Lies? What lies?

Question

How did George Bush "lie" to America about Iraq when the intelligance agencies of the U.S and Britian had UNANIMOUS evidence that Hussein had or was ready to get weapons of mass destruction? So we didn't find them, all that means is that Hussein was ready to get them instead of actually having them when we invaded! The information that the U.S and Britian collected was correct, AS IS PROVEN BY SADDAM'S NUMBER TWO MAN-Georges Sada-WHO SAID THAT SADDAM WAS READY TO GET THEM FROM SYRIA!!!!

So, what did he lie about?

Volleyball, it was an either-or situation. EITHER he already had WMD's OR was ready to get WMD's.

Get it?

Was ready to get them from Syria, moved them to Syria, WHATEVER!!!! The bottom line was Hussein was a HUGE threat to use them, therefore, Bush didn't lie.

Maybe if you stop watching MSNBC and start watching Fox News and their KICK *** RATINGS, you get some reliable information, which is where I got my intelligiance agency information regarding the us and Britian!

Liie I'm going to believe anything that Joe Wilson says? Did John Kerry, Bill Clinton, Harry Reid, and a legion of other democrats believe him?

Some "lies" about Nigeria! I'm assuming you also think that Bush caused 9-11?

I know truepatriot, I'm God's little angel! Just like Michael and the arch angels declare a bloody war on Satan in the book of Revelation, I call for a bloody war against the demons we are fighting overseas! It's like Napoleon once said, "the price of victory is BLOOD."

By the way, "we" in reference to the United States doesn't include anti-American communists like yourself! "TruePatriot"? More like "TrueTerrorist"!!!!

Jenny B, who do you think I'm going to believe, government agencies like the CIA that go and find their information? Or Washingto Posts journalists that get their news via the wire reports? I'll take the government agencies and their in depth access to critical information!

Hey! Rick M! I heard there's a Twighlit Zone marathon on Sci-Fi! You said that your 51, so you HAVE to remember that show, right? Why don't you go ahead and watch it while people like me have a political debate involving real facts!

Thank you Jenna B! your the only reasonable liberal on here!

Excellent sources, but let me ask you this: how does all this information prove that Bush lied? It certainly proves that the info collected by the CIA and Britian regarding Hussein getting WMD's was wrong, but it doesn't mean that Bush was making claims that he KNEW were wrong. According to this story that you've given me, Bush was clueless. There's a difference between being clueless and being a liar. You proved that Bush was cluless about the info that he got, but can you prove that he KNEW that the info was wrong?

Great stuff on that Pillar guy, Jenny B, now here's my responce:

You still haven't proved that Bush lied. Even if he wasn't completely clueless like your sources claim, you yourself admitted that there were plenty of claims based off "intelligiance" that Hussein actually DID have WMD's. You're right, he should have been more rreasonable with the American people instead of jumping to conclusions, but does that prove that he lied? That's what I'm asking here: "How did he lie?" Spinning is not lying. You proved that Bush spun the information that he got to fit his agenda, but you didn't prove that he lied. I had always believed that Bush's sources were unanimious, and you proved me wrong. But at the same time, even those in depth discoveries show that there were a rrasonable amount of people who told him that Iraq DID have WMD's or was ready to get them, and liberals like Kerry and Clinton believed that.

lltrix, you didn't prove that Bush lied! Way to f..k up your argument!

My source for Saddam getting WMD's from Syria (which was really "sending" them to Syria) is his book "Saddam's Secrets." I can't give you a link to his exact quotes about the WMD;s because it is a copyright book. I've never read the book, but I was watching Hannity and Colmes when they were interviewing Sada, and he said something about Hussein and WMD's in Syria. I thought he said "was ready to get" them from Syria, when he really "sent" them to Syria, but whatever! Neither proves that Bush lied! Prove that he lied! Even Jenny B with her superb sources won't say that Bush lied! It's like I said, spinning isn't lying! The media spins all the time to make Bush-and all of America-look bad, but only Dan Rather has actually told "lies" about Bush.

"based on conjecture. "I mean honestly, how do you expect me to give you definitive proof he lied?"

Guess what Jenny B, if you can't give me definitive proof that Bush lied like Bill Clinton did with Monica Lewinski, then you have no grounds to stand on. You proved that Bush misled the American people based on a conjecture that turned out to be a mistake. Great! You proved that he wasn't as honest as he should be. Great! But guess what, NONE OF THAT IS AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE LIKE BILL CLINTON LYING UNDER OATH ABOUT MONICA LEWINSKI WAS!!!! Every president spins and pushes their personal agenda, but only Clinton has LIED about something that was proved 100% to be WRONG! And to make matters worse, he lied UNDER OATH!!! That is an impeachable offense, and not even the activist judges could save Clinton from being impeached! What does that tell you?

But as for Bush, if you can't prove that he lied beyond a reasonable doubt like Clinton did, you can't say he broke the law!

