UPDATE 01/24/08 1:30 PM: I’m going to revise my text for accuracy here, and because I have noticed in several wingnut blogs the claim that the CPI report accuses the Bushies of lying. I have read the report on the CPI site (something I suspect many wingnuts have not done), and I can find no indication that this is the case. I will therefore follow suit, and update some of my comments in the original post.
This is humorous. Andrew ‘Gribbit the Dipshit’ Richardson, known mostly for being a lying moron who dreams of beating people up, has an overwrought post in which he claims that Democrats…
…have the ability to tug at the heart strings of otherwise rational thinking individuals and make them forget to use their own minds and believe whatever they wish you to believe…
Golly gee willikers. I wonder what he thinks of the recently published report from the Center for Public Integrity, which documents nearly a thousand lies falsehoods used by the Bush administration to make Americans believe what Bushco wished them to believe — that we were in imminent peril of a terrorist attack using weapons of mass destruction supplied by Iraq…
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.
Andy Dipshit lists “envy” and “change” as a couple of the concepts used by those wascally Democrats. Wonder how he feels about the Bush administration using the concept of chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons to stampede the populace into supporting a war of aggression?
The CPI report is accompanied by a searchable database of the falsehoods used by Bushco to deceive the American people, and a timeline showing the prevalence of these lies falsehoods in the run-up to war:
This is how professional liars demagogues “make [people] forget to use their own minds”, Dipshit: by making them afraid for their lives.
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 truly dangerous demagogues are those who start a war on the basis of a mountain of lies torrent of misinformation. Try to remember that, Dipshit.
hat tip: Informed Comment
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
Proudly Hosted By
17 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link
http://thinkingmeat.net/2008/01/23/a-mountain-of-documented-lies/trackback/
January 23, 2008 at 5:59 pm
kender
the center for public integrity? Isnt that a soros funded group?
No partisan ship there….
January 23, 2008 at 6:49 pm
Qwerty
January 23, 2008 at 10:04 pm
meatbrain
And if it is? shitmonkey cannot demonstrate that anything in the report is actually incorrect — so it waves “soros funded” in the air, hoping that no one will notice its failure to make a serious argument.
January 23, 2008 at 11:45 pm
Protest Warrior
Meathead…do you ever have an original thought or are you just a parrot for your puppet master at the DNC HQ?
January 24, 2008 at 2:31 pm
meatbrain
PW: Have you had your cojones implant yet, and if so, are you prepared to actually discuss the content of the CPI report?
January 24, 2008 at 4:35 pm
kender
If there is no proof (you know that pesky evidence shit that causes prosecutors to actually file charges?) that Bush (or anyone else for that matter) lied on purpose with a plan to actually deceive the populace that what, really, can you possibly do about someone saying something that may not be true?
Maybe the things said were believed to be true at the time they were said. Maybe they were true at that time.
Aside from all of that, where is it against the law to lie in a speech or a press conference? The only time I have seen people get in trouble for lying was when they told legal investigators (such as the police) a lie OR they told a lie UNDER OATH.
So where did Bush lie under oath or to investigators that were pursuing a crime?
Putting aside the fact that you won’t actually reply to the substance of this comment, can you show me one law that says it is illegal to lie in general? (as in when you are not talking to the police or under oath?)
Is that the smell of scalded meaty I detect upon the ether of cyberspace?
Man that’s rank….take a bath (gratuitous insult thrown in to keep my vast right wing conspiracy union card)
January 24, 2008 at 5:49 pm
meatbrain
Perhaps shitmonkey can first explain why the CPI report would contain proof of an allegation it does not make…
One can do exactly what this report does: Document the persistent and repeated dissemination of falsehoods and misinformation as a means of selling a war of aggression to the people of the United States.
Maybe shitmonkey can provide evidence for either of these claims. (Evidence truly is pesky, isn’t it? Especially when one has none…)
I know of no law against lying in a speech or a press conference. I do wonder, though, whether shitmonkey finds the persistent and repeated dissemination of falsehoods and misinformation as a means of selling a war of aggression to the people of the United States to be morally objectionable.
No, wait, we already know the answer to that: shitmonkey itself is more than willing to use falsehood to support an argument. So it cannot possibly believe that it is immoral to employ falsehoods.
Who has asserted that he did so?
No — that’s the smell of shitmonkey’s own straw man, rotting in the sun.
January 24, 2008 at 6:42 pm
kender
If the report (which I am in the middle of reading) doesn’t show that Bush said one things and then, prove he knew differently at the time then there is no proof that bush lied about anything, and this “report” is simply a left wing smear tactic on an outgoing president.
What part of “No crime was committed” do you fail to grasp?
And how badly does it chafe your hide to know that no impeachment is coming down the line, that bush isn’t going to jail and all of the teeth gnashing is getting you guys nothing more than high blood pressure and angst?
