At least 935 lies from the Bush Administration

[baldrick]

Why is it acceptable to lie to the people you are supposed to serve ?

False Pretenses

Following 9/11, President Bush and seven top officials of his administration waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq.


By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith
President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.
On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.
It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.
In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Not surprisingly, the officials with the most opportunities to make speeches, grant media interviews, and otherwise frame the public debate also made the most false statements, according to this first-ever analysis of the entire body of prewar rhetoric.
President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).
The massive database at the heart of this project juxtaposes what President Bush and these seven top officials were saying for public consumption against what was known, or should have been known, on a day-to-day basis. This fully searchable database includes the public statements, drawn from both primary sources (such as official transcripts) and secondary sources (chiefly major news organizations) over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001. It also interlaces relevant information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches, and interviews.

full story here
Iraq: The War Card - The Center for Public Integrity

[AntRobertson]

Why is it acceptable to lie to the people you are supposed to serve ?

It's not under any circumstances in my opinion. Certainly not in any self-professed 'Democracy'. That being said it's easy to understand motives for it.

What scares me more is that there's clearly a ready and willing audience who are not only prepared to accept lies but even make excuses for it. They empower politicians to lie and are equally complicit.

[barbaro]

President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction....

Maybe a few more Americans will wake up. I hope some will.

[raycarey]

because bush is such an abject failure on so many fronts, he has been attempting to claim that he has the 'long view' and that "history will be the judge" of his presidency.

once all the flat out lies, half truths and obfuscation are revealed (and it will all eventually come out) he will indeed be judged by history....and it won't be kindly.

[Lambik]

"He who permits himself to tell a lie once, finds it much easier to do it a second and third time, till at lenght it becomes habitual."
Thomas Jefferson.

[AntRobertson]

One can't help but think that being the son of a wealthy and powerful man that can sort out all those pesky little problems for you (DUI? No problem, what DUI!? etc) is not really the kind of moral grounding you'd want to see in anyone in a position of authority. Much less President of the US.

[Butterfly]

The American public was only stupid to believe those lies,

What make you think they deserve the truth ? they probably wouldn't understand why anyhow. If they knew 911 was an inside job, would they react differenthly or just stay glued to the TV for the next episode of American Idol 8 ?

[Ban Saray]

What's worse that dickhead John Howard believed all this hype as well.
The head count is what really pisses me off, over 5000 now, for some egotistic fuckwit idea of democracy.
Saddam was his old mans best mate, even had drinks at the ranch in Texas I believe.
And to what end, I simply have answer, and neither do they.

[Marmite the Dog]

What's worse that dickhead John Howard believed all this hype as well.

So did the Blair Witch.

[AntRobertson]

Saddam was his old mans best mate, even had drinks at the ranch in Texas I believe.

Dunno about that, did sell him weapons though.

That's kinda the de-facto status symbol in the world of despots and tyrants. You've not made it until the US funds you or provides you weapons.

[Boon Mee]

Look no further than who funded the two 'studies', eh?
The one and only...George (got an agenda) Soros.
Load of Poppycock.
Here's a link to the 'unbiased' participants in the 'studies'...

About Us - The Center for Public Integrity

[barbaro]

^ The statements speak for themselves.

These statements, and interviews have been recorded on audio and video.

This....tells the tale.

[AntRobertson]

Look no further than who funded the two 'studies', eh?
The one and only...George (got an agenda) Soros.
Load of Poppycock.
Here's a link to the 'unbiased' participants in the 'studies'...

About Us - The Center for Public Integrity

That link's not working for me.

If your only issue is with who funded the study then that's not really an issue at all. By the same token you could dismiss every single Fox 'News' broadcast because Fox is owned by the right-wing Murdoch.

And, as Milkman's already mentioned, it's all based on statements and speeches that are in the public record - so unless you dispute the veracity of that there's really no other objective or reasonable grounds to dismiss it as a "Load of Poppycock".

