[Chewbacca]

Originally posted by Timber Loftis: 2. To show Bush's hypocricy would require showing his belief was false, he knew it was false, and that he went ahead and stated it anyway. This can't be shown. We all basically tought Saddam had WMD. Heck the UN stated Saddam had WMD several several times. Saddam agreed to a cease fire in which he ADMITTED he had WMD and AFFIRMED he would get rid of them. He actually USED WMD on the Kurds (mustard gas). He NEVER showed proof of disarmament, and I for one was not willing to believe he pulled a bund of "secret disarmaments" and did not inform the UN -- particularly since he was wiley enough to call every news station on the planet when he made the piddly gesture of cutting up a few SCUDs in an attempt to avoid US invasion. In short, becuase it was a reasonable belief shared by many, no one will ever be able to prove Bush intentionally lied. There is a difference between a reasonable mistake and a lie.

I offer evidence and facts, not the same old tired arguments. You may dodge these, find a witty remark to degrade the impact, but the facts stand on their own. And Im talking about 2003 facts, not, 1998, 1996, or 1991, or 1988 or any other time in the dead of history, but relevant contemperary information.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/4122113/ Regarding chemical and biological weapons, the U.N. inspectors headed by Hans Blix conducted 731 inspections between November 2002 and March 2003. Despite claims by the U.S. government of the existence of specific stockpiles of weapons and active weapons programs, they found no evidence of either. In his reports to the Security Council, Blix was always judicious. "One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist," he said. "However, that possibility is also not excluded."

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/htm..._intel100.html WASHINGTON — The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows. What that comparison showed is that while the top-secret version delivered to President Bush, his top lieutenants and Congress was heavily qualified with caveats about some of its most-important conclusions about Iraq's illicit weapons programs, those caveats were omitted from the public version.

There is a difference between a reasonable mistake and a mistake made in haste while ignoring relevant informed opinions- a stupid avoidable mistake! Leaving out the caveats and dissenting opinions about Iraqs WMD from the public version of the intel report is a deception

You may want Bush and Co. to have simply made a 'reasonable mistake' but that assessment defies reason and the facts.

[ 02-24-2004, 02:25 AM: Message edited by: Chewbacca ]