Author Topic: Conservative? Not these guys.  (Read 4354 times)

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #25 on: December 09, 2008, 03:05:43 PM »
LOL your a fuking idiot so if 9/11 didnt happen we would have still invaded iraq?

Answer the question do you think obama lied to all of america when he told them his expectations in removing from iraq or do you think he got filled in on something when he got briefed?
I'm an idiot.

How big of you.

Maybe you're missing something.  I think it's apparent to everyone but you that 9/11 had ZERO to do with IRaq.  Even Bush's own people admit that.

Hell, once Bush got his invasion, he admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

The only people still holding that falsehood are you and Dick Cheney.

I think Obama listens to his advisers and makes decisions with his mind.  If the facts on the ground today lend themselves to an extended phased withdrawal then so be it.

How different is that from Bush...Mr. "I follow my gut instinct"?

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #26 on: December 09, 2008, 03:16:24 PM »
I'm an idiot.

How big of you.

Maybe you're missing something.  I think it's apparent to everyone but you that 9/11 had ZERO to do with IRaq.  Even Bush's own people admit that.

Hell, once Bush got his invasion, he admitted Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

The only people still holding that falsehood are you and Dick Cheney.

I think Obama listens to his advisers and makes decisions with his mind.  If the facts on the ground today lend themselves to an extended phased withdrawal then so be it.

How different is that from Bush...Mr. "I follow my gut instinct"?
im not saying that iraq had something to do with the planning or carrying out of 9/11 jackass only that 9/11 was a reason for going into iraq.

you side stepped the question and tried not to get to the point which was that he was given new information that changed his mind. I.E. we the general public are not previe to all info that the president had are we?

big L dawg

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5729
  • i always tell the truth even when i lie...
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #27 on: December 09, 2008, 05:24:44 PM »
im not saying that iraq had something to do with the planning or carrying out of 9/11 jackass only that 9/11 was a reason for going into iraq.

you side stepped the question and tried not to get to the point which was that he was given new information that changed his mind. I.E. we the general public are not previe to all info that the president had are we?


if 9/11 didn't happen the government would have manufactured a reason to invade just as they did.
DAWG

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #28 on: December 09, 2008, 05:48:13 PM »
im not saying that iraq had something to do with the planning or carrying out of 9/11 jackass only that 9/11 was a reason for going into iraq.



Even this assertion shows your ignorance. The two things had nothing to do with each other, but the Bush administration conflated them  for a naive portion of the American public. 

Iraq was allegedly about Saddam possessing weapons of mass destruction. Even in the run up to the war, the claim was dubious. Cheney and co tacked on allegations of terrorist camps being run out of Iraq to play into  the malignant jingoism festering around the country. People like you thought "Gee, Iraq and Afghanistan are in the same part of the world and those people are all the same color. They's must be up to sumthin'!"

Years later, half the country still believes that, in some not totally clear way, the two events are related.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #29 on: December 09, 2008, 06:44:21 PM »
Even this assertion shows your ignorance. The two things had nothing to do with each other, but the Bush administration conflated them  for a naive portion of the American public. 

Iraq was allegedly about Saddam possessing weapons of mass destruction. Even in the run up to the war, the claim was dubious. Cheney and co tacked on allegations of terrorist camps being run out of Iraq to play into  the malignant jingoism festering around the country. People like you thought "Gee, Iraq and Afghanistan are in the same part of the world and those people are all the same color. They's must be up to sumthin'!"

Years later, half the country still believes that, in some not totally clear way, the two events are related.
LOL no i thought it was a mistake you have any proof that bush was going to go into iraq any way?
you probably subscribe to the thinking that 9/11 was an inside job too dont you used by the bush administration to have an excuse to go after saddam  ::)

Al Doggity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 7286
  • Old School Gemini
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #30 on: December 09, 2008, 09:14:21 PM »
LOL no i thought it was a mistake you have any proof that bush was going to go into iraq any way?
you probably subscribe to the thinking that 9/11 was an inside job too dont you used by the bush administration to have an excuse to go after saddam  ::)

Way to introduce a straw man argument when your premise is faulty. Whether Bush planned to invade iraq prior to 9/11 is a moot topic. The fact of the matter is that he did use 9.11 as a smoke screen to start an unrelated war. You have confused the two multiple times in this thread. I'm not exactly sure why you can't grasp the actuality of the situation, but you seem to be warping the facts to fit some strange reality you've created. You've already posted that you understand that Iraq would not have been invaded if 9/11 hadn't happened and you have also posted that you understand that the two evenst are not related.

