A_Wanderer
ONE love, blood, life
Is something a lie if people assume it out of ignorance?
A_Wanderer said:Is something a lie if people assume it out of ignorance?
A_Wanderer said:Is something a lie if people assume it out of ignorance?
Actually a public figure ~ in regards to an Iraq - 9/11 link and the 40 odd percent of US citizens that believed it. Now take your average person and you know that 50% of people are dumber; I don't think that using the fact people believed/assumed a link should make the administration at fault.Irvine511 said:
... am sensing a WMD parallel here ...
Because every damn post is the same ~ and now we all know the exact way that the thread will go.BonoVoxSupastar said:How did I know where this was going.
I think the posters are more predictable than the threads.A_Wanderer said:Because every damn post is the same ~ and now we all know the exact way that the thread will go.
A_Wanderer said:
People will accuse Bush of lying, fully ignoring the Clinton administration, Rolf Ekeus and the international community. There will be defending posts citing UN resolutions and post bellum definitions of soveriegnty and the whole damn thing will wind up in the gutter.
Well thats a topic unto itself ~ his behaviour now vindicates my thoughts that he was an unstable thug, now we know that he is an unstable thug with an interest in sticking Australia firmly in the malaise of neutrality.Angela Harlem said:I actually thought this was about Mark Latham
Enough rope, indeed.
Is it lies or just good ol' fashioned deceit?A_Wanderer said:Is something a lie if people assume it out of ignorance?
Irvine511 said:um, i don't think it's by accident that 40% of the american public (and a much, much higher percentage of Fox News viewers) believed that SH was involved in 9-11.
it illustrates the connection, but the quotes are out of context"Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11.
Oh, indeed there is a tie between Iraq and what happened on 9/11. It’s not that Saddam Hussein was somehow himself and his regime involved in 9/11, but, if you think about what caused 9/11, it is the rise of ideologies of hatred that lead people to drive airplanes into buildings in New York. This is a great terrorist, international terrorist network that is determined to defeat freedom. It has perverted Islam from a peaceful religion into one in which they call on it for violence. And they're all linked. And Iraq is a central front because, if and when, and we will, we change the nature of Iraq to a place that is peaceful and democratic and prosperous in the heart of the Middle East, you will begin to change the Middle East....
A_Wanderer said:
It's the same in any country, most people don't give a piss about politics and are ill informed ~ the point is that I feel these statistics don't reflect lies on behalf of the administration in regards to a Baathist involvement in 9/11 rather a natural inference from people about Arabs that hate them.
Well I'm not sure which comments you were talking about, but none of these comments I found do I find proper for policy.A_Wanderer said:What is OK? I think that the statements above by Condoleeza Rice are perfectly fine and accurate statements about motivation for policy.
Not smarter, but they did seem to see through the smoke. Now I admit many voted based on other information, but that number can be factored into every election. The truth will be found in seeing why the voters voted the way they did.A_Wanderer said:
Are you saying that Kerry got his votes because people who vote democratic are generally smarter and better informed?
No but only another poll will tell you that.A_Wanderer said:
There are people who don't have a clue about politics or foreign affairs ~ and I don't think that they are only voting for the republicans.
A_Wanderer said:Well thats a topic unto itself ~ his behaviour now vindicates my thoughts that he was an unstable thug, now we know that he is an unstable thug with an interest in sticking Australia firmly in the malaise of neutrality.