Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Ustwo
|
Uh no. It is a classic example of an analogy.
From the article you posted headline:
Bush's "16 Words" on Iraq & Uranium: He May Have Been Wrong But He Wasn't Lying
The article points out correctly that (assuming) Bush didn't know the information was undeniably false and therefore he did not lie when he used it.
But other facts not contained in your article demonstrate that the CIA warned him the information was weak repeatedly - but he used it anyway. That doesn't mean he was a liar, but it does mean he used information which he was told was weak.
Exactly like Rather.
But your response is a classic example of a redefinition: analogy becomes distortion of facts, even when no facts have been distorted.
And just to be clear - I don't wonder why you sometimes "give up". I don't see you attempting "to start" anything other than an argument.