BS: Proof that Bush lied

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 01:15 PM

How about everyone stop interfering in Iraq, Iran, Lebanon, Israel, and the bits of the Holy Land that aren't in Israel? No troops, no supplying arms or technical support for military equipment. Wouldn't that be something!

Perhaps the USA could start the process by putting an offer to do that on the table.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:28 PM

"Fight or flight"

How did you come to that conclusion Dianavan?

Is there a fight or flight only option in Turkey?

And the last time I looked, Israel was in the middle east so they derserve your support too.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:54 PM

"I have no problem with that whatsoever but I would have HUGE problems with the U.S. helping them."


So you claim that other countries have rights that the US does not?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 03:58 PM

Recalling your ""If they cannot survive on their own, they don't deerve to. Survival of the fittest. ", your comment regarding the US is both hypocritical and evidence of a bigoted mind.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:19 PM

>>So you claim that other countries have rights that the US does not?<<

I don't care if they have the right or not. I just want the U.S. out of everybody else's business. It isn't helping them and it isn't helping us so enough already. If another nation is insane enough to want to be the world's policemen, have at it.

>>Recalling your ""If they cannot survive on their own, they don't deerve to. Survival of the fittest. ", your comment regarding the US is both hypocritical and evidence of a bigoted mind.<<

Doesn't matter whether it is or not. The bottom line is, I am now an isolationist thanks to George Bush. We just can't continue meddling in other country's affairs because we're no longer welcome and no longer trusted to do what's right. As a result, I want us out of all global conflicts while we lick our wounds and figure out where we went wrong (besides electing Mr. Cocksucker to the Oval Orifice). The rest can battle it out between them and winner take all.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,282RA
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:20 PM

Whoops, that last post was me.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Barry Finn
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:32 PM

No one deserves our support. I wouldn't wish that on my worst enemy.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 04:40 PM

If the U.S. were invaded, Canada would help because our own security might be at risk.

However, neighbors helping neighbors is a completely different thing than invading a country half a world away.

Don't forget, Iran and Iraq are neighbors. For all you know, they may be standing by in case the Iraqi government needs them.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:27 PM

"However, neighbors helping neighbors is a completely different thing than invading a country half a world away.

Don't forget, Iran and Iraq are neighbors. For all you know, they may be standing by in case the Iraqi government needs them."



And Israel and Lebanon are neighbors, so no morre complaints about Israeli troops going into Lebenon. - Just look at the violence in Lebenon because of Hezbollah...

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: dianavan
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 06:29 PM

That might hold true if Israel were merely standing by in case Lebanon needed them. We all know thats not what happened.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 07:38 PM

PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH: The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al-Qaida, because there was a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Amos
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 07:57 PM

Oh...does the expression "aluminum tubes" bring anything to mind?


A

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 08:07 PM

They hold up my tent?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 08:19 PM

Of course there was a relationship between Saddam's Iraq and al-Qaida. Much the same relationship as between the USA and al-Qaeda.

They loathed each other.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 19 Feb 07 - 11:26 PM

Dianavan:

Are Iran and Lebanon neighbors?

"we're no longer welcome and no longer trusted to do what's right."

But Iran is welcome and trusted to do what is right?

RD:

All I have seen is personal opinions about what GWB said and no one that was convinced by the alleged propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:12 AM

Dickey, love, why not just give up gracefully rather than continue to bluster disgracefully?
You're not going to make anyone think any differently, however loudly you insist that the earth is flat. All you're going to do is make people think you're an irritant rather than someone with whom it's worth bantering.
Why not post some stuff above the line. This is a music forum, not simply somewhere where the mad can wander in off the streets for a McDump.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:16 AM

You display that you are.... :-)

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:20 AM

Sorry Capt'n - you just got in before me...


"not simply somewhere where the mad can wander in off the streets for a McDump. "


ROFLMAO....

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Teribus
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 08:28 AM

Carrots, I don't believe anyone is "blustering" apart from yourself and Ron Davies. As yet neither of you have put up any form of arguement to counter the points put forward by Guest Dickey.

As long as anyone keeps repeating the same old tired lies, misrepresentations and myths regarding events, they are going to find themselves pulled up on them.

There was no propaganda campaign deliberately instigated by the Bush Administration to link Iraq to the attacks of 911 over the period carefully selected by Ron Davies. Or before or since for that matter. Just because the pair of you keep saying that there was, and just because the pair of you believe that there was, does not make it true that there was.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 08:52 AM

When the Bush haters are asked if they believe what they are saying about the alleged propaganda, they have to resort to methods such as personal attacks to avoid answering.

