2 huge problems with that argument.



1) If you believe that Bush lied about WMD's, you must also then admit that Clinton also lied, because he also said they had weapons of mass destruction. So, he lied under oath in a court of law, when he was up on charges of sexual harassment from some else, AND he lied about weapons of mass destruction also.



2) Every intelligence agency in the world said the exact same thing prior to the invasion of Iraq. Why did the French, German, Chinese, Russian, British, U.S., etc. all make this same lie when many of them were against the envasion?



-----------------------------



I tend to believe that Bush was wrong when he quoted what everyone else in the world was telling him, and those intelligence agencies were wrong also. I can find no evidence of a lie anywhere, just accusations from Bush haters. This allegation has been out there for many months, and no one has yet been able to prove it. Why is that? Is it because it is another false accusation, like his service in the national guard?



Clinton, on the other hand, was proven a liar while under oath in a court of law, to congress, and in an address to the nation, and he later admitted that he lied. Two entirely different situations.



Funny how one the one hand, you can claim Bush is a liar with no proof of this, and on the other hand, you can ignore Clinton's proven lie due to the subject matter of the lie.



The liberal mind is a very strange thing! Logic like that could destroy every Vulcan on Star Trek!



Rodney

[ Show Entire Thread ]