Quote:
Originally posted by Tyrone Slothrop
In this post from Crooked Timber (links in original), Henry responds to something in the Economist, but he might as well be responding to Spanky.
eta: more here
|
"The critics mentioned in the piece aren’t making “the charge that [Bush] knew all along that Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction.” I’m not aware of anyone apart from a few crackpots who are."
This is such a preposterous lie. That is exactly what all the critics are saying. Almost no one I have read, or I have heard complaining has acknowledged Bush was not lying when he said there were WMDs. When people are saying Bush lied that are saying he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction. It was totally duplicitous to say Bush lied about the existence of the weapons, I guess I shouldn't expect to the same people to be honest about what they were saying. Once it became apparant that no matter how many time they repeated Bush lied it was still obvious it was B.S. on its face, they then try and claim they didn't mean what they meant.
This is really pathetic.