The mad person looking for a McDump is a perfect example if using derision to support non existent facts.

When someone repeats something they do not believe, they do so in hopes that someone else will believe it. Isn't that the essence of propaganda.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 09:55 AM

*sigh*
About twelve years ago in this thread (or another very similar thread) it was pointed out that propaganda doesn't come wrapped in paper stamped 'propaganda', and that there are implicit as well as explicit meanings.
Trouble is, that's too bloody subtle for some people here.

Do phrases like Dick Cheney's "Iraq has long-establlished ties with Al Queda" mean anything?
And in the past 12 months we've had the tacit linking of 9/11 and Iraq yet again by Bush: "...imagine a world in which you had a Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life...imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of a world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens."

Or shall we go farther back? OK, let's go on a tripe down memory lane...

Condoleeza Rice, September 2006: "We know that Zarqawi was running a poisons network in Iraq… There were ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda"

Bush, June 2004: ""The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda: because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda,"

Cheney, July 2004: ""He (Saddam Hussein) cultivated ties to terrorist groups." "If we had not acted… the terror network would still enjoy the support and protection of the regime…"

Bush, May 2003, in his "Mission Accomplished" address: "The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 -- and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men -- the shock troops of a hateful ideology -- gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the "beginning of the end of America." By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed."

Bush, March 2003: "…the use of armed force against Iraq is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

And before the invasion...

Cheney, March 2003: "We know he's [Saddam] out trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know that he has a long-standing relationship with various terrorist groups, including the al-Qaeda organization."

Rice, March 2003: "And secondly, a very strong link to training al Qaeda in chemical and biological weapons techniques. We know from a detainee that -- the head of training for al Qaeda, that they sought help in developing chemical and biological weapons because they weren't doing very well on their own. They sought it in Iraq. They received the help."

Rice, march 2003: "Now the al Qaeda is an organization that's quite disbursed and -- and quite widespread in its effects, but it clearly has had links to the Iraqis, not to mention Iraqi links to all kinds of other terrorists. And what we do not want is the day when Saddam Hussein decides that he's had enough of dealing with sanctions, enough of dealing with, quote, unquote, "containment," enough of dealing with America, and it's time to end it on his terms, by transferring one of these weapons, just a little vial of something, to a terrorist for blackmail or for worse."

Paul Wolfowitz, February 2003: "And, worst of all, his [Saddam Hussein] connections with terrorists, which go back decades, and which started some 10 years ago with al Qaeda, are growing every day."

Colin Powell, February 2003; "But what I want to bring to your attention today is the potentially much more sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al Qaida terrorist network, a nexus that combines classic terrorist organizations and modern methods of murder. Iraq today harbors a deadly terrorist network headed by Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi, an associated in collaborator of Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaida lieutenants."

Bush, January 2003: "[Colin Powell] will also talk about al Qaeda links, links that really do portend a danger for America and for Great Britain, anybody else who loves freedom….
The war on terror includes people who are willing to train and to equip organizations such as al Qaeda…And as I have said repeatedly, Saddam Hussein would like nothing more than to use a terrorist network to attack and to kill and leave no fingerprints behind."

Bush, October 2002: "After September the 11th, we've entered into a new era and a new war. This is a man that we know has had connections with al Qaeda. This is a man who, in my judgment, would like to use al Qaeda as a forward army."

Bush, September 2002: " Al Qaeda hides, Saddam doesn't, but the danger is, is that they work in concert. The danger is, is that al Qaeda becomes an extension of Saddam's madness and his hatred and his capacity to extend weapons of mass destruction around the world…[Y]ou can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror."

Richard Perle, July 2002: "This evidence is very powerful. There is collaboration between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda, which means to destroy us. It entails chemical weapons, biological weapons, training in their application. And he's working on nuclear weapons. The message is very clear - we have no time to lose, Saddam must be removed from office. Every day that goes by is a day in which we are exposed to dangers on a far larger scale than the tragedy of September 11."

Is that clear enough, Terry'n'Dickey?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 10:08 AM

There was no propaganda campaign deliberately instigated by the Bush Administration to link Iraq to the attacks of 911 over the period carefully selected by Ron Davies. Or before or since for that matter.
So, Terry, if I put a dollop of brown sauce on those words, would you like to eeat them? ;-)
And any chance of any answers to some earlier points, or am I still just 'talking to the hand'?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 10:34 AM

Dianavan

That might hold true if Iran were merely standing by in case Iraq needed them. We all know thats not what is happening.