[Edit]

Ok the link's working now. George Soros? What are you on about, I can't see him even referred to anywhere in that link you provided. Do you actually have evidence that he funded or was otherwise involved with the study or are you merely throwing his name in their in some bizzare attempt to 'discredit' the study?

[Frankenstein]

What's worse that dickhead John Howard believed all this hype as well.

So did the Blair Witch.

Did they really believe it, or did they just go along with it because the US is too important to ignore, because of historical ties and alliances, and because they're little warmongers in their own right?

[Frankenstein]

Look no further than who funded the two 'studies', eh?
The one and only...George (got an agenda) Soros.
Load of Poppycock.
Here's a link to the 'unbiased' participants in the 'studies'...

About Us - The Center for Public Integrity

Does that mean Bush and his bestest buddies didn't lie then? It was all a big misunderstanding, right?

[Agent_Smith]

made at least 935 false statements

What's the difference between a lie and a false statement? Seems to me that a false statement can be unintentional and a lie not.

I'm in no way a Bush apologist--I think he has done so much harm for my country's image and economy that the next administration will not be able to fix it, or even the next 2--but I do believe that Bush's little cadre of opportunists sincerely believed that there were WMD's in Iraq. After all, Reagan and Bush Sr. sold them to Saddam way back in the day so why wouldn't he keep them? I think Saddam sold 'em off to Syria but who knows.

Anyway, if it's proven that he knowingly and deliberately lied to bring us to war then he and his gang should be brought up on charges/impeached. That would be a bit different from his opinion about how the history books will see him but it would be fitting.

[Boon Mee]

One question to ask yourselves is why didn't the two studies (and I use the term loosly) contain any Clinton Administration quotes?

Very telling, eh? Especially with all the rhetoric Slick Willie was bandying about in the mid to late 90's...

[AntRobertson]

^ That's a red herring Booner. Why would the study focus on the previous admin.

[Boon Mee]

^ That's a red herring Booner. Why would the study focus on the previous admin.

Red herring my ass.
In order to put the WOT in context, you have to look at what Dubya inherited.

[britmaveric]

I wonder how many lies Clinton told when he was in the white house??? Prob beats President Bush by a mile.

[barbaro]

I wonder how many lies Clinton told when he was in the white house??? Prob beats President Bush by a mile.

It's fine to talk about lies by all politicians, including Clinton.

But we're a bit off-topic.

If a study is done and concludes another politician (not W. Bush) lied more, you can cite it.

But....you need to cite it.

And, you need to make it relevant to the current administration's lies about the current study recently concluded.

The off-topic threads that follow yours are removed, and the author can start a thread about the lies of other politicians.

This is fair enough.

[AntRobertson]

^ That's a red herring Booner. Why would the study focus on the previous admin.

Red herring my ass.
In order to put the WOT in context, you have to look at what Dubya inherited.

Well so far the only apparenet issues you seem to have with the study is to say it was funded by Soros (of which I still can't see any evidence) and that it doesn't deal with Clinton.

Both fairly trifling matters and concerns in light of what the study documents.

[zipcode]

"Nobody died when Clinton lied !"

A bit simplistic, I know, but does reflect the main essense.

[barbaro]

"Nobody died when Clinton lied !"

A bit simplistic, I know, but does reflect the main essense.

And Bush lied and how many people have been killed, and displaced?

How much has this cost monetarily?

How much credibility has been lost?


The few GWB supporters left, try to change the topic to former Presidents and politicians that are not even in office, anymore.


This says a lot.

[Boon Mee]

"Nobody died when Clinton lied !"

A bit simplistic, I know, but does reflect the main essense.

And Bush lied and how many people have been killed, and displaced?

How much has this cost monetarily?

How much credibility has been lost?


The few GWB supporters left, try to change the topic to former Presidents and politicians that are not even in office, anymore.


This says a lot.

OK - time to put up or shut up:

What did Bush lie about?
And don't reply "He lied about WMD's" - that ain't gonna get it 'cause they were there according to all reports he had available. So...enough with the rabid BDS for a minute and illustrate exactly what Bush lied about - huh?