Full Version: If at first you don't deceive, lie lie again
QUOTE(IRAQ ON THE RECORD: THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION’S PUBLIC STATEMENTS ON IRAQ)
Number of Misleading Statements. The Iraq on the Record database contains 237 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq that were made by President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Powell, and National Security Advisor Rice. These statements were made in 125 separate appearances, consisting of 40 speeches, 26 press conferences and briefings, 53 interviews, 4 written statements, and 2 congressional testimonies. Most of the statements in the database were misleading because they expressed certainty
where none existed or failed to acknowledge the doubts of intelligence officials. Ten of the statements were simply false.
Topics of the Statements. The 237 misleading statements can be divided into four categories. The five officials made 11 statements that claimed that Iraq posed an urgent threat; 81 statements that exaggerated Iraq’s nuclear activities; 84 statements that overstated Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons capabilities; and 61 statements that misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al Qaeda. House Report
where none existed or failed to acknowledge the doubts of intelligence officials. Ten of the statements were simply false.
Topics of the Statements. The 237 misleading statements can be divided into four categories. The five officials made 11 statements that claimed that Iraq posed an urgent threat; 81 statements that exaggerated Iraq’s nuclear activities; 84 statements that overstated Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons capabilities; and 61 statements that misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al Qaeda. House Report
Since this report is a year old, I’m sure that 237 lies is a modest estimate as of today.
Recently, Rumsfeld made an issue over the nomenclature of the insurgency. Then, he went on to contradict General Pace regarding a soldier’s obligation to stop torture when s/he witnesses it or merely report it. To the General’s credit, he stood firm and repeated his assertion that anyone who witnesses torture is obligated to stop it (while Rumsfeld gestured theatrically).
QUOTE
When General Pace said, "it's absolutely the responsibility of every US service member if they see inhumane treatment being conducted to intervene to stop it." Secretary Rumsfeld interjected, "I don't think you mean they have an obligation to physically stop it; it's to report it."
To this, General Pace replied: "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it." ABC News
To this, General Pace replied: "If they are physically present when inhumane treatment is taking place, sir, they have an obligation to try to stop it." ABC News
Then there’s Condi, bending over backwards on her "goodwill" trip to assert other nations that the US does not torture, even as evidence comes to light about foreign “renditions”. I guess if it didn’t happen here, it didn’t happen at all.
QUOTE
Since almost all of this activity takes place beyond the borders of the United States, there is not much that its opponents can do about it through the American justice system. Moreover, the CIA and the U.S. military usually outsource the more extreme forms of torture to other governments (the Abu Ghraib abuses were an aberration) in order to evade direct legal responsibility. But that does involve flying detained suspects around the world in planes owned or chartered by the CIA, and the flight logs of these aircraft show that they have landed hundreds of times in European Union countries -- which may legally implicate those countries as accomplices to torture. Embassy Magazine
And, oopsie, one of them wasn’t even involved in any sort of terrorism; he was just a poor schlub on vacation and happened to have an Arabic-sounding name. So, an innocent German citizen was detained and abused for 4 months. Then, when the mistake was realized, they dumped him on a hillside in Albania to let him find his own way home. Nice.
QUOTE
Khaled Masri, a 42-year-old man of Lebanese decent, claims that he was taken on New Year's Eve 2003 by CIA operatives from his vacation in Macedonia to a prison in Afghanistan.
While he was detained he was beaten and subjected to inhuman conditions, according to the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.
<snip>
An article in Sunday's Washington Post quoted an anonymous former CIA official who said Masri had been detained on a hunch, because the head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center's al Qaeda unit "believed he was someone else." CNN
Also see Bloomberg, Raw Story
While he was detained he was beaten and subjected to inhuman conditions, according to the lawsuit filed by the American Civil Liberties Union.
<snip>
An article in Sunday's Washington Post quoted an anonymous former CIA official who said Masri had been detained on a hunch, because the head of the CIA's Counterterrorist Center's al Qaeda unit "believed he was someone else." CNN
Also see Bloomberg, Raw Story
And just to add (more) insult to injury, el-Masri has been denied access to the US to attend his own trial.
Bush has stated publicly and often that “we do not torture” and “we do not render to countries that condone torture”. More lies.
Then there are all the indictments, and scandals, and cronyism, and the mismanagement and incompetence, and juvenile retribution, and on and on and on. And yet, there are still those who maintain there’s nothing to see here, it’s that goldurned librul media, etc. etc., move along now.
I’m so tired of listening to Bush apologists. What does it take to convince them of the perfidy of these people? This is the nastiest nest of vipers I have seen in public office in my lifetime. Nixon couldn’t hold a candle to someone like Cheney or Rumsfeld. They’d eat him alive.
If you don’t believe the administration has lied to the American people on numerous issues and on numerous occasions, on what basis do you hold that belief?
How big/important/heinous does a lie have to be for you to distrust the president and his administration (e.g., does it really take a "dead hooker in the trunk")?
How will the deceit of this administration affect the US after it leaves?
A positive message devoid of truth is flavorless pap and only desired by babies. -Duane Alan Hahn
I'm sorry Daffygrl, but it's really hard to participate in discussions on these levels. With the wording in the debate topic I feel that if I believe President Bush and in the War in Iraq you are automatically assuming that I'm a sheep or just plain stupid. In fact your assumption that the President has lied or intentionally misled the people is quite unfounded. There is a more objective thread about whether or not WMD was a lie and as it is a topic dedicated to a point or a direct question, and not just ranting about dislike of the President I will keep posting there. By the way, no one has been able to post any credible evidnece that the President intentionally misled the people in that thread.
But for the record...
If you don’t believe the administration has lied to the American people on numerous issues and on numerous occasions, on what basis do you hold that belief?
I hold that belief because I haven't seen any direct proof that the President or his Administration has intentionally misled the people of the United States of America. To be honest, I think that that approach is much more practical because I think that any member of the press would salivate over and release any evidence like the Pentagon Papers in about 2 seconds if they could produce it. And to be honest with things like RatherGate and the forged documents, CNNs "X" over Chenney, and other stories surrounding the press I'm much more likely to believe that the press is lying before the President. And that, is even worse than being lied to by the government becuse people almost always expect that the government is lying to them but the press is supposed to hold themselves to a much higher standard as watchdogs for the people.
But for the record...
If you don’t believe the administration has lied to the American people on numerous issues and on numerous occasions, on what basis do you hold that belief?
I hold that belief because I haven't seen any direct proof that the President or his Administration has intentionally misled the people of the United States of America. To be honest, I think that that approach is much more practical because I think that any member of the press would salivate over and release any evidence like the Pentagon Papers in about 2 seconds if they could produce it. And to be honest with things like RatherGate and the forged documents, CNNs "X" over Chenney, and other stories surrounding the press I'm much more likely to believe that the press is lying before the President. And that, is even worse than being lied to by the government becuse people almost always expect that the government is lying to them but the press is supposed to hold themselves to a much higher standard as watchdogs for the people.
Topic closed...
Reason: Debate premise too biased for constructive debate. Maybe tone it down a bit so everyone feels welcome to participate. Otherwise, please repost it in the Democrats only forum.
Recommended action:
If you started this topic, please contact the staff member who closed it by clicking the PM button below this post with a clear question to debate.
Helpful links:
- Starting New Topics
- Survival Guide
- The Rules
- Staff Directory
Note: This is an automated response.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.