2008-01-22 study of Bush Iraq lies
A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations – the Center for Public Integrity, funded by the Fund for Independence in Journalism – shows that President Bush and top Administration officials issued 935 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 neocon reality inversion immediately started trying to spin the report as totally biased, without actually addressing any of the facts:
|from 2008-01-23 How to Lie About Lying:|
Now, would any disinterested party read the above -- and not think the study authors were accusing President Bush and his administration of deliberately lying us into war? Surely this subtextual implication must have crept in because of bad writing; I can't imagine that the elite media would be so intentionally partisan.
- Yes, they were accusing him of that, because he did. This is common knowledge everywhere except within the neocon reality inversion.
- How is it partisan to accuse someone of something they did? Ok, mea culpa, I realize the author isn't being genuinely obtuse, just deliberately misleading. "Partisan" is not the same thing as always presenting both sides as equally valid, but the neoconservatives want us to think that it is so that we will fall for the fallacy of moderation and assume that a "reasonable" position is halfway to (their) madness. Which it isn't.
|from 2008-01-23 AP Reports 'Bush Lied' Study Funded by Ultra-leftist George Soros:|
...somehow the AP forgot to mention that the organization that released this study was funded by extreme leftist George Soros, who has spent billions funding the Democrat Party and many far left think tank and advocacy organizations. Yeah, THAT study is going to be legitimate!
This is an ad hominem attack, and doesn't actually address any of the facts raised in the report. It's also unclear whether it is even true, as the article specifically mentions that the report was posted by the Center for Public Integrity as funded by the Fund for Independence in Journalism. If there's a Soros connection there, it isn't so obvious that not mentioning it should be considered poor reporting.
More importantly, if funding from Soros automatically makes such a report illegitimate, who do they think should have funded it? The government? (Conservatives are supposedly against government funding for anything except war.) A right-wing organization? Possibly; that would ensure that all such studies were "fair and balanced" in the Fox Newspeak sense.
|from 2008-01-23 532 Bush Administration Lies About Iraq:|
Would it not have been more honest for the newspaper of record to recall that however “sketchy” the intelligence, it was not presented by the CIA to the administration as sketchy at all? Rather, it was presented as an iron-clad case, most memorably by CIA director George Tenet as a “a slam-dunk.” And would it not have been more honest to point out that the post-war studies of Iraq’s WMD program, like the Duelfer Report, had the benefit not merely of hindsight but the ability of investigators to roam freely through Iraqi archives and facilities? Back in 2002 and early 2003, when the U.S. was gearing up for war, things looked very differently than they did afterward.
My understanding is that the "slam dunk" was but one of many reports presented to Bush, and that any reports not supporting the existence of WMDs were carefully suppressed or ignored. One such report even led to harsh retribution by the Bush administration, so the author must think his readers are all idiots with long-term memory loss. Bush knew very well there were no WMDs, but his administration has carefully engineered the impression that he couldn't have known.
However, even if he truly didn't know, and made an honest mistake based on sketchy data -- where is the contrition for having made this huge mistake? Where is the realization that well, perhaps it wasn't necessary after all? How is this justification for our continued presence in Iraq, now that we know for sure there is no WMD threat there?
- Iraq - The War Card: Orchestrated Deception on the Path to War: the report itself
- 2008-01-23 official press release
- 2008-01-24 [Talk|Index] Iraq: The Damage of Falsehoods § “The Bush administration calls Iraq the central front in the war on terror. Give me a break. Iraq is a place where President Bush decided to place 165,000 troops as stationary targets for an unidentifiable enemy to attack and kill continuously. All while the real terrorists who are plotting to attack us here at home are roaming freely around the world, and Bin Laden is safely hidden in the mountains of Pakistan. How does that make Iraq the central front in the war on terror?”
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] Study: Bush led U.S. to war on 'false pretenses' § “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.” See 2008-01-22 study of Bush Iraq lies for further discussion.
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] Media mayhem continues § by Jon Ham: “Now we find out that The Associated Press and The New York Times both parroted a press release from a George Soros-funded America-hating group that claims to â€œproveâ€ that Bush lied and people died. The so-called Center for Public Integrity, the Soros boot-licking group, claims, according to AP, that...” (Yet more ad hominem from the right when truth about Bush is spoken too loudly...)
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] MSM tools spread Soros propaganda § “The right side of the blogosphere is all over the clueless media coverage of a new â€œstudyâ€ and database compiled by â€œtwo nonprofit journalism organizationsâ€ that purports to show that BUSH LIED to entice America into Iraq. You would think by now that the MSM would try to spare itself some embarrassment and at least do a cursory Google search before casting the researchers as neutral, reliable, disinterested parties. But noooo. They dutifully published these transparent moonbat briefs for impeachment without disclosing the â€œnonprofit journalism organizationsâ€™â€ ties to BDS sugar daddy George Soros.” Includes montage image of Soros as Dr. Evil.
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] How to Lie About Lying § “Now, would any disinterested party read the above -- and not think the study authors were accusing President Bush and his administration of deliberately lying us into war? Surely this subtextual implication must have crept in because of bad writing; I can't imagine that the elite media would be so intentionally partisan.” See 2008-01-22 study of Bush Iraq lies for further discussion.
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] Study: Falsehoods Preceded Iraq War § “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.” See 2008-01-22 study of Bush Iraq lies for further discussion.
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] AP runs Soros-funded anti-war â€œstudyâ€ as hard news § (at Hot Air) “This late in the war, Iâ€™m not even sure why anyone would bother trotting out the â€œBush LIED, people DIEDâ€ line. If you havenâ€™t bought it by now, youâ€™re not likely to, and if you already buy it, you already buy it. I suppose seeing it in print one more time could be your Daily Affirmation that weâ€™re living in Bushreichâ€™s Amerikkka.” Why bother trotting it out? Because apparently some people still support him and the war. Seems unbelievable, but yes...
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] AP Reports 'Bush Lied' Study Funded by Ultra-leftist George Soros § “Well, the AP has done it again. They have given us leftist propaganda and painted it as news.”
- 2008-01-23 [Talk|Index] 532 Bush Administration Lies About Iraq § “This brings us back to the question which we began. What is a false statement? Did the Bush administration lie when it relied on the CIAâ€™s estimates of Iraqâ€™s WMD program, or is it the Center for Public Integrity that is now doing some lying, with the New York Times brazenly helping them along?”
- 2008-01-22 [Talk|Index] Media Study Claims Bush Administration Lied Hundreds of Times About Iraq § “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.” (syndicated reposting of AP report)