The Dangerous Lie That ‘Bush Lied’

Neither did Nazi Germany. They like al Qaeda and ISIS declared war on America and we cleaned their clock. Sadly your BDS consumes you. Join the others in the asylum of the deranged. They're trying to run the asylum. Their leader is Barack Obama.

 

Pot says to kettle.

Put up your 'law degrees' Perry Mason, and grow up.

17 UN resolutions were violated. Just because the UN punked, doesn't mean we have to. And you do know what the Commander-In-Chief is, don't you? That's the guy who can send in troops where he deems necessary.And Hussein started jerking the inspectors around like he did for the 13 prior years. First he would say they can inspect, then he would limit access. The UN woulds get ticked and Hussein would comply.....partially. GW got sick of the game and said screw it. Inspectors were not given full unfettered access and the resumption of hostilities resumed. Now be a good boy and do your own homework on what specific UN resolutions were violated. Like I said there were 17 of them not counting 1441. Now go play with your powder blue UN helmet and Kofi Anon doll.

 

Right!!! Your first step to recovery. You admit that Clinton, Gore, Albright, Kerry, Levin, Daschle, Pelosi, and other Progressive Democrats all believed that Saddam Hussein had and was developing WMD in spite of claiming that Bush lied. Are you now claiming that the Progressive cabal was also part of PNAC and wanted war too?

 

Yes, the entire thing was a set up.

 

Mr. Spook unaccountable with his sack of cognitive distortions again. Here he is earlier. Zero accountability.

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=391740&page=2&p=1064645338#post1064645338

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=391740&page=4&p=1064654681#post1064654681

http://www.politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=391946&page=2&p=1064655295#post1064655295

 

When Americans figure out that partisan politics is a tool to divide and manipulate creating dominance for a secret government, we will be sooooooo much better off.

You really should be informed about the origins of our secret government.

https://www.cia.gov/library/center-...gram-to-bring-nazi-scientists-to-america.html

 

So should we thank a Democrat like Harry S. Truman for creating the CIA out of the former OSS?

 

No, we test ALL people as officials in office and those running for office. Here's the tests.

A) Test officials and candidates for acceptance of the root purpose of free speech being to assure information vital to unity needed to alter or abolish is shared and understood.

B)Test officials and candidates for acceptance of root purpose of free speech as prime constitutional intent used to create unity to conduct Article V with constitutional as the prime right for the purpose of protecting unalienable rights.

C) As an official of government, can you accept that EVERY American can understand and accept A)?

D) Are you aware that in 1911, 2/3 of the states applied for a convention and congress violated the law, their oath and the constitution by failing to convene delegates?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fs7qIQ1VkEg
http://my.firedoglake.com/danielmar...ands-for-article-v-constitutional-convention/
Can you accept that such a fact justifies that all delegates be elected in the states by the people of those states?

E) Can you understand and accept that any state legislator that cannot accept A), can be impeached in this constitutional emergency as being unfit for office?

F)Can you understand and accept that A) B) C) D) & E) are legal process and that IF citizens act with D) as justification, and E) to complete the legal process, they WILL be "the rightful masters of the congress and the courts" BECAUSE their states, as led by the people, then will agree that proper preparation for Article V consists of;

1) Amend Article V to assure the right to "alter or abolish" is enforceable under law by including preparatory amendment as a requirement.

2) End the abridging of free speech.

3) Securing the vote.

4) Campaign finance reform.

G) Do you agree that Officials of states and federal government need to accept that such preparation by amendment is completely constitutional and can only enable democratic assertion of the principles of the republic once complete? WHEREUPON all amendment ceases until America can assure it is competent to Article V by testing itself to assure it knows and can define constitutional intent

Parties will no longer matter, or they will change their character into something not very relevant.

 

BTW, congress just adopted a history making rule, which addresses part of my last post having to do with congress NOT EVEN counting applications for Article V. I made a thread about it, here.

http://www.politicalforum.com/lates...-count-article-v-convention-applications.html

Basically, we can see that Americans are completely distracted and mislead, clueless as to how to actually create change in their own country.

 

And it's even more incoherent as each day passes.

 

I have had some issues with that too.

But I really think that the Defense Department should get its old name back, the War Department.

Nobody needs a war, but everyone thinks they need defense. And it's reflected in what we've wasted on "defense" in the decades since WWII.

 

First, show us where Bush ever said there is no doubt. Second the CIA said this.

"Default
The official most likely to be embarrassed by "Plan of Attack" is CIA Director George Tenet. It was Tenet, as much as anyone, who convinced Bush that the president could safely tell the public that Iraq had WMD. On Dec. 21, 2002, Tenet and Deputy Director for Intelligence John McLaughlin briefed Bush, Cheney and Rice in the Oval Office. McLaughlin set up a slide show on the agency's top-secret evidence that Saddam possessed WMD. When he was finished, there was "a brief moment of silence," writes Woodward:

" 'Nice try,' Bush said. 'I don't think this is quite--it's not something that Joe Public would understand or would gain a lot of confidence from.'... Bush turned to Tenet. 'I've been told all this intelligence about having WMD and this is the best we've got?' From the end of one of the couches in the Oval Office, Tenet rose up, threw his arms in the air. 'It's a slam dunk!' the DCI said. Bush pressed. 'George, how confident are you?' Tenet, a basketball fan who attended as many home games of his alma mater Georgetown as possible, leaned forward and threw up his arms again. 'Don't worry, it's a slam dunk!' "

Later, when the invasion was over, Tenet acknowledged to associates that the CIA should have stated upfront in the National Intelligence Estimate that the evidence was "not ironclad, that it did not include a smoking gun," writes Woodward. (In a revealing scene, Woodward describes Michael Hayden, the director of the National Security Agency, explaining the uncertainties of intelligence to his wife as they wash the dishes. "If it were a fact," says Hayden, "it wouldn't be intelligence."

