlled by the very people he is supposed to lead

Thank you for agreeing.

Taking a good possibility and presenting it as hard fact is not deceitful?

I agree. But we aren't talking about deciet! We are talking about lying.

LOL..he's not? Show me one Politician who is not a liar! What about all that BS he claimed about the Texas School system when he was running for president? That all turned out to be a bunch of BS!

I'm talking about WMD. Not schools. I agree though, all politicians are liars in one way or another. Every person on earth is a liar. Some just more than others. Once again, off on a tangent.

Prove he is not a liar. Show the intel that allowed bush to claim he knew where the WMD were located and all the other BS claims he made

Did you even read my post? Or did you just read the title and make your ignorant post?



Is this good enough for answering all the posts that related to my original post? Do you see how pointless it was and how hardly anyone had anything even remotely relavent to say?

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: tallest1
So do you, XZeroII, acknowledge that our president has, at the very least, been deceitful?

Of course! He's a liar! He manipulates data! He does the hokey pokey and turns himself around. But I see no evidence that he lied about the WMD. There is no proof that he lied about it. In fact, the evidence shows that he made a calculated risk going into Iraq. He had data saying it was there, and data saying it was not. He had to weigh the evidence and options and make a decision. If you have evidence that Bush KNEW for a fact that Iraq did not have WMD, I'm all ears. I will make a public apology in a new thread claiming that I was wrong and Bush lied about it. However, all I ever hear is conjecture, hearsay and stuff pulled out of the air.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

Lying is intentionally saying something that you know is untrue. Decietful is not caring about truth, but saying it anyway. Could be true or untrue.

Sorry, a lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive. To quibble about the difference between "lie" and "deceive" puts one on the same path as debating what "is" is.

 

[Spencer278]

like I said show why bush believed 100% that there where WMD at the time he was making all the BS claims and people will believe he is not a liar. If there is no edvidence that shows to back up his claims we can assume he lied.

 

[XZeroII]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

Lying is intentionally saying something that you know is untrue. Decietful is not caring about truth, but saying it anyway. Could be true or untrue.

Sorry, a lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive. To quibble about the difference between "lie" and "deceive" puts one on the same path as debating what "is" is.

They are close, I admit, but they are different. You are right, though. I just couldn't think of a better way to put it. However, you can see that deceit is a falsehood, while a lie is an intentional falsehood. See my previous post for my response to this...

 

[Dari]

It's funny how everyone believed he had WMDs before we invaded. It's also funny how prominent Democrats during and after the Clinton presidency claimed that they believed Iraq had WMDs. But the funniest part is how Iraq booted the inspectors in 1998 if they didn't have WMDs and finally give inspectors less than full access when their backs were against the wall.

I guess the extreme liberals will believe what they want even though history says otherwise. I will leave them to their devices. They've been wrong throughout history and this is no different. IMHO, it's absolutely pointless pointing out the facts when they will reply "But he lied." Their minds are closed.

 

[tallest1]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

Lying is intentionally saying something that you know is untrue. Decietful is not caring about truth, but saying it anyway. Could be true or untrue.

Sorry, a lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive. To quibble about the difference between "lie" and "deceive" puts one on the same path as debating what "is" is.

I agree. Unless you're an English major, your argument has been completely shot.

 

[Jhhnn]

Your assertions, XZeroII, not only prove that GWB is a liar, but that he is easily one of the most effective liars in modern history.

Good lies always contain some element of truth, it's what makes them work. The underlying psychology of belief is what allows conmen to fleece the same marks over and over, even when they know that the perp has fleeced them repeatedly in the past.

Could I interst you in some South Dakota oceanfront? We know it's oceanfront because of the seashells, you just have to wait for the tide to come in...

Might as well have a big red "S" tatooed on your forehead- "S" for Sucker...

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: XZeroII
I don't care if you think he is an idiot, or decietful, or whatever. But he is NOT a liar. I just want to read a single thread regarding this stupid war and not see some person call him a liar.

What's the difference between deceitful and liar?

Lying is intentionally saying something that you know is untrue. Decietful is not caring about truth, but saying it anyway. Could be true or untrue.

Sorry, a lie is anything said or done with the intent to deceive. To quibble about the difference between "lie" and "deceive" puts one on the same path as debating what "is" is.

That is my attitude as well.

XZeroII, what is the practical difference between knowingly misrepresenting a thing as fact and a lie?

 

[chess9]

XZeroII:

As I see it, Bush did one of these:

1. Lied.
2. Intentionally kept himself ignorant of the facts in order to justify going to war so he had a remote chance of getting a second term.
3. He was sloppy, i.e., didn't read all of the material, etc. This should be the defense of those Senatorys like Kerry and Gebhart that gave the President a blank check. I think they just didn't do their homework.

So, do you believe your President is lazy, dumb, a liar, or some combination of those? If I were a Republican I'd vote for liar, but I think dumb and intellectually lazy is probably closest to the truth.

-Robert

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Dari
It's funny how everyone believed he had WMDs before we invaded. It's also funny how prominent Democrats during and after the Clinton presidency claimed that they believed Iraq had WMDs. But the funniest part is how Iraq booted the inspectors in 1998 if they didn't have WMDs and finally give inspectors less than full access when their backs were against the wall.

I guess the extreme liberals will believe what they want even though history says otherwise. I will leave them to their devices. They've been wrong throughout history and this is no different. IMHO, it's absolutely pointless pointing out the facts when they will reply "But he lied." Their minds are closed.

yeah it is really funny that people believed the president.

 

[XZeroII]

nm