Israel attacked Hezbollah in response to Hezbollah attacks on Israel and the kidnapping of several Israeli soldiers- ( and when will Hezbollah return them, as the UN ceasefire requires?). Look at the present deadly unrest in Lebanon- Hezbollah vs the government. So, WHO is the better neighbor- Israel, who attacked Hezbollah, or the Syrians and Iranians, who, against the terms of the ceasefire, are resupplying Hezbollah?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 02:22 PM

Actually BB, Iran was probably keeping an eye on things and making sure the U.S. knew it. Who knows? One thing for sure, it cannot be considered an invasion.

This is thread drift. If you want to discuss the kidnapping of Israeli soldiers by Hezbollah, then start a new thread. Don't forget to mention the number of men, women and children that Israel have imprisoned.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Arne
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 03:06 PM

Here's Dubya lying about something that's obviously false:

The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region. I firmly believe the decisions we made will make America more secure and the world more peaceful.

Note that this speech was long after the invasion. And Dubya's repeated this same claim a couple of times since.

Dubya's a lying sack'o'sh*te.... It's not even second-nature to him; it's instinctual.

Cheers,

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 04:08 PM

A few more for the Captain's list:



"I have acknowledged since September 2002 that there were ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq." Rumsfeld, October 2004

"There clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming. It goes back to the early '90s. It involves a whole series of contacts, high-level contacts with Osama bin Laden and Iraqi intelligence officials." Cheney, June 2004

"There's overwhelming evidence there was a connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government. I am very confident that there was an established relationship there." Cheney, January 2004

"Iraq has been the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11." Cheney, September 2004



It's just too easy to find little gems like these. No propaganda my arse.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 04:11 PM

Cheers TIA.
Quiet in here tonight, innit? ;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:07 PM

for a second time, let me post :

" did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in."


Where do you find ANY of this to be false?

Did he have a prohibited weapons program? YES, according to the UN report.

Did the UN demand that he allow inspectors in? YES

Did he allow them the access that the UN had specified? NO, according to the UN report.

So?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:27 PM

Why is it that when Israel take prisoners it's called "captured" and when Hezbollah doies it's "kipnapped"?

And no, that doesn't mean I consider holding on to captured prisoners is acceptable, it's a war crime - whoever does it, Hezbollah, Israel or the USA.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:32 PM

And I think, Captain Ginger you might have to wait a long time before any of the Propaganda Deniers eats their words, or even acknowledges your impressive catalogue. But perhaps they might be a bit more careful saying that kind of thing in future.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:35 PM

"Why is it that when Israel take prisoners it's called "captured" and when Hezbollah doies it's "kipnapped"? "

For the same reason that an Israeli crossing of the border is an "invasion", and a Hezbollah crossing is a "raid".

Israel is a nation, Hezbollah is a (terrorist) group.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:47 PM

""...imagine a world in which you had a Saddam Hussein who had the capacity to make a weapon of mass destruction, who was paying suiciders to kill innocent life...imagine a world in which Saddam Hussein was there, stirring up even more trouble in a part of a world that had so much resentment and so much hatred that people came and killed 3,000 of our citizens.""

All true statements. Are you saying that Saddam was NOT stirring up trouble in that part of the world?

Or that he did not have a WMD program, as found by the UN?

Or that he did not pay the families of suicide bombers money?


Please be specific, and tell me what you object to in this statement>

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Barry Finn
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 05:58 PM

Didn't Bush once say that there is no connection between Al Qaeda and the Iraqi government? So that one truth compensates for all those lies or was he lying then too? Trouble with lies is that you can't keep track of them with the truth it's always the same. Captain, stop you're killing me with truths.

"did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program" of "WMD"

No but we're still looking even though Bush has now said there were none.

Has Bush lied? You couldn't name as many times that he has told the truth.
Well if he said all those statements above it would lead me to believe that he tried at the very least to lead me astray.
Please.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 06:00 PM

Bruce, you really don't get it poppet - that statement was one of a few that I posted to point out that the US administration had tried to link 9/11 and Iraq. Your reaction would seem to indicate that you, too, have fallen for it.
Bless!
Terry's very subdued tonight, isn't he? Someone put bromide in his cocoa or summat?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: dianavan
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 07:30 PM

O.K., O.K.

Maybe Bush didn't lie. Maybe he's just too stupid to know whats really going on or maybe he's so arrogant he doesn't care.

