Bush Lied to the American People...

The situation is a little more complex than a few Al Qaeda sound bytes. Bush stated his opinion. If I say, "John kept me out of the club because he's jealous of me," whether I am lying or merely giving a subjective opinion depends on what was in my mind when I said it, but there is every chance that it is just a subjective opinion.

To point to a statement of that sort and call it a lie without real evidence that the speaker intended it as a lie is nonsense.

Brandon9000 wrote:

The situation is a little more complex than a few Al Qaeda sound bytes. Bush stated his opinion. If I say, "John kept me out of the club because he's jealous of me," whether I am lying or merely giving a subjective opinion depends on what was in my mind when I said it, but there is every chance that it is just a subjective opinion.

To point to a statement of that sort and call it a lie without real evidence that the speaker intended it as a lie is nonsense.

Ok so you dont think Bush lied, why do you think they attacked us Brandon ?

However, I also think it has to do with evil. For Bin Laden and his crew to claim their motives are justified in any way is evil. There certainly are other means of getting through to the US government

squinney wrote:

Quote:

However, I also think it has to do with evil. For Bin Laden and his crew to claim their motives are justified in any way is evil. There certainly are other means of getting through to the US government

Funny how things can be put into perspective just by changing a couple of words....such as

However, I also think it has to do with evil. For Bush and his crew to claim their motives are justified in any way is evil. There certainly are other means of getting through to the Iraqi government

Oh....for Heavens sake ......grow up children. You seem to have fallen victim to the adage that the end NEVER justifies the means. I would argue differently....for example: If I was convinced that the development of a particular new drug would eliminate cancer but it would take one Billion dollars and a year to produce, you can be assured I would tell a lie to achieve that objective.

Take a look at history: One could make the case that Lincoln lied about the real reason to go to war thus creating the most costly war ever in terms of lives lost. It seems to me he told the American people that the reason was to free the slaves when in actual fact the real reason was to hold the union together. He is now revered as one of our greatest presidents

By the same token Roosevelt could be accused of allowing Pearl Harbor to happen in order to create the tragedy neccessary to shock the American people into entering the war. Roosevelt presided over a victory against a madman who could have conquered the world if he had listened to his Generals instead of falling victim to his Napoleonic madness.

The end consequence can in some cases justify extraordinary means so stop trying to turn this into a Moral Crisis......it's history ..... get over it.

Interesting post, Rayban1. Historically quite inaccurate, but, still, interesting. Lincoln never said the war was to free the slaves. The exact opposite of what you wrote is true. His contention was that the war was to preserve the Union and that he was detrmined to do it even if he could do so without freeing any slaves at all (letter to Horace Greely, quoted too many places to cite here). The freeing of the slaves came as a result of that war; it was never a specifically stated cause for the war. And do you have something like evidence which would be acceptable in a court of law that FDR "allowed" Pearl Harbor to be bombed so that we could get into the war? I know the allegation has been made a number of times and a number of books have been written on the subject. A far larger number of books has been written refuting the charge. You have some new information? And, btw, just out of curiosity, what do either of those pseudo-historical asides have to do with the subject of this thread?

Insults are not necessary. Why is it that everybody else is wrong and you are right. People are intelligent enough to decide for themselves based on facts without having their intelligence questioned.

I haven't seen anyone question Lincoln or Roosevelt. This thread is about George Bush. Althou, according to your logic... George Bush should have learned from history and the foibles of his predecessors.

Merry Andrew wrote:

Interesting post, Rayban1. Historically quite inaccurate, but, still, interesting. Lincoln never said the war was to free the slaves. The exact opposite of what you wrote is true. His contention was that the war was to preserve the Union and that he was detrmined to do it even if he could do so without freeing any slaves at all (letter to Horace Greely, quoted too many places to cite here). The freeing of the slaves came as a result of that war; it was never a specifically stated cause for the war. And do you have something like evidence which would be acceptable in a court of law that FDR "allowed" Pearl Harbor to be bombed so that we could get into the war? I know the allegation has been made a number of times and a number of books have been written on the subject. A far larger number of books has been written refuting the charge. You have some new information? And, btw, just out of curiosity, what do either of those pseudo-historical asides have to do with the subject of this thread?

What you say is partially true but in 1862 the war was going badly so Lincoln decided to add another factor to the equation by announcing the emancipation proclamation which did not actually free any slaves except in northern states but it stated the intention to abolish slavery in the event the north won the war. The war actually was all about states rights to secede from the union to avoid the heavy hand of the federal gov't. My contention is therefore true that he used slavery to whip up support for the war

You're trying to restate my words inaccurately........I said "Roosevelt COULD BE accused of allowing Pearl Harbor to happen" which is a bit different than what you accuse me of saying

Intrepid wrote:

Insults are not necessary. Why is it that everybody else is wrong and you are right. People are intelligent enough to decide for themselves based on facts without having their intelligence questioned.

I haven't seen anyone question Lincoln or Roosevelt. This thread is about George Bush. Althou, according to your logic... George Bush should have learned from history and the foibles of his predecessors.

Why is it that you college kids constantly display the double standard of the left as though it justifies something and is worn like a badge of honor. When a conservative chides a liberal for a comment it's an insult.........when a liberal chides a conservative for a comment it's a very clever witicism.
Please grow up and stop the silliness.