Lying, liars and damn liars
In a not-so-surprising revelation yesterday, a declassified National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran was released that concluded that Iran is not, in fact, building a nuclear weapon, and had probably stopped any such program four years ago.
Even more interesting is the fact that President Bush knew about this two months before he made a speech a couple of months ago warning that a nuclear armed Iran was a menace to the world and could start another World War.
He lied.
If he lied about this, doesn't that lend some credence to the idea that he lied about invading Iraq?
By "lied", I mean that he announced something as a fact when he had good reason to believe otherwise. Many people suggest that George Bush does this, not because he's a liar, but because he's stupid. I respectfully submit that he could be both.
There are times when a trusted leader needs to hold things back when talking to the public...for national security reasons, for instance, or to preserve the lives of military, intelligence professionals or others that are doing their jobs. But holding things back is a very different proposition than deliberately changing the facts to get the public to support what you want them to support. I realize that other Presidents have done this too (the Gulf of Tonkin, for example), but this administration must have trademarked the technique.
What America needs most of all in our next President is a sense of decency and honesty. I want someone in power that at least feels guilty when he/she lies.
Posted on December 04, 2007
