All the Presidents Lies

[BoredShirtless]

Hi,

My name is BoredShirtless, and we have a problem. Ignorant people, either by choice or because they just can't help it, are seriously pissing some of us off. Why? Because even though all the evidence says so, they refuse to acknowledge that the President of the United States and his Administration lied and bullshitted in the lead up to the war against Iraq. Therefore the challenge is, how can we help them? This thread is the answer. If the aware would please post CREDIBLE sources for all the times the Bush Administration lied and exaggerated in one easy to follow thread, those who choose to be ignorant will have no choice but to acknowledge what's right in front of their nose. And those who just can't help it, well......what can you do?

Please post only sources to the lies and exaggerations. If you want to discuss a particular source, please start a new thread. By following this simple rule, we'll have a clutter free repository to go back to whenever the amnesia kicks in.

[BoredShirtless]

The ball is rolling....now! Oooo and it's a doozy baby!
http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml%3Fi= ... er20030708

[Montcalm]

Just a comment: All politicians lie its in their nature,noone honest has ever been elected in office in the US or any other country.

[Stormbringer]

I don't know, there have been a few more or less honest men elected every now and then.

[Tribun]

They all lie.

The important thing is, how good they could hide it.

[Mr Bean]

How good and for what reason
How many men would have gone to Stalingrad for Stalin if the word was that every unit could expect a minium of 40% casualties in the first week of combat, VS that they were beating back the hated Facisits


Sometimes they lie for good, sometimes for gain either personal or for the Country, but its important to see the difference between lieing for the sake of lieing, lieing for personal gain and lieing for the country


(And of course there have always been a few notable expections per president where you have to wonder what the heck they were thinking when they said what they said)

Now for my life
My favorite has been Ol' Bill Clinton's comment back during the Monica scandel which he stuck with for a few days about how Monica had given the bjob of her own free will and he had nothing to do with it and was a completly unwilling partipant

Just think about that for a second
When was the last time somone just came up to you, ripped your pants off at work and given you a B-job at your desk without saying a word?

If you have recently tell me where you work please

[Vympel]

I like this URL:

Bullshit, in their own words

[jegs2]

Just a comment: All politicians lie its in their nature,noone honest has ever been elected in office in the US or any other country.

Ditto. Politicians are synonymous with liars. If that is news to anyone, then perhaps they need to purchase a clue. Better yet, just send me $100,000, and I'll look out for your political interests.

[Joe]

Screw you, shitbrick. Pull that gerbil out of your ass and get a fucking life.

[Montcalm]

Just a comment: All politicians lie its in their nature,noone honest has ever been elected in office in the US or any other country.

Ditto. Politicians are synonymous with liars. If that is news to anyone, then perhaps they need to purchase a clue. Better yet, just send me $100,000, and I'll look out for your political interests.

Thats another example of how crooked politicians are,they get in office they make a salary around 100 or 200K,but when they leave they have millions in their bank accounts,so where did that money come from,are they good businessmen or is it :cough: BRIBES :cough: or do they dig in the federal budget?

[BoredShirtless]

Screw you, shitbrick. Pull that gerbil out of your ass and get a fucking life.

1. Not yet, its nibbling on my prostate sooo good!
2. This thread is the reply to Crackpot's challenge. You're more then welcome to go away and stay out. I've already pegged you as "ignorant because he can't help it". In other words, you were successfully brainwashed by the propaganda. Little sheep. Baaaa!

[Nathan F]

I like this URL:

Bullshit, in their own words

It'd be nice if that site also listed all the comments made by the anti-war politicians on how, just a couple years ago, they thought that Iraq had WMDs as well.

[Nathan F]

Screw you, shitbrick. Pull that gerbil out of your ass and get a fucking life.

1. Not yet, its nibbling on my prostate sooo good!
2. This thread is the reply to Crackpot's challenge. You're more then welcome to go away and stay out. I've already pegged you as "ignorant because he can't help it". In other words, you were successfully brainwashed by the propaganda. Little sheep. Baaaa!

You're a moron.

You're just as much of a sheep as anyone, a sheep to every smidgeon of anti-war propoganda that has ever emerged.

[Nathan F]

Also, why have you yet to provide that list of war crimes committed by Bush and breaking of international laws that we have signed to.

Ass.

[Joe]

Screw you, shitbrick. Pull that gerbil out of your ass and get a fucking life.

1. Not yet, its nibbling on my prostate sooo good!
2. This thread is the reply to Crackpot's challenge. You're more then welcome to go away and stay out. I've already pegged you as "ignorant because he can't help it". In other words, you were successfully brainwashed by the propaganda. Little sheep. Baaaa!

