Originally Posted by roachboy

i wasn't going to post again to this thread as it has devolved onto "feelings" again, as if what matters about the obvious falsifications at the levels of data and interpretation that the bush people in the run-up to the iraq war was not the demonstrable problems with what was done and said, but rather whether you or i or someone else was dispositionally inclined to see these problems as amounting to lying or some such. so that the thread has come to is basically whether you like or do not like the application of the word "lie" to the bush administration--which is really just another way of talking about whether you supported the war in iraq or not.

there's nothing else happening here.
to my mind, the demonstrable falsification of data and the incoherences of interpretation made the case for invading iraq false.
you can quibble about what label you see as best following from that all you want, but there's no getting around the facts of the matter.

Originally Posted by rahl

Unless you know of a different defiinition to the word "lie" then you were lied to. False information was presented to the American people(including you), for the justification of invading iraq. Whether you "feel" iraq was a bad place or saddam was a bad guy is utterly irrelevant.