QandO

April 30, 2004

Lies and damn lies.
Posted by McQ

This is what passes for reasoning among those on the left bound and determined to make a square peg fit a round hole:

AMERICAN SOLDIERS died in Vietnam because American presidents lied to the American people about the need for war. American soldiers are dying in Iraq because an American president lied to the American people about the need for war.

That is why the Vietnam War is relevant to the 2004 presidential election. Oddly enough, John Kerry, presidential candidate and decorated Vietnam War veteran, needs to be reminded of that as much as anyone.

Really? What you need to be reminded of, Ms. Vennochi, is what constitutes a lie. In fact, its very simple ... its a statement the speaker KNOWS to be untrue WHEN HE SAYS IT.

Now the same question has been asked any number of times of those who continue to carry this canard forward, "what was the LIE?" Did they indeed KNOW before they SPOKE that there were no WMDs? And if so, where's your proof?

Its obvious that some of the assumptions were incorrect, no one argues that, but that doesn't then make them a LIE. Or is this too difficult for those with a vested interest in the "lie" meme to see?

In both wars, the government set up a false premise to justify US involvement - the ''domino theory'' in Vietnam, weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. In both, it was assumed that America's superior military force would quickly finish off the enemy. In Vietnam, the United States eventually turned its weapons on the people we were fighting to free; the same is true in Iraq.

Here we see the nut of the confusion, or in reality, her disingenuousness. Ms. Vennochi equates a theory (for instance, the Domino theory) with a lie. In other words, the fact that the theory LATER came to be seen as wrong means that those who pushed it BEFORE then, were liars. She then attempts the same argument with WMDs.

*Sigh*

So we now understand how Ms. Vennochi defines a lie. A lie, in her lexicon, is any theory which proves to be mistaken by future events, even though those who touted them believed them to be true.

Amazing.

However, just to illustrate what a lie really is, take a look at Ms. Vennochi's own example of a lie: "In Vietnam, the United States eventually turned its weapons on the people we were fighting to free".

Of course Ms. Vennochi knows quite well we didn't turn our weapons on the people we were trying to free (I'm quite sure we weren't trying to "free " either the NVA or VC) anymore than we're doing so now in Iraq (unless our intent is to free former Ba'athist who've taken up arms). If Ms. Vennochi's statement wasn't a lie, Fallujah would now be a smoking crater. And she knows that.

The article is an interesting case study ... she uses the redefinition of words, false assumptions and extremely shakey reasoning to attempt to push a foregone conclusion. Its quite transparant, but then she doesn't have to fool everyone, just those who won't take the time to see through her intellectual dishonesty will do.

TrackBack