Straw Man

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41015
  • one dwells in nirvana
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #31 on: December 09, 2008, 09:43:06 PM »
If you are a true conservative you have to really be scratching your head.

It seems like its more lip service than anything. 


progressives are the new conservatives

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #32 on: December 09, 2008, 10:21:33 PM »
Way to introduce a straw man argument when your premise is faulty. Whether Bush planned to invade iraq prior to 9/11 is a moot topic. The fact of the matter is that he did use 9.11 as a smoke screen to start an unrelated war. You have confused the two multiple times in this thread. I'm not exactly sure why you can't grasp the actuality of the situation, but you seem to be warping the facts to fit some strange reality you've created. You've already posted that you understand that Iraq would not have been invaded if 9/11 hadn't happened and you have also posted that you understand that the two evenst are not related.
just b/c the two are not related in terms of terrorist activity doesnt mean that they arent related at all how do you and decker not understand this...if you concede that if 9/11 didnt happen then we wouldnt be in iraq how can you say they arent related? its a simple logic if then situation...if 9/11 happens then we invade iraq, if 9/11 doesnt happen then we dont invade iraq...how are the two not related? I understand what your saying in that iraq had nothing to do with the attack on 9/11 and i agree but you must understand that its b/c of 9/11 that we are in iraq so they two are related.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #33 on: December 10, 2008, 06:36:12 AM »
im not saying that iraq had something to do with the planning or carrying out of 9/11 jackass only that 9/11 was a reason for going into iraq.
How was the attacks of 9/11 a reason for going into Iraq?

you side stepped the question and tried not to get to the point which was that he was given new information that changed his mind. I.E. we the general public are not previe to all info that the president had are we?[/quote]You mean that the public does not have the same facts as the leaders do instantly?

No shit. Thanks for adding that to the discussion.




Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #34 on: December 10, 2008, 06:41:20 AM »
just b/c the two are not related in terms of terrorist activity doesnt mean that they arent related at all how do you and decker not understand this...if you concede that if 9/11 didnt happen then we wouldnt be in iraq how can you say they arent related? its a simple logic if then situation...if 9/11 happens then we invade iraq, if 9/11 doesnt happen then we dont invade iraq...how are the two not related? I understand what your saying in that iraq had nothing to do with the attack on 9/11 and i agree but you must understand that its b/c of 9/11 that we are in iraq so they two are related.
These are the ramblings of a confused person.

Are you trying to say that...I give up, I have no idea what the hell you're trying to say.

It looks like you're trying to say 9/11 was used as pretext for the Iraq invasion but somehow the words "Pres. Bush" never appear.

It's like the Iraq invasion was just a result of 9/11 turmoil.

hahaha.

NOpe, the invasion was a duplicitous and concerted effort by Bush and Co. to start a war where one was not merited.

And as Always, Al did a great job of pointing out your bush league attempt at debating the matter.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #35 on: December 10, 2008, 07:48:35 AM »
These are the ramblings of a confused person.

Are you trying to say that...I give up, I have no idea what the hell you're trying to say.

It looks like you're trying to say 9/11 was used as pretext for the Iraq invasion but somehow the words "Pres. Bush" never appear.

It's like the Iraq invasion was just a result of 9/11 turmoil.

hahaha.

NOpe, the invasion was a duplicitous and concerted effort by Bush and Co. to start a war where one was not merited.

And as Always, Al did a great job of pointing out your bush league attempt at debating the matter.
and im sure you have proof of this as well dont you just like i asked of doggity? i guess not...

so you rag on me for secret info and you use some yourself i see hahahah

you never answer my question if 9/11 didnt happen would we be in iraq?

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #36 on: December 10, 2008, 08:14:50 AM »
and im sure you have proof of this as well dont you just like i asked of doggity? i guess not...

so you rag on me for secret info and you use some yourself i see hahahah

you never answer my question if 9/11 didnt happen would we be in iraq?
Fascinating.  It's historical fact that Bush and co. started a concerted effort to impress upon the american people that Iraq was an imminent threat to the US b/c of WMDs and ties to Al Qaeda.

Where the hell have you been? 

It’s hard to believe but some people still assert that President Bush was somehow “misled” by poor intelligence into attacking Iraq.

We’ll look at some of the 55 documented lies of Bush on the matter.

A lie occurs when a false impression is made knowingly. That includes exaggerations and omissions used to create that false impression.