Or maybe I just never gave a flying fuck about WMD in Iraq to begin with, you little assholesucker.

[Stormbringer]

To all the me-tooers of one stripe or another:

[theski]

It'd be nice if that site also listed all the comments made by the anti-war politicians on how, just a couple years ago, they thought that Iraq had WMDs as well.

Here ya go brother.....in easy to understand format for Bored Nutless..

The following are statements made by former President Clinton, members of his former administration, and Democratic leaders in Congress about Iraq. You will see that they blend very nicely with what the Bush administration has been telling us. The reality is we have unanimity between the two parties and administrations on this matter, regardless of what you might be hearing right now.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."

President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."

Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."

Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of an illicit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."

Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL, ) and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."

Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."

Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."

Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."

Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."

Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."

Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."

Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."

Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Photo credits:

American soldier Cpl. Gene Canon of Tampa Bay Florida mans a 50 caliber machine gun as security for a fuel tanker convoy on the road from Tikrit to Sommara in Iraq, Sept. 21, 2003. With an ongoing threat of highway bandits and carjacking the U.S. military supplies security for civilian transport convoys throughout Iraq. Rob Griffith, AP

Former U.S. President Bill Clinton, Jim Hollander, AP

Former US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, Alex Wong, AFP-Getty

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi from her web site

Former Vice President Al Gore, Paul Sakuma, AP

Senator John Kerry, Frank Franklin II, AP

Senator Hillary Clinton, Lawrence Jackson, AP

[/b]

http://www.talkingproud.us/Government092103.html


BTW: and a well deserved title for Bored

[Andrew J.]

I don't know, there have been a few more or less honest men elected every now and then.

Grover Cleveland was more or less honest, although a lot of his political victories were flukes in one way or another.

[Vympel]

I see the persistent fallacy of bringing up the statements of democrats (who obviously did not feel that the evidence was strong enough to merit military invasion of iraq) persists, as if anyone besides partisan-minded Americans gives a fuck if the democrats were wrong too. You think BoredShirtless is a democrat? Argue the damn thread properly.

[Nathan F]

I see the persistent fallacy of bringing up the statements of democrats (who obviously did not feel that the evidence was strong enough to merit military invasion of iraq) persists, as if anyone besides partisan-minded Americans gives a fuck if the democrats were wrong too. You think BoredShirtless is a democrat? Argue the damn thread properly.

It's the point that many of the people lambasting the war are the same ones who said earlier that we SHOULD go to war. Quite hypocritical.

[Stormbringer]

I see the persistent fallacy of bringing up the statements of democrats (who obviously did not feel that the evidence was strong enough to merit military invasion of iraq) persists, as if anyone besides partisan-minded Americans gives a fuck if the democrats were wrong too. You think BoredShirtless is a democrat? Argue the damn thread properly.

Actually, it's pretty relevant when the Democrats are making the Iraqi WMDs into the the Great Big Bush Lie. The fact is that the previous administration as well as the current opposition party clearly believed, on the basis of the same sort of intelligence, that Iraq really did have WMDs. That is a relevant matter when the acussations of lying come up.

[theski]

Vympel wrote

I see the persistent fallacy of bringing up the statements of democrats (who obviously did not feel that the evidence was strong enough to merit military invasion of iraq) persists, as if anyone besides partisan-minded Americans gives a fuck if the democrats were wrong too. You think BoredShirtless is a democrat? Argue the damn thread properly.

If that was for me..... I was just giving Nathan his list..... *shrugs*

BTW I think BS is just a pissant....IMHO

[Vympel]

Actually, it's pretty relevant when the Democrats are making the Iraqi WMDs into the the Great Big Bush Lie. The fact is that the previous administration as well as the current opposition party clearly believed, on the basis of the same sort of intelligence, that Iraq really did have WMDs. That is a relevant matter when the acussations of lying come up.

Firstly, 'the opposition party' and Bush's coming opponent in the election need to be defined. Has Kerry called Bush a liar? If so, how does this reflect on him, considering that the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the Senate got all their information from Bush's administration in the first place? Simply quoting what they said in response to Dubya's highly successful bullshit campaign (and considering I called bullshit on it way before the war started I feel quite justified in saying so) isn't particularly damning or relevant.

[Stormbringer]

Firstly, 'the opposition party' and Bush's coming opponent in the election need to be defined.

Ugh, this is America. Since the Republicans control Congress and the White House so the Democrats would be the opposition party.

Has Kerry called Bush a liar?

He's refrained from calling him a liar outright but he's accussed Bush of lying.

If so, how does this reflect on him, considering that the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the Senate got all their information from Bush's administration in the first place? Simply quoting what they said in response to Dubya's highly successful bullshit campaign (and considering I called bullshit on it way before the war started I feel quite justified in saying so) isn't particularly damning or relevant.

