- About Us
Intelligence at the time said that there might be WMD in Iraq. There was no proof that there were WMD in Iraq. This is why the UN inspectors were going around Iraq. Both the UK and US Governments actively tried to twist the "evidence" in order to bolster their argument for invading Iraq. These governments said that there was evidence of WMD in Iraq. There was no evidence whatsoever. There may have been hints, or maybe people thought they had a good idea that there were WMD in Iraq but the truth is that there was no concrete proof that there were WMD in Iraq.
Wasn't it pretty obvious that they were lying when they started to try and tie Al Queda in with Iraq? They had absolutely no proof of this either.
Here's a little example.
Bush said that there was a definite link between Iraq and the attacks of 9/11. This is a lie because it was untrue and there was absolutely no evidence to back this ludicrous claim.
Moore correctly said that 15 of the 19 hijackers in the attackers of 9/11 were Saudis and he then suggested that there is more of a link between Saudi Arabia and 9/11 than Iraq and 9/11. Here, Moore hasn't twisted the truth at all. He states a fact and then gives his opinion.
Of course, the glaring truth which Moore's critics seem to miss is that Moore has no duty whatsoever to everyone to be completely unbiased. He uses facts to bolster his opinions. Bush uses half truths at best to sell his opinion but Bush has a duty to the people of his country (and the people of the world since he doesn't bomb the US) to be as up front with the truth as possible.