Liar, Liar ...

[TheVictors]

Pants on Fire, Hanging on the Telephone Wire !!

 

[tsmith7559]

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-...ild-all-jeep-models-as-suv-demand-climbs.html

Bloomberg...a bunch of liars???

 

[TheVictors]

too easy.

 

[byco42]

Here's a lie for you:

Obama was asked about the Benghazi attack on “The Late Show with David Letterman.” The president said, “Here’s what happened,” and began discussing the impact of the anti-Muslim video. He then said, “Extremists and terrorists used this as an excuse to attack a variety of our embassies, including the consulate in Libya.” He also said, “As offensive as this video was and, obviously, we’ve denounced it and the United States government had nothing to do with it. That’s never an excuse for violence.”

Here's another one:

Question: We have reports that the White House said today that the attacks in Libya were a terrorist attack. Do you have information indicating that it was Iran, or al Qaeda was behind organizing the protests?

Obama: Well, we’re still doing an investigation, and there are going to be different circumstances in different countries. And so I don’t want to speak to something until we have all the information. What we do know is that the natural protests that arose because of the outrage over the video were used as an excuse by extremists to see if they can also directly harm U.S. interests.

Here's some refreshing honesty:

“I can tell you this, I think we do know what happened now. There’s no question but that it was a terrorist attack, there is no question but that the security was inadequate and I think that there is no question that we need to work on our intelligence,” said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.)

They knew from the moment it happened that this was no motorboat accident.

 

[Michchamp]

motorboat accident?

 

[byco42]

motorboat accident?

Exactly.

 

[Michchamp]

so we're going to need a bigger boat.

 

[biggunsbob]

Here is a thought... While republicans are going off about 4 guys being killed in Libya with the Semantics of how and when and who said what lets not forget it was a republican administration lead by George Bush they lied to congress and the American people about WMD's and such in Iraq.. You know the stupid war of choice that has caused over 4000 + service men and women deaths... One death is to many but for any republican to keep going on Rice just show that they want to politicize this so Obama will nominate Kerry so they can try and win his seat... There is just no shame in the republican party... Republicans need to stop about Libya. Let the administration finish the investigation ...

Remember that other administration lied every day leading up to the Iraq war...
The other Rice, Powell, Cheney, and Rumsfeld are the biggest liars in the White house we have ever seen... Bush will go down as one of the 5 worst Presidents of all time...

 

[tsmith7559]

http://www.davidstuff.com/political/wmdquotes.htm

 

[byco42]

"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

This one is especially telling, because at this time troops, including my first-born, were massing in Kuwait. And then there was the Kerry-position of 18 months later, distancing himself from his own words:

"... the president didn't find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so he's really turned his campaign into a weapon of mass deception."

"...the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat."

 

[Michchamp]

"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

This one is especially telling, because at this time troops, including my first-born, were massing in Kuwait. And then there was the Kerry-position of 18 months later, distancing himself from his own words:

"... the president didn't find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, so he's really turned his campaign into a weapon of mass deception."

"...the president has been preoccupied with Iraq, where there wasn't a threat."

so... you're blaming Kerry for trusting Bush, and in a non-partisan attempt to compromise, speaking for the Iraq War that the Bush Administration had been pushing since they were all lobbyists in DC during the 90s...

ok. I agree with you. I think Kerry is a wealthy, powerful politician, and as such, goes along with the establishment (or is part of the establishment...) still doesn't absolve Bush as he was the man in charge. the Iraq War wouldn't have happened without the chickenhawks in his administration pushing it.

 

[byco42]

so... you're blaming Kerry for trusting Bush, and in a non-partisan attempt to compromise, speaking for the Iraq War that the Bush Administration had been pushing since they were all lobbyists in DC during the 90s...

ok. I agree with you. I think Kerry is a wealthy, powerful politician, and as such, goes along with the establishment (or is part of the establishment...) still doesn't absolve Bush as he was the man in charge. the Iraq War wouldn't have happened without the chickenhawks in his administration pushing it.

It might not have happened if the Democrats had not been so swift to back Bush's play. They are all accountable. Look at now. Drones, executive orders giving some new agency access to our personal information without probable cause, Patriot Act still in play, TSA puncturing our orifii...we're subjects, not free people.

 

[redandguilty]

I don't think there were nearly as many lies told as people tend to remember. One of the actual lies told would be the Nigerian yellowcake document and the failure of our media to stay focused on who created them was a horrible failure.

I don't know how many people actually watched Colin Powell's presentation, but I don't think the problem was that it was full of lies so much as it was not a conclusive argument. It was cartoons (I mean artist renditions) of things defectors said they'd seen or heard about, little to no actual evidence regarding the state of the WMD program and none that suggested that it had had much success.

I think the truth is that there was an active WMD program but that it had been losing the cat and mouse game with El Baradei and the UN right up to the point where they shot at them and kicked them out (something I think people forget about). They probably hadn't succeeded in making weapons, but not for a lack of trying.

 

[Michchamp]

I don't think there were nearly as many lies told as people tend to remember. One of the actual lies told would be the Nigerian yellowcake document and the failure of our media to stay focused on who created them was a horrible failure.

I don't know how many people actually watched Colin Powell's presentation, but I don't think the problem was that it was full of lies so much as it was not a conclusive argument. It was cartoons (I mean artist renditions) of things defectors said they'd seen or heard about, little to no actual evidence regarding the state of the WMD program and none that suggested that it had had much success.

