Bush is a liar
 

A Washington Post article outlines just how full of shit this administration really is:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/886806.asp?0cv=CB10

BAHUMBUG!

:Graucho

We're not supposed to listen to the media. It's all propaganda. Did you forget already?

Oh wait, that's right, it's not propaganda if the media says what you want them to say. Ohhhkkk...

yes he is

You mean to tell me Antonio Gramsci was right?! :eek2

Ya did you forget that.

You're right. It's only propeganda when they say shit you don't wanna hear.

:glugglug

LOL That's the way it works. C'mon...get on the ball here.

btw, you're brainwashed.

And vice versa.. ie. if it was bot said your beloved medias will be right if it doesn't Sly says it's propaganda..

Just pulling your leg Sly :)

That's a big ass sig you got there!

So is there something in the article that is incorrect or is it you could care less about the truth.

I think its more that we don't care about the small minded opinions of Bush bashers like yourself.
:1orglaugh

The truth? What truth?

The opinion of one writer? Daily, fucking daily, there are arguments on this board that the media is bias and full of shit. And I happen to agree. I don't trust any one media source any more than I trust the opinion of one writer.

The media is full of propaganda one day. But the next, it's telling the truth?

Find solid arguments. Using the media as a source of proof after hanging onto its invalidity... right.

Sorry dumbass but these are facts, not opinions:

In his appearance Sunday, on NBC?s ?Meet the Press,? the vice president argued that ?we believe [Hussein] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.? But Cheney contradicted that assertion moments later, saying it was ?only a matter of time before he acquires nuclear weapons.?

---------------------------------

In another embarrassing episode for the administration, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell cited evidence about Iraq?s weapons efforts that originally appeared in a British intelligence document. But it later emerged that the British report?s evidence was based in part on academic papers and trade publications.

---------------------------------

Earlier this month, ElBaradei said information about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium were based on fabricated documents. Further investigation has found that top CIA officials had significant doubts about the veracity of the evidence, linking Iraq to efforts to purchase uranium for nuclear weapons from Niger, but the information ended up as fact in Bush?s State of the Union address.


Pull your fucking head out.

Good points Sly. You could have added the question "What President has ever told the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth?" That is pretty applicable to any politician world wide.

ok, so in the smallminded world of a......."thunderballs" is it? its ok if its only a matter of time before he acquires nuclear weapons? If that's the point you're making, don't expect to get far in this world.

---------------------------------

And I'm sure that to the dopey left wingers this means that Iraq is telling the truth and the US is the evil ones. Fortunately, the left is not in power when backbone is needed.

---------------------------------


ElBaradei doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground and is not privy to CIA findings. There are *NO* facts saying this wasn't true.


I'm betting we can count on you to say we planted the WMDs we find once this little military action is over. I don't mind idiots making posts about not going to war and that Saddam is the victim, I really don't. It gives me something funny to read.:thumbsup

Sad, but true. We have politicians of all levels promising the sky to be elected, and once elected, they give air ( maybe a fart even)... And that is in every country....

But, when it is obvious that a president lies, he should resign or at least be impeched....

But I do prefer a president that lies about having received a bj or not, than one sending youg men to die and kill civilian population, along with ruining the economy ....

Oh, to be a canadian who's so easily gulled. :1orglaugh

Thats the whole point. Republicans go nuts and impeach CLinton over lying about a blow job, but now its ok to lie in order to gain support for a war. Fucking pathetic.

shutup, you're a democrat and you're DIRTY!!

pretty sure he lied about more than a bj and still does lie like a New York Jew.:Graucho

I'll get right on that. Being that a solid arguement can't be backed by the media I'll go talk to the Bush administration myself and have them hand over all the documents.

How in the fuck can you make a solid arguement without citing the media? But unlike some you aren't supposed to believe 1 story 100% but actually use your brain to but them all together and come up with your own opinion. That article does a very good job of that. :2 cents: Oh yea, and it does cite FACTS THAT YOU CAN GO FIND YOURSELF.

pffft, what are facts? what is reality? perhaps the administration purposely is contradicting itself so skepticism will prevail so he can win back a large amount of people hence getting re-elected on a stronger note. perhaps, those writers are actually apart of the iraqi press spreading false info. maybe a 13 year old hacker with severe muscular dystrophy hacked into all the websites and posted false articles.

either way who cares. maybe we'll never know till 50 years down the road.

Good point, tough I do care... and it took only 5-7 years to see the lies of the IRAN-CONTRA affair....

Kennedy did not tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the Bay of Pigs, and the overthrow and assasination of Diem. Democrat.

Johnson flat out lied to congress about the Gulf of Tokin incident that got him permission to engage combat troops in Vietnam. Democrat.

Nixon tried to keep hidden our incursions into Cambodia during the Vietnam war. Republican.

Regan lied about our reason for invading Granada and the Iran Contra affair (though the latter is still arguable). Republican

Bush Senior lied about our reason for taking Noriega down in Panama. Republican.

These are just some of the better known events where Presidents lied and engaged our military, with the real truth coming out in later years.

So what is new about a President not telling the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, when it comes to engaging our military.

Wrong, not a democrat. Please post something you know about, which in your case may very well be nothing. :thefinger