Skip to comments.Who Is Lying About Iraq?
Posted on 01/13/2006 10:33:34 AM PST by Froufrou
Among the many distortions, misrepresentations, and outright falsifications that have emerged from the debate over Iraq, one in particular stands out above all others. This is the charge that George W. Bush misled us into an immoral and/or unnecessary war in Iraq by telling a series of lies that have now been definitively exposed.
What makes this charge so special is the amazing success it has enjoyed in getting itself established as a self-evident truth even though it has been refuted and discredited over and over again by evidence and argument alike. In this it resembles nothing so much as those animated cartoon characters who, after being flattened, blown up, or pushed over a cliff, always spring back to life with their bodies perfectly intact. Perhaps, like those cartoon characters, this allegation simply cannot be killed off, no matter what.
Nevertheless, I want to take one more shot at exposing it for the lie that it itself really is. Although doing so will require going over ground that I and many others have covered before, I hope that revisiting this well-trodden terrain may also serve to refresh memories that have grown dim, to clarify thoughts that have grown confused, and to revive outrage that has grown commensurately dulled.
(Excerpt) Read more at commentarymagazine.com ...
"It's a 'Slam-Dunk'" - George Tenent, Clinton appointee refering to inteligence gathered during the eight years of the Clinton Administration that Saddam Hussien had WMD's
"Boogie to Baghdad" - Richard Clarke, Clinton appointee refering to inteligence gathered during the eight years of the Clinton Administration that Osama Bin Laden would hide out in Iraq at the invitation of Saddam Hussien
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
Yet Clinton did nothing. I'm beginning to think the truth is really somewhere in the middle.
Going back to DU?
Teehee! Love you're tagline! I just sporked myself while reading this!
Good points! I get more stymied daily that the Libs' constituents buy their crap. OTOH, they've spent generations making the poor lazy, helpless and dumb. Using failing education systems to aid and abet them. :o(
Go to 'search' box, and type in 'Stephen Hayes'.
If you say he "lied", you're saying he knew they were gone and still led with them as justification. He was simultaneously smarter than the entire rest of the world and dumb as a post. Reductio ad absurdum.
Not all liberals are dumb, they just have selective perception. I used to send articles like this to some of my liberal friends (one is a physics professor) but now I have given up.
The initial split second where they recognize a publication or author as being on their "enemies" list, the entire article is dismissed. They then express sorrow over how deluded I am, but never offer any rebuttal.
"If you say he "lied", you're saying he knew they were gone and still led with them as justification. He was simultaneously smarter than the entire rest of the world and dumb as a post. Reductio ad absurdum."
The beauty of this is, of course, the abject simplicity of it. Glorious. ;o)
What gets me is the way the spew forth and insist they are right when they can't even google one of thousands of pieces to substantiate their claims. Why is there so little to derail their ilk?
Oh, sorry - you already answered that, didn't you? Because they insist on not derailing.
Maybe they'll just implode someday, starting with Ted the Toad.
My "enemies" list is probably ten times the size of their enemies list. It's great to be able to give the back of your hand to 70 percent of the "objective media". ;-)