Bush Lie #1

Statement: "We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents."
Source: President Talks to Troops in Qatar, White House (6/5/2003).

Fact: the Defense Intelligence Agency who examined the trailers concluded that they were most likely used to produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons.

Lie: This statement was a lie because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons in contradiction of the intelligence provided.


Bush Lie #2

Statement: "Here's what -- we've discovered a weapons system, biological labs, that Iraq denied she had, and labs that were prohibited under the U.N. resolutions."
Source: President Bush, Russian President Putin Sign Treaty of Moscow, White House (6/1/2003).

Fact: This statement was a lie because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons in contradiction of the intelligence provided.

Lie: This statement was a lie because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons in contradiction of the intelligence provided.


Bush Lie #3

Statement: "The regime . . . has aided, trained and harbored terrorists, including operatives of al Qaeda. The danger is clear: using chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons, obtained with the help of Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country, or any other."
Source: President Says Saddam Hussein Must Leave Iraq Within 48 Hours, White House (3/17/2003).

Fact: This statement is a lie because it suggested that Iraq, at the time, was providing support to al Qaeda. The U.S. intelligence community had conflicting evidence on this issue and was divided regarding whether there was an operational relationship. Bush omitted this part of the matter in his statement to push Iraq as a threat to us. This statement also was misleading because it evoked the threat of Iraq providing al Qaeda with weapons of mass destruction. According to the National Intelligence Estimate, the intelligence community had "low confidence" in that scenario.

Lie. Omitting relevant, key countervailing information is lying.

Only 52 more to go. And that’s just Bush’s lies.

Source: http://oversight.house.gov/IraqOnThe...orge+W%2E+Bush
________________________ ________________________ _______________________

If Bush, for whatever reason, did not want to go to war with Iraq, then why was he constantly lying about the threat posed by Iraq?

Those are public statements.  They are not secrets. 

Quote
you never answer my question if 9/11 didnt happen would we be in iraq?
9/11 made Bush's push for war much easier.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #37 on: December 10, 2008, 08:19:22 AM »
LOL dude you have no idea what info he was given this is part of my point i.e. the obama iraq strategy change...what you is after the fact knowledge not first hand at the time knowledge hindsight is always 20/20 at the time its possible is it not that he thought that they where a threat?

so your saying that bush was going after iraq no matter what? pls provide evidence for this

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #38 on: December 10, 2008, 08:21:30 AM »
LOL dude you have no idea what info he was given this is part of my point i.e. the obama iraq strategy change...what you is after the fact knowledge not first hand at the time knowledge hindsight is always 20/20 at the time its possible is it not that he thought that they where a threat?
What?

Quote
so your saying that bush was going after iraq no matter what? pls provide evidence for this
I just gave you 55 lies by Bush himself which were used to portray Iraq as a threat to the US requiring military action.

Do you understand that?

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #39 on: December 10, 2008, 08:39:21 AM »
What?
I just gave you 55 lies by Bush himself which were used to portray Iraq as a threat to the US requiring military action.

Do you understand that?
i tried clicking on your link and the web page didnt come up?

what im sayng is that even though there where reports saying this there where also reports saying the opposite in addition to that fact you have we have no idea what other relevant information the president had that we did not at the time and still has not been made public.

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #40 on: December 10, 2008, 08:48:05 AM »
i tried clicking on your link and the web page didnt come up?

what im sayng is that even though there where reports saying this there where also reports saying the opposite in addition to that fact you have we have no idea what other relevant information the president had that we did not at the time and still has not been made public.
http://oversight.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/index.asp?viewAll=1&Speaker=President+George+W%2E+Bush

Sorry about that, the address condensed into an ellipsis.

How do you know there's more intel out there?  We've seen the white papers that Bush doctored to fabricate the Iraqi 'threat' to the US.

What more do you need--lies, fabricated documents, violation of the law in ordering the attack...what more do you need?

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #41 on: December 10, 2008, 10:57:03 AM »
http://oversight.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/index.asp?viewAll=1&Speaker=President+George+W%2E+Bush

Sorry about that, the address condensed into an ellipsis.

How do you know there's more intel out there?  We've seen the white papers that Bush doctored to fabricate the Iraqi 'threat' to the US.