You realize that a good portion of those quotes are actually from the Clinton Administration? That pretty much puts some pretty big nails in the notion that Bush pulled the whole thing out of his ass.

And there's also the simple fact that for all their rhetoric, they didn't question the intelligence too hard or dispute the conclusion. That does matter when you've got Democrats on their soap boxes touting it as a major issue and forgetting they never disputed the basic facts.

[theski]

Vympel wrote

Firstly, 'the opposition party' and Bush's coming opponent in the election need to be defined. Has Kerry called Bush a liar? If so, how does this reflect on him, considering that the Democrats and Republicans in Congress and the Senate got all their information from Bush's administration in the first place? Simply quoting what they said in response to Dubya's highly successful bullshit campaign (and considering I called bullshit on it way before the war started I feel quite justified in saying so) isn't particularly damning or relevant.

1. Yes Kerry has made that claim..

John Kerry Declares: Bush LIED


http://www.johnkerry.com/pressroom/rele ... _0110.html

These are very serious charges by a former high ranking Administration
official. We already knew the Administration failed to focus on the threat
from Osama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda. We already knew the Administration broke
every promise they made to work through the U.N., use the resolution to
enforce inspections, build a coalition, and plan for peace. But Secretary
O'Neill's revelations would mean the Administration never intended to even
try to keep those promises. It would mean they were dead-set on going to
war alone since almost the day they took office and deliberately LIED to
the American people, Congress, and the world. It would mean that for purely
ideological reasons they planned on putting American troops in a shooting
gallery occupying an Arab country almost alone. The White House needs to
answer these charges truthfully because they threaten to shatter their
already damaged credibility as never before.

2.

DURING EIGHT YEARS ON INTELLIGENCE COMMITTEE

In 2000, After Eight Years On Intelligence Committee, Kerry Cited Threat Of Iraq’s WMD. “I think all of us are deeply concerned about the degree to which certain countries seem to be contributing to the potential of instability in the world. Obviously, there is nothing more destabilizing or threatening than weapons of mass destruction. We have spent an enormous amount of time and energy focused on Iraq …” (Senator John Kerry, Congressional Record, 9/11/00)

After Four Years On Intelligence Committee, Kerry Urged U.N. To Eliminate Iraq’s “Suspected Infrastructure For Developing And Manufacturing” WMD. “The Security Council should authorize a strong UN military response that will materially damage, if not totally destroy, as much as possible of the suspected infrastructure for developing and manufacturing weapons of mass destruction … Saddam Hussein has intentionally or inadvertently set up a test which the entire world will be watching, and if he gets away with this arrogant ploy, he will have terminated the most important multilateral effort to defuse a legitimate threat to global security.’” (“US Lawmakers Threaten Military Action Against Iraq,” Agence France Presse, 12/12/97)

IN SUPPORT OF PRESIDENT CLINTON

In 1998, Kerry Said Saddam Had Used WMD And Intended “To Do So” Again. “Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East.” (Senator John Kerry, Press Conference, 2/23/98)

Kerry Defended Clinton’s 1998 Attacks Because Saddam “Is Pursuing … Weapons Of Mass Destruction.” “Americans need to really understand the gravity and legitimacy of what is happening with Saddam Hussein. He has been given every opportunity in the world to comply. The president does not control the schedule of UNSCOM. The president did not withdraw the UNSCOM inspectors. And the president did not, obviously, cut a deal with Saddam Hussein to do this at this moment. Saddam Hussein has not complied. Saddam Hussein is pursuing a program to build weapons of mass destruction.”(Senator John Kerry, Press Conference, 12/16/98)

BEFORE FIRST GULF WAR

In 1991, Kerry Acknowledged Saddam Working Toward Development Of WMD “For Years.” “If we go to war in the next few days, it will not be because our immediate vital interests are so threatened and we have no other choice. It is not because of nuclear, chemical, biological weapons when, after all, Saddam Hussein had all those abilities or was working toward them for years ....” (Sen. John Kerry, Congressional Record, 1/12/91, p. S369)

In 1990, Kerry Said “Iraq Has Developed A Chemical Weapons Capability.” “Today, we are confronted by a regional power, Iraq, which has attacked a weaker state, Kuwait. ... The crisis is even more threatening by virtue of the fact that Iraq has developed a chemical weapons capability, and is pursuing a nuclear weapons development program. And Saddam Hussein has demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons of mass destruction in the past, whether in his war against Iran or against his own Kurdish population

All are before Bush....... so what does that tell you???

http://www.rnc.org/RNCResearch/Read.aspx?ID=3842