I think the truth is that there was an active WMD program but that it had been losing the cat and mouse game with El Baradei and the UN right up to the point where they shot at them and kicked them out (something I think people forget about). They probably hadn't succeeded in making weapons, but not for a lack of trying.

even if there was an active WMD program, the idea we needed to invade to stop it is preposterous.

we had no-fly zones over half the country, and could attack anywhere else within it practically at the push of a button. and we had international support for this extreme position.

shows how warped our national thinking is when you consider that premise that we can control the skies of a sovereign nation like that, and shoot down anything they send aloft - civilian or military - perfectly acceptable.

and if you think there were not as many lies as you remember, you also need to consider the incredibly suspect anthrax letters going around, how the FBI pinned it on some hapless research scientist who cracked (after trying to pin it on others before that) and then stonewalled the congressional investigations into it. read any of glenn greenwald's articles on the topic.

but whatever. saddam hussein was a bad guy, right? and the iraqis are better off now.

well.. some of them are. not the ones we killed. or the ones we maimed in air strikes. or the ones blackwater killed. or the ones that died in sectarian violence that erupted after we removed Hussein from power. or the ones that were tortured to death by militias/security forces after being handed over to them for "interrogation" by US forces. or the ones that had their sanitation services, electricity, water, etc. destroyed by US airstrikes...

...but if you take all those things out of the equation, the Iraqis should still be hailing us as liberators.

 

[redandguilty]

even if there was an active WMD program, the idea we needed to invade to stop it is preposterous.

we had no-fly zones over half the country, and could attack anywhere else within it practically at the push of a button. and we had international support for this extreme position.

shows how warped our national thinking is when you consider that premise that we can control the skies of a sovereign nation like that, and shoot down anything they send aloft - civilian or military - perfectly acceptable.

and if you think there were not as many lies as you remember, you also need to consider the incredibly suspect anthrax letters going around, how the FBI pinned it on some hapless research scientist who cracked (after trying to pin it on others before that) and then stonewalled the congressional investigations into it. read any of glenn greenwald's articles on the topic.

but whatever. saddam hussein was a bad guy, right? and the iraqis are better off now.

well.. some of them are. not the ones we killed. or the ones we maimed in air strikes. or the ones blackwater killed. or the ones that died in sectarian violence that erupted after we removed Hussein from power. or the ones that were tortured to death by militias/security forces after being handed over to them for "interrogation" by US forces. or the ones that had their sanitation services, electricity, water, etc. destroyed by US airstrikes...

...but if you take all those things out of the equation, the Iraqis should still be hailing us as liberators.

I'd better state my position before you make one up for me. I was against the war even back when it started, which was certainly a more difficult position to hold back when I was working on a military base. I do think some type of threat was necessary, but I don't think it had to be a threat of invasion. The threat of invasion that was made would have been enough though. Just before invading, Hussein was going to let El Baradei back in, but the deadline they had given him had expired. Problem was, it wasn't a threat of something they (Bush admin) didn't want to do, they very much wanted to invade and were looking for any excuse to do it.

So what's with the "even if" talk? You don't think Hussein was pursuing WMD?

 

[Michchamp]

I'd better state my position before you make one up for me. I was against the war even back when it started, which was certainly a more difficult position to hold back when I was working on a military base. I do think some type of threat was necessary, but I don't think it had to be a threat of invasion. The threat of invasion that was made would have been enough though. Just before invading, Hussein was going to let El Baradei back in, but the deadline they had given him had expired. Problem was, it wasn't a threat of something they (Bush admin) didn't want to do, they very much wanted to invade and were looking for any excuse to do it.

So what's with the "even if" talk? You don't think Hussein was pursuing WMD?

what kind of "WMD" are we talking here? because ICBMs are a lot different than anthrax.

I know Colin Powell held up a vial and scared everyone. a lot of countries have chemical and biological weapons... having them, and having a method to deliver them to strike us are two different things.

but no, I don't think they had anything going on. they obviously did at one time, because we gave it to them, but we never found anything after March 2003, despite turning the whole country upside down. and no one found anything prior to that while inspecting it.

 

[Michchamp]

but even if he did have them, like I said, it doesn't factor. it shouldn't be an issue.

unless you think he was suicidally insane, and he clearly wasn't, he wasn't going to attack the US even if he had them.

 

[redandguilty]

what kind of "WMD" are we talking here? because ICBMs are a lot different than anthrax.

I know Colin Powell held up a vial and scared everyone. a lot of countries have chemical and biological weapons... having them, and having a method to deliver them to strike us are two different things.

but no, I don't think they had anything going on. they obviously did at one time, because we gave it to them, but we never found anything after March 2003, despite turning the whole country upside down. and no one found anything prior to that while inspecting it.

Nobody's talking about ICBMs. I don't think anyone ever did. At least not that I can remember. The cat and mouse games were over bio and chemical weapons and missiles that could go 100s of miles. The UN found plenty of evidence of these programs; efforts to develop weapons, chemical weapon production equipment. They were winning the cat and mouse game when they were there, but from '98-'02, there were no inspections.

...and the vial was a prop. Just like the cartoons. They didn't claim otherwise. Why people found this to be convincing, I'll never know. There was no smoking gun to that presentation.

 

[redandguilty]

but even if he did have them, like I said, it doesn't factor. it shouldn't be an issue.

unless you think he was suicidally insane, and he clearly wasn't, he wasn't going to attack the US even if he had them.

I'll go so far as to say it could have and should have been handled through the resumed inspections even if he had stockpiles of ready-to-go chemical and biological weapons.

 

[Michchamp]

I'll go so far as to say it could have and should have been handled through the resumed inspections even if he had stockpiles of ready-to-go chemical and biological weapons.

good. I agree.

although using the NRA's "logic" we should let them develop whatever they want, because a better-armed world is a safer world.