Ten Appalling Lies We Were Told About Iraq

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Says it all really. Note last paragraph.

And as we all know, GW's Poodle-In-Chief, the Right Honourable Member for South Texas Tony Blair unleashed a similar tornado of distortion, exaggeration, spin and puffery on the British public in the run-up to this illegal invasion, thereby losing The Blue Meanie's vote for ever

But on a brighter note, we had the largest public demonstration in British history (more than a million people) in London in February (No blood for oil!), and we are now at least having (a sort of) public enquiry which has already exposed all sorts of cockroaches in the corridors of powder to the harsh light of day - even if the eventual report will inevitably be a bland whitewash
«1345

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 94
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Uh huh.



    A more puzzling question to me - because I know politicians lie a lot - is, what's with your signature? Not trying to be obtuse; I just don't get it.



    Also: the bigger lie right now is coming from oil industry lackeys (I mean analsysts). Their "supply crisis" rationale for gas prices is the biggest bald-faced lie I've seen since, well since the whole gas centrifuge thing by golly!



  • Reply 2 of 94
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Moogs

    Uh huh.



    A more puzzling question to me - because I know politicians lie a lot - is, what's with your signature? Not trying to be obtuse; I just don't get it.





    you've never seen the shining
  • Reply 3 of 94
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    Indeed I have. I guess I don't recall the part where Jack says that four times over (which I'm guessing he does). I do however remembe the "Heeere's JOHNNY!" line.
  • Reply 4 of 94
    thuh freakthuh freak Posts: 2,664member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Moogs

    Indeed I have. I guess I don't recall the part where Jack says that four times over (which I'm guessing he does). I do however remembe the "Heeere's JOHNNY!" line.



    before going after olive oil including the ed mcmahon impression, nicholson's character filled hundreds of pages of paper with "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy." quite monotonous, and creepy. the wife found it, and i think that led to their disagreement, and his going over the edge, so to speak.
  • Reply 5 of 94
    northgatenorthgate Posts: 4,461member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Moogs

    Uh huh.



    A more puzzling question to me - because I know politicians lie a lot - is, what's with your signature? Not trying to be obtuse; I just don't get it.



    Also: the bigger lie right now is coming from oil industry lackeys (I mean analsysts). Their "supply crisis" rationale for gas prices is the biggest bald-faced lie I've seen since, well since the whole gas centrifuge thing by golly!







    Is the spelling intentionally goofed up? Or was it like that in The Shining as well?
  • Reply 6 of 94
    andersanders Posts: 6,523member
    I have never understood why people were so fascinated by the shining. I love all of Kubriks work but have never seen this film as special. Only the way the boy on the three wheeler is filmed adds something special to it IMO.
  • Reply 7 of 94
    Quote:

    what's with your signature? Not trying to be obtuse; I just don't get it.



    The blue meanieas are the bad guys in The Yellow Submarine.
  • Reply 8 of 94
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    That's his name, not the signature, but thanks. Knowing a bit about Yellow Submarines things are starting to become more clear to me now.



  • Reply 9 of 94
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Northgate

    Is the spelling intentionally goofed up? Or was it like that in The Shining as well?



    Hair of the dog that bit me, Lloyd!
  • Reply 10 of 94
    Quote:

    Originally posted by thuh Freak

    before going after olive oil including the ed mcmahon impression, nicholson's character filled hundreds of pages of paper with "All work and no play make Jack a dull boy." quite monotonous, and creepy. the wife found it, and i think that led to their disagreement, and his going over the edge, so to speak.



    Words of wisdom, Lloyd, my man. Words of wisdom.

  • Reply 11 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    They're wrong about #2. Maybe some of the other 9 but why bother reading it when it lies itself.
  • Reply 12 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    #3 takes Cheney out of context. If I remember several times in the interview he said "nuclear weapons program". But the one time out of 6 he doesn't finish the thought and put the "program" on it become a "lie".





    Isn't it lying when you quote someone out of context?
  • Reply 13 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    #6 is total crap.
  • Reply 14 of 94
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    #6 is total crap.





    Quote:

    #6

    "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." ? President Bush, Oct. 7.




    Scott:



    I'd be very grateful if you could point me to a link where I could read more about these humming silos of terribly dangerous unmanned drones discovered by the puissant, thrusting American weapons inspectors.



    Because I keep abreast of the news and I don't remember reading that any of this "growing fleet" has been discovered.



    In fact, come to think of it, I sorta feel... lied to!



    Sort of like George Bush is a great big, fat ****ing liar, you know?



    Anyway, waiting for your link,



    love, your friend



    'Hassan' ibn Sabeh from Stoke Newington, London N16
  • Reply 15 of 94
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    They're wrong about #2. Maybe some of the other 9 but why bother reading it when it lies itself.



    I'm with Hassan on this - care to back up your claims with some actual evidence here, Scott? Care to offer us a bit more than unadorned monosyllables like "crap" and "wrong"?
  • Reply 16 of 94
    Tell you what, forget the humming silos.



    Show me a link to any information on one solitary single 'manned air vehicle' (commonly known as 'an aeroplane', I believe) discovered in the last three months equipped to deliver chemical or biological weapons and capable of the 6,000 mile flight from central Iraq, across the no-fly zone and the Atlantic Ocean to the United States. Please.



    Or any 'unmanned air vehicle' of any kind not made from fibreglass and powered by a car battery.



    Kites, radio controlled biplanes and weather balloons do not count.



    (I've been woodshedding a new dance similar to my World Famous Oil Dance, incidentally, tentatively titled my 'George Bush Is A Big Fat Liar' Dance. It's only a work in progress but I believe it has potential. I might give it a run out in a sort of performance-workshop soon, maybe on this thread.)
  • Reply 17 of 94
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    the statement cited in #2 is a lie.
  • Reply 18 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah

    Scott:



    I'd be very grateful if you could point me to a link where I could read more about these humming silos of terribly dangerous unmanned drones discovered by the puissant, thrusting American weapons inspectors.



    Because I keep abreast of the news and I don't remember reading that any of this "growing fleet" has been discovered.



    In fact, come to think of it, I sorta feel... lied to!



    Sort of like George Bush is a great big, fat ****ing liar, you know?



    Anyway, waiting for your link,



    love, your friend



    'Hassan' ibn Sabeh from Stoke Newington, London N16




    The argument made at the web site is that a drone with a range of 300 miles is not threat to a country 6000 miles away. Obviously if you had such a drone and you wanted to attack a country with it you would LAUNCH IT FROM A MUCH CLOSER DISTANCE. So their argument is bullshit.
  • Reply 19 of 94
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by The Blue Meanie

    I'm with Hassan on this - care to back up your claims with some actual evidence here, Scott? Care to offer us a bit more than unadorned monosyllables like "crap" and "wrong"?



    #2 is wrong mainly because the brits still stand by their claim that Iraq was trying to by stuff from Africa.
  • Reply 20 of 94
    smirclesmircle Posts: 1,035member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    The argument made at the web site is that a drone with a range of 300 miles is not threat to a country 6000 miles away. Obviously if you had such a drone and you wanted to attack a country with it you would LAUNCH IT FROM A MUCH CLOSER DISTANCE. So their argument is bullshit.



    How convenient to declare *any* model plane, ultra light and manned plane a possible attack weapon on a nation half a world away...



    Scott, just how gullible are you?
Sign In or Register to comment.