What more do you need--lies, fabricated documents, violation of the law in ordering the attack...what more do you need?
no problem

Do you really think that you have all the same intelligence as the president of the United States on any matter none the less something as sensitive as this? honestly? Again its quite apparent that that the general public doesnt have all the info look at barack obama and his plan for removing troops prior to his briefing and then after some info was given to him that made him change his plan either that or he was lying to all america and knew his plan would not work.

is it possible that bush fabricated documents after the invasion and after there where no wmd perhaps to save face?

if bush really did fabricate documents to invade iraq dont you think he would have been impeached

also if im not mistaken their where other countries with their intelligence saying the same thing where there not? where they in on it too?

big L dawg

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5729
  • i always tell the truth even when i lie...
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #42 on: December 10, 2008, 11:23:47 AM »
believeeverythingthegove rnmenttellsyou.com
DAWG

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #43 on: December 10, 2008, 12:26:03 PM »
believeeverythingthegovernmenttellsyou.com
LOL nope just dont go believing unsubstantiated rumors 9/11 was an inside job, palins daughter is really her daughters daughter, she had an affair with a business partner, her daughter is a gang banging lesbo, obama is muslim, obama isnt a citizen...ignorant shit if you ask me

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #44 on: December 10, 2008, 12:59:37 PM »
no problem

Do you really think that you have all the same intelligence as the president of the United States on any matter none the less something as sensitive as this? honestly? Again its quite apparent that that the general public doesnt have all the info look at barack obama and his plan for removing troops prior to his briefing and then after some info was given to him that made him change his plan either that or he was lying to all america and knew his plan would not work.
Why was it that Bush's lies always made Iraq's threat greater rather than lesser?  Does that indicate a rational pattern of deception to you?

Quote
is it possible that bush fabricated documents after the invasion and after there where no wmd perhaps to save face?
The fabrication of the summary of the NIE report was the White Paper produced by the Bush White House.  In it "the president and his administration edited the "White Paper", or declassified version of the NIE released to Congress and the public, censored in a way that made the Iraqi threat seem more ominous than it actually was."  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Prosecution_of_George_W._Bush_for_Murder
Bugliosi goes into detail on the precise additions and omissions used by Bush to make Iraq seem dangerous.

Quote
if bush really did fabricate documents to invade iraq dont you think he would have been impeached
Are you kidding?  With those democrats?  Impeachment is not the same thing as the criminal code.  Impeachment is a quasi-legal proceeding that is more political than it is legal.

Quote
also if im not mistaken their where other countries with their intelligence saying the same thing where there not? where they in on it too?
You are misstating the problem.  All the intel estimates of the US and other countries was years and years old.

It's a good thing that the most recent estimates and inspections of 2002 showed Iraq was not a threat to the US and that Iraq did not have WMDs.

But if you want to rely on outdated intel to make your point, that's your prerogative.

The best and latest evidence was from 2002...not 1998.

And the Uniter said he would be making up his mind to attack Iraq based on the latest intel.  Or was that just a lie?

I'm sorry, misstatement.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #45 on: December 10, 2008, 01:23:23 PM »
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
"The United States and the UK asserted that Saddam Hussein still possessed large hidden stockpiles of WMD in 2003," Yes there was intelligence that said there where none there was also intelligence that said there where.

from your link
"A National Intelligence Estimate of less than a week earlier stated that while Iraq did have WMD capabilities, it had no plans to use its weapons except in the capacity of self-defense," this is from 2002 so apparently their was intelligence that pointed towards iraq having wmd.

of course it was censored again we are not privie to all the same info that the president is and we shouldnt be no matter who is president obama, bush, clinton they will know things that we dont and should not know. How do they know it made it more ominous did they get their hands on the classified version?

Enough for colin powell and rice to assert that their was as well...again i believe this was a mistake now do i believe that they intentionally misled america, no sorry i dont.

Ok so why havent any criminal charges been filed against him if that is the case?

Decker

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 5782
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #46 on: December 10, 2008, 03:26:19 PM »
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
"The United States and the UK asserted that Saddam Hussein still possessed large hidden stockpiles of WMD in 2003," Yes there was intelligence that said there where none there was also intelligence that said there where.
That statement is nothing but wishful thinking with no basis in evidence or fact.  It's pro-war bullshit with no support.

And so what if the US and Britain really did believe that?  Bush lied his ass off and Blair was an accomplice. 

The undeniable fact of the matter is that the WMD inspectors found nothing to support the allegations.

The best most recent evidence available contradicted Bush's allegations.  Yet he ordered an attack to disarm a disarmed country.  That's murder.