"That aside, do you honestly think it's okay that Bush started a war based on conjecture? That's a shame. Americans can't trust their President to tell them the truth in a matter as important as National Security."

Yes, I do think it's okay to start a war based on conjecture!! I believe that the WMD's were a FACTOR in Bush's decision to invade Iraq, but even if they WEREN'T an imminent threat at the time (which you proved that they weren't through that Washington Post column), I don't believe that the WMD's were the ONLY factor in the invasion.

I believe that Saddam's crimes against humanity and Iraq's rich oil reserves played a factor as well, therefore, when you combine the WMD's Saddam's atrocities, and the oil, Bush had a right to lead us to war based on Conjecture. (I'll address the specifics of the atrocities and the oil if you want me to). And hey, if it hurts national security, how come we've only lost 3000 soldiers and haven't been attacked on the homefront since 9/11?

The National Intelligence Estimate can say all give us all the information in the world about how there are more terrorists overseas and stuff! If that's THEIR definition of "unsafe," whatever! Until the terrorists attack us again like they did on 9-11, why should I care? Do you have a better solution to fight these demons than war, which eliminated the Nazis and Confederates? Diplomacy? How did that work out for Nevile Chamberlain?
And if you think that it will be cheap to make a full-fledged switch from oil to something else, you're nuts!! Our country doesn't have the economic power or the will to do that!! What's wrong with taking all of Iraq's oil, which would lower our gas prices to less than $1.50 a gallon? What American is going to complain about that? Or what about drilling in Alaska? We've been funding terrorists for years, so wouldn't taking Iraq's oil and drilling in Alaska stop that?
I don't know why so many conservatives take offense to liberals complaining about oil!

I told you honey: I DON'T CARE WHAT THE NIE SAYS!!!! I'LL TAKE HISTORY OVER THE NIE, AND HISTORY SAYS THAT NEGOTIATIONS COST MILLIONS OF LIVES AT THE HANDS OF HITLER!!! THE TERRORISTS OVERSEAS ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM HITLER, AS THEY PROVED ON 9/11, SO WHY SHOULD WE NEGOTIATE WITH THEM? YOU SAY THAT WE CAN'T POSSIBLY KILL EVERY TERRORIST!! YOU'RE CRAZY!!! WE KILLED EVERY NAZI, SO WHY CAN'T WE KILL EVERY TERRORIST AS WELL?? I THINK YOU JUST DON'T BELIEVE IN EVIL!! GUESS WHAT SWEETIE, WELCOME TO REALITY!!!
And as for oil, would you please defend this claim:The price of oil is not solely dependant on supply/demand economics." If by "solely" you mean 100%, than yeah, you're right, but oil prices are 95% based on supply and demand! That's called "capitalism," a term obviously foreign to liberals like you!
Oh, and of COURSE Bush didn't say he's going to take Iraq's oil! Why would he-that would be disastorious!! But I still believe that oil is somehow involved-and it should be.

By the way, you didn't give me a reason for why we shouldn't drill in Alaska! Admit it honey-your against having oil as America's main source of energy!!

I stand corrected on drilling in Alaska, although I still believe that oil shoould be the main source of fuel in America!
Now about war. Even if we didn't kill every Nazi, its like you said, "what we did was we effectively made their cause and their political party non existent." How exactly did we do that? THROUGH WAR! I'll say this again: HOW DID NEGOTIATIONS WORK FOR CHAMBERLAIN? WHY SHOULD WE LISTEN TO THE NIA WHEN AMERICAN HISTORY IS A 1000000X MORE VALUABLE SOURCE! THAT'S NOT "FITTING MY AGENDA," IT'S COMMON SENSE! DUH!
Even In Gueralla warfare, we bombed the crap out of Vietnam and DESTROYED them at the Tet Offensive, yet thanks to the media and the Anti-Americanism of the the protesters like John Lennon, we lost! We were BEATING them militarily, yet our own cowardice caused us to loose! What's wrong with bombing people who want to fight a Gueralla war? It worked in Vietnam!

I should add this in, because I know you are going to plead the 1st Ammendment right to protest: YOU DON'T HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROTEST AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT IN A TIME OF WAR!!!! ABRAHAM LINCOLN DIDN'T ALLOW IT, WOODROW WILSON DIDN'T ALLOW IT, FDR DIDN'T ALLOW IT, AND HARRY TRUMAN DIDN'T ALLOW IT!!! THE 1919 LAW "SCHENK VS. UNITED STATES" GIVES THE PRESIDENT THE RIGHT TO ILLEGALIZE ACTIONS CONSIDERED HARMFUL TO THE WAR EFFORT.
PROTESTING CAUSED US TO LOOSE A WAR THAT WE WERE WINNING IN VIETNAM!! W IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED!! TO BAD IT IS!!
AGAIN, READ SCHENK VS. THE UNITED STATES (AND BASIC AMERICAN HISTORY) AND GET BACK TO ME!!

AMERICAN HISTORY ALWAYS TRUMPS THE NIE!!