 

Does it matter? Either way the intelligence was wrong but even if it hadn't been attacking Iran would've made infinitely more sense, under the justification used to invade Iraq.

Look at the source code named curveball

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/iraqi-defector-curve-ball-speaks-out/

 

Though the report is still being edited and portions blacked out so it can be publicly released, Republicans and Democrats have agreed on its key findings, senators and Senate staffers said. "The picture in regards to intelligence is not very flattering," Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., chairman of the intelligence committee, said Sunday on CNN's Late Edition.

In a pivotal, Oct. 1, 2002, National Intelligence Estimate sent to Congress just before votes to authorize the use of force against Iraq, U.S. Intelligence said Iraq "has chemical and biological weapons" and "if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade." That judgment in the estimate's opening lines came even though no Western official had seen an actual chemical or biological weapon in Iraq since 1995.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-03-14-senate-cia-iraq_x.htm

 

Of course it matters. You cannot claim that it was solely Bush's fault when all the squeaky wheels in the Democratic Party were screaming about Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction (Biological and Chemical).

 

Bush kicked out weapons inspectors not Saddam (2003)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KvDe7Z-ykDo

Washington Dismisses the Inspectors’ Findings

The Bush administration’s response to the inspectors’ reports was swift and negative, because their conclusions contradicted the allegations previously made by the U.S. government – for example, with regard to the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi WMD. The next day, President George W. Bush delivered a radio address to the American people, arguing that the inspection teams did not need any more time, because Saddam was “still refusing to disarm.”

http://armscontrolnow.org/2013/03/0...g-un-inspectors-an-unnecessary-war-with-iraq/


Bush lied...people died...that is the bottom line no matter how much the right wing scrounges around to rewrite history.

 

Now when your intelligence agencies tell you Iraq has chemical weapons and could have nuclear within 8 years, is that not justification? Do we wait like we did with N. Korea when they got nuclear and it would be suicide to attack them then?

 

No, and the INR, a member of the IC, didn't buy the idea that Iraq was building nukes. They were right. But even if they had, Iraq is no North Korea. Hell, North Korea wouldn't be North Korea if not located on China's doorstep. Regardless, Cuba, Syria, Iran, North Korea and other adversarial states all have various WMD programs and we can't invade them all. Though I would volunteer for any occupying force in Havana, just sayin...

 

I would say the only ones trying to rewrite history is the Left. I just posted where our intelligence agencies told Congress right before they voted to invade, that Iraq had WMD and could have nuclear within 8 years.

Did you know you could hide that stuff out in the desert in a big hole and inspectors would never know it? Hell Iraq buried 30 aircraft that wasn't discovered till after troops got there. Plus there were chemical labs discovered after troops arrived that inspectors never found either.

US did find Iraq WMD

By Don Kaplan

October 25, 2010 | 4:00am

There were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq after all.

The massive cache of almost 400,000 Iraq war documents released by the WikiLeaks Web site revealed that small amounts of chemical weapons were found in Iraq and continued to surface for years after the 2003 US invasion, Wired magazine reported.

The documents showed that US troops continued to find chemical weapons and labs for years after the invasion, including remnants of Saddam Hussein’s chemical weapons arsenal — most of which had been destroyed following the Gulf War.

In August 2004, American troops were able to buy containers from locals of what they thought was liquid sulfur mustard, a blister agent, the documents revealed. The chemicals were triple-sealed and taken to a secure site.

Also in 2004, troops discovered a chemical lab in a house in Fallujah during a battle with insurgents. A chemical cache was also found in the city.

http://nypost.com/2010/10/25/us-did-find-iraq-wmd/

 

You've hit on it and don't know it. You've left out the one word that gives you the answer. Why WOULD
Bush lie us into a calamitous war?

Answer: He wouldn't.
Conclusion: He didn't.

 

It strikes me that the Left thinks that if they admitted that Bush probably didn't lie, that it would cause too great of a destructive blow to Liberalism.

My view is, that for the Left to refuse to admit that no one is sure that Bush lied, and that the overwhelming evidence points to the conclusion that he probably didn't lie, that for the Left to refuse to admit this - causes an even greater destructive blow to the Left.

The Left's tightly-wound fabrication continues to unravel as we speak.

And eventually, the old-guard Republicans will be seen as the undesirable politicians that THEY are also.

 

Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda link allegations timeline
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein_and_al-Qaeda_link_allegations_timeline#1992

So you refute all the information dating back to 1992 regarding the actions and interactions of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden as accused by William Jefferson Clinton?

 

If I had a cup of coffee for every time the word "allegedly" was used in that link, my bladder would have exploded.

- - - Updated - - -

if someone claims there is absolute certainty about something... and, even as they make the claim, they KNOW that varying levels of uncertainty surround the topic, isn't that, in and of itself, a lie?

 

If Bush believed it was true how can it be a lie?

 

Well there's few absolute certainties. He lied when he said:
“If you like your health insurance plan, you can keep it”
"You can keep your doctor if you want to keep your doctor".
“The sequester is not something that I’ve proposed. It is something that Congress has proposed.”
"I’ve done more for Israel’s security than any President ever"
"We began by passing a Recovery Act that has already saved or created over 150,000 jobs.” – caught cooking the books and now changed to ‘jobs supported’ versus ‘created/saved’"
See: http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2009/04/ap_fact_check_obama_disowns_de.html

BTW, there's a lot more I can include, PF doesn't allow that much space in one posting. I suggest you try again.....