Quote
from your link
"A National Intelligence Estimate of less than a week earlier stated that while Iraq did have WMD capabilities, it had no plans to use its weapons except in the capacity of self-defense," this is from 2002 so apparently their was intelligence that pointed towards iraq having wmd.
Again, so what?  That paragraph states in black and white that Iraq was no threat to the US.

Why did Bush make a national address that very day claiming that Iraq was an imminent threat when the latest intel said the exact opposite?

Look at the date of the estimate.  Oct 7, 2002.  The weapons inspections did not start until November 18, 2002....after Bush ran to the UN asking to enforce the disarmament aspects of the terms of the surrender of the first Gulf War....thus Resolution 1441.

Quote
of course it was censored again we are not privie to all the same info that the president is and we shouldnt be no matter who is president obama, bush, clinton they will know things that we dont and should not know. How do they know it made it more ominous did they get their hands on the classified version?
The relevant portions of the NIE were declassified.
Quote

Ok so why havent any criminal charges been filed against him if that is the case?
A sitting president cannot be sued for the crimes Bush is accused of.  Wait a couple of more weeks.

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #47 on: December 10, 2008, 03:31:57 PM »
That statement is nothing but wishful thinking with no basis in evidence or fact.  It's pro-war bullshit with no support.

And so what if the US and Britain really did believe that?  Bush lied his ass off and Blair was an accomplice. 

The undeniable fact of the matter is that the WMD inspectors found nothing to support the allegations.

The best most recent evidence available contradicted Bush's allegations.  Yet he ordered an attack to disarm a disarmed country.  That's murder.
Again, so what?  That paragraph states in black and white that Iraq was no threat to the US.

Why did Bush make a national address that very day claiming that Iraq was an imminent threat when the latest intel said the exact opposite?

Look at the date of the estimate.  Oct 7, 2002.  The weapons inspections did not start until November 18, 2002....after Bush ran to the UN asking to enforce the disarmament aspects of the terms of the surrender of the first Gulf War....thus Resolution 1441.
The relevant portions of the NIE were declassified.A sitting president cannot be sued for the crimes Bush is accused of.  Wait a couple of more weeks.
LOL so now britain is in on the shame too?

Look dude as much as you want to rant and rave there was intelligence that said they did have wmd bush choose to believe them instead of the ones that said they didnt or the one that said they could but probably wouldnt attack us.

Either way he didnt intentionally misled ppl which is what you are asserting like i said i think it was a mistake and a bad decision but your portraying it as a big conspiracy which it isnt.

LOL ill wait a few more weeks but i doubt and you probably know nothing will come of it.

Hedgehog

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 19466
  • It Rubs The Lotion On Its Skin.
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #48 on: December 10, 2008, 05:13:22 PM »
LOL nope just dont go believing unsubstantiated rumors 9/11 was an inside job, palins daughter is really her daughters daughter, she had an affair with a business partner, her daughter is a gang banging lesbo, obama is muslim, obama isnt a citizen...ignorant shit if you ask me

I agree with you totally about being sceptical towards conspiracy theorists and sensationalism.

But as far as Bush and the Iraq war goes - it would really be in his best interest to put forward any kind of evidence that support starting a war with Iraq.

Do you remember how Bush had Colin Powell talking to the UN claiming there were intelligence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

Something that were never found.

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but there were actually UN inspectors searching throughout the whole of Iraq at the time of the invasion. They reported back everyday how they didn't find anything, how they got the kind of access they demanded, and so on.

They were all over the place.

Further, no Al-Qaida ties were found at the time.

From what I understand, terrorists have actually established themselves in Iraq these days.
As empty as paradise

tonymctones

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 26520
Re: Conservative? Not these guys.
« Reply #49 on: December 10, 2008, 05:19:24 PM »
I agree with you totally about being sceptical towards conspiracy theorists and sensationalism.

But as far as Bush and the Iraq war goes - it would really be in his best interest to put forward any kind of evidence that support starting a war with Iraq.

Do you remember how Bush had Colin Powell talking to the UN claiming there were intelligence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction?

Something that were never found.

I'm not sure you're aware of this, but there were actually UN inspectors searching throughout the whole of Iraq at the time of the invasion. They reported back everyday how they didn't find anything, how they got the kind of access they demanded, and so on.

They were all over the place.

Further, no Al-Qaida ties were found at the time.

From what I understand, terrorists have actually established themselves in Iraq these days.
im not disputing these facts only pointing out that there was intelligence out there that pointed to the opposite and just b/c he went against info saying there wasnt doesnt mean he intentionally misled the country which is what decker is asserting.