Answer 1

Liberals still haven't gotten over the Florida recount. Saying "Bush lied" is the only thing they can say since they can't form a logical argument.

Answer 2

You need to watch "Why we fight". It will answer all your questions. BTW, Bush did lie about WMD's and Saddam having them and getting them. The yellow cake from Nigeria was a fabrication that was cooked up by Cheney. This was all proven by CIA intelligence and by Italian intelligence that supposedly where Cheney got the info. It was a lie. Saddams' number two man saying that he was ready to get them from Syria? I don't suppose you have links and credible documents to prove that do you? I didn't think so.
It's a known fact that Cheney was in CIA headquarters everyday monitoring reports about IRAQ. It's a known fact that he had the people writing the reports and taking note alter the language and the information on those reports.
Little girl, you have a lot to learn.
BTW, the Libby case made libby look like the liar, it had nothing to do with Wilson. You really need to watch the hearings or listen to them on the radio like I did. Wilson was right. It was Rove and Cheney who told Libby it was o.k to leak the name of Valerie Plame.

Answer 3

I have grave news today concerning the war (now, this might be the worst news in years about circumstances on the ground in Iraq): American and Iraqi forces are cracking down in Baghdad -- even as Democrats here are trying to undermine the troop surge that President Bush has ordered.

Shi'ite militiamen -- who just weeks ago were openly roaming the streets, armed to the teeth -- are in hiding, and have ditched their weapons. Some have even left the city. One of Mookie al Sadr's guys told the press that his gang had been given orders to stand down if American and Iraqi forces impose tight security on the city.

Now, this is no small matter, my friends, since Mookie's militia is considered one of the main obstacles to quelling the violence in Baghdad. Mookie himself, the head honcho of this gang, has reportedly fled to Iran. Shi'ite officials have told the press that Mookie's guys want to avoid a battle so they can protect their political seats in the Iraqi government.
And there's more news: Iraq's government has closed its borders with Iran and Syria. And despite Democrats here claiming that Iraqis are against the troop surge, their government is assuring Islamic nations that the surge and security plan now underway will work; that it will help end the sectarian violence.

The war is not lost. Iraqis are optimistic. The enemy is fleeing. This thing can be won! All is not hopeless...which is horrible news for the Democrats, as I told you at the beginning.

Answer 4

Say, little miss godlyteenbaby or whatever,when you grow up and become godlywoman, you can sit at the big table with the grown-ups. Until then isn't there an episode of American Idol or something on mtv that's a little more your speed?The cons that voted with their brains did so because that's what the people want. That's how government is supposed to work. You can return to Mandy Moore videos now.

Answer 5

Bush never lied to anyone. He just went along with the
intelligence supplied to him. Most others in Washington
believed it too and that includes Hillary Clinton. I thought
we heard that Saddam killed his own people with ingredients
found in Wmd's. Some think that since it took so long for
our inspectors to get over there to look for wmd, that Saddam
had them moved to Iran or Syria. Makes sense to me. Those
dictators all help each other,you know.

Answer 6

Because there are people easily fooled by compulsive liars, or they probably see themselves as being no different from Bush, the Liar. Bad people tend to be attracted to bad people -- the very reason why we see gangs, mobsters, mafia, etc. etc. in our society!

And oh yeah, buttercup, why aren't we bombing all those nations in S. America, or N. Korea, or Sudan, or Rwanda and remove their evil governments? After all their heads of governments have been gunning down their citizens and even killing American citizens inside some of those countries? Hhhmh, probably no oil wealth, or no Zionist NeoCons bribing our leaders to spin up wars to fight their cause.

Answer 7

I dont believe that he lied, but I dont believe he was telling the truth either. I really think that no one was sure, and Bush, rather than not doing anything and getting hurt for it, like on September 11th, decided he would strike and take out the possibility...My best advice would be to research research research and dont take anyones word for anything....everyone has their perspective and flimsy facts, so you need to make your own decisions about current events. Just remember the government is not faultless and that they do have the power to hide things more than the average American does......do your research, hear both sides, and keep an open mind. It may suprise you

Answer 8

Aluminum tubes, yellowcake uranium, and the meeting with Muhammad Atta in Prague. Actually most of the heavy lying was commited by Cheney to keep Bush squeeky clean.

Answer 9

I think that Saddam hadWMD's & shipped them to Syria while we were wasting time jabbering at the UN. That just seems more likely than the alternative explanation that after evicting the inspectors in 1998, Saddam spent the next 5 yrars systematically destroying them & managed to fool every intel service in the world.

President George W Bush did NOT lie.

Answer 10

The President was supplied with Intelligence which contradicted the WMS etc. propoganda.
That intelligence was suppressed and the false Propaganda was presented to the United Nations.

Answer 11

It relies upon on what the lie is like if I ask: Q: have you ever finished something with yet another lady even as we were relationship? A(lie): uh... no Than not in any respect might want to forgive him. If it change into: Q: What grade did you get in ELA? A(lie): ninety 8 that could want to slide