BWAAHAHAHAHAAAA….....neener neener neeeeeeeneerrr
January 24, 2008 at 6:55 pm
meatbrain
shitmonkey has yet to cite a left wing study that claims bush lied. We will wait in vain for him to do so, I suspect.
Perhaps shitmonkey can cite the specific statements in the report that he considers “smears”, and explain exactly why those statements should be considered smears.
Perhaps not.
Who in this thread has claimed that a crime was committed? The smell of rotting straw man grows more pungent by the minute…
I am well aware that an impeachment of anyone in the Bush administration is unlikely. The documentation of the long list of falsehoods and misinformation used by the Bush administration is itself a worthwhile task. It is likely that the CPI database will prove a useful tool for historians for many years to come.
January 24, 2008 at 7:51 pm
kender
Hhhmmm…the authors of the study that started this whole thread published the study for a group that soros helps fund. Left wing bias to the report? Oh of couuurrsse not…uh uh not at all (that’s called sarcasm meaty, look it up)
Meaty, do you understand the words “if” and “then?” I said IF A isn’t shown THEN proven etc….which means I didn’t say it IS a smear tactic, but I did say it would be IF the allegations of lies aren’t proven. See how that works? It’s called language.
And nobody has said a crime was committed, but if a crime was not committed then what is the point of the report? Historians? UHhuh….spreading lies more likely….
If there is no proof that bush actually lied then there is no point to the report. All I am seeing so far is allegations without proof, but then that’s the stock in trade of your side.
January 24, 2008 at 8:04 pm
meatbrain
shitmonkey has yet to cite a left wing study that claims bush lied. We will wait in vain for him to do so, I suspect.
Nice dance.
Perhaps shitmonkey can cite the specific statements in the report that he considers “smears”, and explain exactly why those statements should be considered smears.
Perhaps not.
Perhaps shitmonkey can cite the specific “allegations of lies” contained in the CPI report.
Perhaps not.
Indeed, no one in this thread has said that a crime was committed. Nor does it appear that the report make that allegation. Therefore, shitmonkey’s repeated howls about nonexistent accusations that crimes were committed were, in fact, a feeble attempt to divert the discussion from the fact that the Bush administration employed the repeated dissemination of falsehoods and misinformation as a means of selling a war of aggression to the people of the United States.
As has already been explained, the report documents the persistent and repeated dissemination of falsehoods and misinformation as a means of selling a war of aggression to the people of the United States.
Perhaps shitmonkey can be more specific regarding the lies he believes the CPI report will be used to spread, and how the report supports such hypothetical lies.
False. As has already been explained, the report documents the persistent and repeated dissemination of falsehoods and misinformation as a means of selling a war of aggression to the people of the United States.
Perhaps shitmonkey can be more specific: What “allegations without proof” are contained in the CPI report?
January 25, 2008 at 10:19 am
kender
Are “falsehoods” and “misinformation” the same as “lies” to you? Or is their some tiered system we are unaware of?
Are you saying that the report in question did not claim bush lied?
January 25, 2008 at 10:23 am
kender
A lie is an untruth told with the intent to deceive, while a falsehood is simply an untrue statement.
So Bush made mistakes, but didn’t set out to deceive anyone, is that it?
And what’s so bad about making mistakes?
January 25, 2008 at 10:27 am
meatbrain
Notice that shitmonkey has not bothered to meet any of the challenges put to him in the comments above. Perhaps he is content to continue to hurl his own shit in the hopes no one will notice his cowardice and stupidity.
The CPI report refers to the use of falsehoods and misinformation by the Bush administration. I can find no instance in which the authors of the report make a direct accusation of lying against Bush or his subordinates.
I consider the deliberate use of falsehoods and misinformation to be a form of lying. It will be the judgment of history whether Bush and his cronies are guilty of lying.
I have not said that.
In this specific case, the actions taken by the Bush administration (whether mistaken or deliberate) have sent nearly four thousand Americans to their deaths, and maimed tens of thousands more, on the basis of falsehoods and misinformation. In the eyes of people with a normally developed sense of morality, that falls into the category of “bad”.
One does not expect a morally incompetent shitmonkey to understand such matters.
January 26, 2008 at 2:26 am
kender
Why don’t you spend two minutes googling the definition of “hypocrite”, dumbass, and take a dose of your own medicine for once.
January 26, 2008 at 9:59 am
meatbrain
If shitmonkey believes that any questions it has posed to me above have not been answered, let it point them out, and I will respond.
Meanwhile, it can take its faux outrage, fold it five ways, and stick it where the sun don’t shine. It is an intellectual coward, and no amount of screeching and gibbering will hide that fact.
January 27, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Qwerty