Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Geggy Geggy is offline
say what now?
Geggy's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Peebody
Geggy is probably a spambot
Old Jan 23rd, 2008, 06:08 AM        Bush administration lied 935 times in two years: study
funny article, at least for me.

Study: Bush, Other Officials Issued Hundreds of False Statements Before Iraq Invasion
DOUGLASS K. DANIEL
AP News
Jan 22, 2008 23:13 EST
A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.
The study concluded 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."
The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.
"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.
The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.
"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "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."
Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.
Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.
The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.
"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," the study concluded.
"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," it said.
__________________
enjoy now, regret later
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Sleazeappeal Sleazeappeal is offline
Ms. Sorghum Molasses '82
Sleazeappeal's Avatar
Join Date: Jan 2008
Sleazeappeal is probably a spambot
Old Jan 23rd, 2008, 12:56 PM       
__________________
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone,' it means just what I choose it to mean, neither more nor less.'
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Jeanette X Jeanette X is offline
Queen of the Beasts
Jeanette X's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: in my burrow
Jeanette X is probably a spambot
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 12:15 AM       
I'm suprised its only 935, actually.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Emu Emu is offline
Level 29 ♂
Emu's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Peoria, IL
Emu is probably a real personEmu is probably a real person
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 02:01 AM       
PROOF AT LAST THAT GOVERNMENTS LIE
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Geggy Geggy is offline
say what now?
Geggy's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Peebody
Geggy is probably a spambot
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 07:48 AM       
yeah, duh, no doubt that government lies, but the things they have lied about is beyond what typical politicans would usually lie about...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeanette X View Post
I'm suprised its only 935, actually.
it seems a lot to me considering the study was focused on only one issue and that was Iraq. it wouldnt be surprising if the count was much higher if they had also focused on other issues in that same time frame such as the 9/11 attacks.
__________________
enjoy now, regret later
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Cosmo Electrolux Cosmo Electrolux is offline
Stone Pants Rabbit
Cosmo Electrolux's Avatar
Join Date: May 2001
Location: In your distant memory
Cosmo Electrolux is probably a spambot
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 09:40 AM       
Oh wait....let me play devils advocate....
ahem.....

"Clinton lied about a blowjob!"
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Kulturkampf Kulturkampf is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Uijeongbu, Gyeonggi-do, Korea
Kulturkampf is probably a spambot
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 04:52 PM       
What a fucking retarded article

" "The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said."

Yeah, and so making these statements when advised of it as truth from the intelligence agencies is lying?

You guys ar efucking pathetic.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
derrida derrida is offline
Member
derrida's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2003
derrida is probably a spambot
Old Jan 24th, 2008, 05:53 PM       
there wasn't what could be termed a solid consensus among the intelligence community. and the idea that certain reports could have been politically motivated isn't out of the realm of possibility. i remember watching powell give his powerpoint presentation and the person sitting next to me is saying that they were convinced of his arguments simply because they didnt believe so many claims about wmds would have been made if there wasnt something to it. i was actually close to thinking the same thing until i saw him bring out the niger yellowcake stuff. then i knew there was really no standard of evidence at all. did you not hear about the forgeries or did you actually believe the retarded apologetics about them?
__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:39 AM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.