It’s official: Bush lied
A new study by the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism proved what we on the left have known all along: Bush lied about Iraq–and he lied, and he lied some more.
In fact, he lied at least 259 times about Iraq’s possession of WMD’s and its links to al-Qaeda in the months leading up to the war in 2003.
Said the study:
“It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida. 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.
…
“[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.”
The study didn’t spare the media, either:
“[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.”
“The cumulative effect of these false statements — amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts — was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war. Some journalists — indeed, even some entire news organizations — have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, ‘independent’ validation of the Bush administration’s false statements about Iraq.”
This all has bearing on the current presidential election going on, as people try to sling mud at some candidate or other (Hillary, Edwards, etc.) over their having initially voted for the war. Well excuse me, but if I had been subjected to a relentless months-long misinformation campaign emanating from the president himself over the certainty of WMD’s and terrorism in Iraq I probably would have voted the same way. In fact I supported the war to begin with, having been played for a fool just like everyone else. This is why I consider these votes to be non-issues and pin the blame fully and squarely on Bush.
Sphere: Related ContentTags: bush, hillary-clinton, iraq, john-edwards, wmd
[...] It’s official: Bush lied A new study by the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism proved what we on the left have known all along: Bush lied about Iraq–and he lied, and he lied some more. In fact, he lied at least 259 times about Iraq’s possession of WMD’s and its links to al-Qaeda in the months leading up to the war in 2003. Said the study: “It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida. In short, the Bush adm [...]
The BUSH administration lied! HORRORS!!!! Finally, the truth can no longer be denied: The NEOCON criminals have no compunction about lying and neither does the coke-snorting, ciminally convicted prez. Now, maybe, the fundamentalist religious nuts will finally take a step back and realize they really shouldn’t be voting. They simply do not have the critical abilties required to make an informed and intelligent decision. The next time I hear one of those mentally difficient morons attack the press for being too “liberal”, I’ll remind them that they listened to the lying prez & his cabal and did NOT do the liberal thing by asking pertinent questions and insisting on honest answers — just like the religionistas did.
What I think is most disconcerting about the report is the one person for whom I have the most respect “Colin Powell” has been so tainted by the unscrupulous Bush Administration. Here is a person who objected to the war, who tried to talk Bush out of invading. Here was a guy lied to by Tenet who told him everything in his UN speech was “rock solid”. Powell did what all “good soldiers” do, at the end of the day they do what they are told even when they may not agree with the orders. Powell tried to avert that war, but was not listened to by Bush. Perhaps one of the best Secretary of States the US has had in many years is now dragged through the mud not because he deserves it, but merely because he is associated with one of the worst and most corrupt Administrations in our lifetimes. I hope people will recognize this before they judge Colin Powell harshly. Here is a very honorable man who believes in his country and who has served the US with distinction. He remains highly respected in the Diplomatic Services because of his integrity. Too bad we don’t have more like him serving in Washington. It would be a far better place if we did.
[...] public somnolent and thirsting for blood simultaneously. But I disagree with my friend Joe over at CenterBlue when he [...]
Joe,
I fear that I must disagree with you on this point. Clinton and Edwards bought into bad intel for purposes of shoring up their tough-on-Ayrabs credentials, and just like everyone else who bought into Bush’s swill, they have to be held accountable for propping up a fallacy a child could see through.
This report is written with incredibly biased language. Taking the fact that there were no WMD found in Iraq, Bush stating they had reliable evidence that they existed is not the same as a lie. You need to prove that he had PRIOR knowledge that no WMDs existed prior to his making any comments on the subject. If their “reliable sources” were wrong or were lying to the Bush administration, then Bush and company is only guilty of passing bad information and not doing their research properly.
As for Cal’s response: If you really think one party is full of intelligent members who think for themselves and ask the right questions and make sure they are informed before voting, you are dead wrong. You need to get out and interact with the public. It is full of shortsighted uninformed people who think what their party tells them is right. I know plenty of religous zelots who shouldn’t be allowed to vote. I know just as many flaming liberals who shouldn’t be allowed to vote. The fact that you have taken this story and used it as a factual document stating that the Bush administration intentionally decieved America over the course of years shows that you probably shouldn’t be allowed in the voting booth either. You state that your people “do the liberal thing by asking pertinent questions”. Maybe you should ask do the same thing instead of reading a paper that says what you’ve been dying to hear and accepting it as gospel without thinking about what facts it is really stating.
Well, what do you know? Looks like Bush wasn’t the only politician that “lied”:
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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.
Now this much is undisputed.
Floor Speech of Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton
on S.J. Res. 45, A Resolution to Authorize the Use of
United States Armed Forces Against Iraq
From http://clinton.senate.gov
Of course, we will all give her a “pass” about this “lie”, now won’t we?
I wonder how many other “inaccurate statements” could be found from both Clintons, Kerry, Edwards, and all of the politico’s from that era? What a bunch of crap.
“Clinton lied, people died”
Brian
It would be interesting to know what the statements were that this organization considers false. It seems to me, everything I have ever heard the named individuals say is 99% true. CNN just won’t publish the information that supports that because of their political standing.
Am i the only one who has read this CNN article correctly? What it states is, “The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources — mainly quotes from major media organizations.” Do you honestly believe that a government transcript is going to say - Hey, let’s make up this scenario and see how far we can go? No way. By whose standard were comments determined lies? We all heard the speeches, etc. My main point here is secondary sources - quotes from media. Too me this article,which was done by two independent journalism groups, is trying to do one thing - deface any lasting legacy the Bush administration has accomplished. Gee folks, wake up, quit blaming Bush, Congress had to vote you know and it passed. Even wonderful Hillary voted yes. It’s just a shame that our President and his advisers trusted intelligence sources and they were wrong about WMD’s. And that can lead me into further discussions why it was so important to get involved in yet another conflict.
Why is it that Clinton can get caught with one little lie about his personal life and almost gets impeached, yet Bush can lie 260 times, leading to the deaths of thousands and thousands and nothing happens? Why is Congress, the Senate and the Press so afraid of this guy? If America can’t impeach a President for directly lying about the reason for war, not once, twice, but 260 times, then what good is our system of “checks and balances” It’s hard to force that type of Democracy on anyone.