Intent to deceive?

Post #109,778 by Silverlock 7/15/03 1:59:06 PM Reply	Intent to deceive? Do you even read what you write? Read a newspaper in the last 2 years? Seen a tv news show? Any press conference? SOTU address? You truly don't see any "intent to deceive"? Iraq/Al Qaeda connection implied since 9/11. No evidence. Iraq to supply WMD to Al Qaeda. No evidence. Tax cut for the rich is defined as a "jobs creation program". Opening up national forests for logging is defined as a forest fire prevention program. We were sold a war with Iraq as thinly veiled vengeance for 9/11 even though Iraq was not involved. Get a clue. ----------------------------------------- [link\|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html\|?W] Where were you in 72?
Post #109,784 by Simon_Jester 7/15/03 2:12:56 PM Reply	Intent to deceive - ability to lie without lying... Personally, I thought that the intent was the key element with regards to lying. I also thought it was possible to "lie by omission" - telling the truth but leave out key important details. But that's just my opinion. YMMV.
Post #109,787 by Silverlock 7/15/03 2:28:51 PM Reply	I'm confused I thought what I was pointing out was the intent of the Bush admin to deceive. ----------------------------------------- [link\|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html\|?W] Where were you in 72?
Post #109,816 by Ashton 7/15/03 6:07:47 PM Reply	In a milieu shouting, Ignorance is Truth!__War is Peace! I deem that your confusion is not merely normal but Healthy, or as one sage observed re much larger matters.. Confusion is a High state (IIRC - this in connection with its being a prelude to a certain breakthrough over lengthy efforts to dissemble..) Aaauuummmm
Post #109,838 by Simon_Jester 7/15/03 8:18:52 PM Reply	I'm sorry - I was agreeing with you... and pointing that it was possible for Bush to tell completely true statement and still lie by omission. The galloping revisionists (how's that for a Marlowe phrase...) are trying desperately to argue that if it Bush said it, it wasn't a lie because technically it was true. But the fact of the matter (as you pointed out) is that Bush, by ever conceivable record, argued strong that WMD (in particular Nukes) were a clear and present danger to the US. Stating that Britain thought Iraq was trying to buy nukes becomes a lie of omission - because he didn't tell us that our own intelligence organization throught the documents were bogus.
Post #109,908 by Silverlock 7/16/03 9:06:39 AM Reply	OK My bad. I should have read closer. ----------------------------------------- [link\|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html\|?W] Where were you in 72?
Post #109,946 by Simon_Jester 7/16/03 1:50:08 PM Reply	Nice followup by the Washington Post.... But a review of speeches and reports, plus interviews with present and former administration officials and intelligence analysts, suggests that between Oct. 7, when President Bush made a speech laying out the case for military action against Hussein, and Jan. 28, when he gave his State of the Union address, almost all the other evidence had either been undercut or disproved by U.N. inspectors in Iraq. By Jan. 28, in fact, the intelligence report concerning Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa -- although now almost entirely disproved -- was the only publicly unchallenged element of the administration's case that Iraq had restarted its nuclear program. That may explain why the administration strived to keep the information in the speech and attribute it to the British, even though the CIA had challenged it earlier. [link\|http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A61622-2003Jul15.html?nav=hptop_tb\| Washington Post ] Notice how all the hyperbole regarding the French has died down as well?
Post #109,970 by Silverlock 7/16/03 2:50:57 PM Reply	Re: the French Kind of hard to continually insult an ally and expect them to respond favorably to a request for armed support. ----------------------------------------- [link\|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html\|?W] Where were you in 72?
Post #110,032 by Ashton 7/16/03 7:17:51 PM Reply	Not 'hard' if you think like a Neoconman... :(
Post #110,239 by jake123 7/17/03 8:51:27 PM Reply	Should point out that the "lie of omission" is enshrined in the common law, has been since before the US was founded, and is well understood and well tested in that milieu. The fact that marketers (and the current admin seems to me to be driven by marketing to a degree that makes the Clinton years look like sober debate) skirt around this one all the time doesn't cut it wil lawyers. --\n-------------------------------------------------------------------\n* Jack Troughton jake at consultron.ca \n [link\|http://consultron.ca\|http://consultron.ca] [link\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca\|irc://irc.ecomstation.ca] \n Kingston Ontario Canada [link\|news://news.consultron.ca\|news://news.consultron.ca] *\n-------------------------------------------------------------------
Post #110,181 by johnu 7/17/03 3:20:31 PM Reply	That explains a lot Tax cut for the rich is defined as a "jobs creation program". Opening up national forests for logging is defined as a forest fire prevention program. I see. Different beliefs == intent to deceive. So had 9/11 never happened and Bush continued to ignore Iraq, he would still be a big old lier around here. Thanks for clearing that up. Regards, JOhn
Post #110,189 by Silverlock 7/17/03 3:55:13 PM Reply	Ignore the inconvenient Twist the rest. You sure you don't work for the RNC? ----------------------------------------- [link\|http://www.talion.com/questionw.html\|?W] Where were you in 72?
Post #110,191 by mmoffitt 7/17/03 3:58:05 PM Reply	I think johnu == krove. bcnu, Mikem The soul and substance of what customarily ranks as patriotism is moral cowardice and always has been...We have thrown away the most valuable asset we had-- the individual's right to oppose both flag and country when he (just he, by himself) believed them to be in the wrong. We have thrown it away; and with it all that was really respectable about that grotesque and laughable word, Patriotism. - Mark Twain, "Monarchical and Republican Patriotism"
Post #110,228 by Ashton 7/17/03 8:18:09 PM Reply	Wrong krove possesses the instincts and dissembling talents of the Sainted Herr G\ufffdbbels - the originator of the Official Ministry of Propaganda. This here's a pup, with Human Events* quips stirred into his pabulum, early on. * He got Shrub his first non- direct-PrescottBushDynasty sinecure: the cushy [we don't give Governors no power here, so they ain't gots much To Do] Texas Governorship. krove has been a limpet on the head of that eel, every day since. How's That! - for parlaying a career in Rush-style dissembling into the Acme of World-Class Dissembling! {applause} {encore} Wait'll ya hear about the emergency Iran invasion .. [never mind those bread lines; this is about Freedom]

Welcome to IWETHEY!