Either way, he's going to go down as one of the most despised presidents of all time and the people who supported him will be called fools.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 07:46 PM

Either fools or malicious deceivers.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Ron Davies
Date: 20 Feb 07 - 11:22 PM

Teribus' obedient acolyte, Dickey, is also suddenly a bit subdued on the subject of the propaganda campaign. Amazing how that happens.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: GUEST,Dickey
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:15 AM

Due to a lack of facts, Ron must continue his belligerent personal attacks.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 01:49 AM

Copy cat Dickey!

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 03:25 AM

Not really all that quiet Carrots. You have come late to this, had you followed Ron's stipulated period of time you could have saved yourself half the typing time it took you to come out with your "so-called-comprehensive" list.

Going through your examples, I find:

- much is cherry-picked for effect and taken out of context
- the way you have chosen to present your later examples, you cloud the issue as to whether the Al-Qaeda being referred to is "Al-Qaeda in Iraq" or OBL's "Al-Qaeda" currently believed to be scuttling about from secret location to secret location in the mountains of the Hindu Cush.

Ansar-Al-Islam is what kind of organisation Carrots? Where did they seek refuge and when? Given the nature of Saddam's regime in Iraq, who would have had to have been involved in granting them sanctuary and allowing them to set up shop in Iraq albeit as a marriage of convenience?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 03:58 AM

Ah, Terry, you master of equivocation; you are a veritable antithesis of Gallileo, muttering under torture that the Earth "is still a little bit flat"!
There was no propaganda campaign deliberately instigated by the Bush Administration to link Iraq to the attacks of 911 over the period carefully selected by Ron Davies. Or before or since for that matter.
The list I quote is by no means comprehensive and shoots your claim out of the water. If even one of the statements on that list is true (and they all are - I can provide links to the primary sources and context for each and every one if you like) then your categorical insistence is wrong.
I've noticed that when you are proved wrong you wriggle once or twice and then you go quiet, letting the thread drop and heading off for more furious cut and paste in another thread. Shall we see what happens here?

And, apropos your nit-picking, let me see...

Al Qaeda is not a structured entity; anyone can call themselves Al Qaeda (and do). Think of it in terms of a franchising operation, where a group of radicalised Muslims, by endorsing the relatively simplistic ethos of Bin Laden, become to all intents and purposes 'Al Qaeda'. With the exception of 9-11, the Cole attack and the African Embassy bombings, most Al Queda operatons appear to be autonomous and largely home-grown, with little evidence of external quartermastering or steering. As such your distinction is irrelevant. How am I 'clouding the issue'? To contextualise Rice's comment on September 10 last year, the interviewer on Fox News Sunday asked her: "Iraq is unlikely to have provided bin Laden any useful CB knowledge or assistance. Didn't you and the president ignore intelligence that contradicted your case?"
Rice's direct reply was: "We know that Zarqawi was running a poisons network in Iraq… There were ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda."
Does that help make things clearer in your mind, Terry?

Ansar al Islam is a radical Kurdish group operating in Northern Iraq which has links to Al Qaeda. It was estimated at some 700 strong in 2002, and was not representative of or supported by the Iraqi government. Its leader, Mullah Krekar, has denied any association with the Ba'ath regime in Iraq and and declared his hostility to Saddam Hussein. Such links as exist would seem to have been akin to those between HMG and PIRA - largely one-sided and based on infiltration and informants.
If you are now about to spring upon us some post-hoc justification for the invasion based on Ansar al Islam, it would be like trying to justify a British attack on the USA because NORAID was based there.

So Terry, a couple more wriggles and then off to another thread, eh?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:14 AM

Captain Ginger,

And YOU, old chum, have fallen for the idea that any fact you do not like can be labeled as propaganda and ignored. Perhaps you should determine the truth of what people say BEFORE you declare that it can't be considered because YOU do not like what it says about the real world.

I will listen to any facts YOU present- but to declare a true statement to be propaganda seems a little unreasonable.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:19 AM

"to declare a true statement to be propaganda seems a little unreasonable. "

But some propaganda statements ARE true!

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:21 AM

So I can presume that what YOU state, even if true, is propaganda?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:25 AM

I fail to see how labeling valid statements as propaganda contributes to a reasonable discussion of reality.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:26 AM

So I can presume that what YOU state, even if true, is propaganda?

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:29 AM

YOU may presume whatever you want. It is the relationship between your statements and the real world that I will continue to call into question.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:34 AM

YOU may presume whatever you want. It is the relationship between your statements and the real world that I will continue to call into question.


I think there's an echo in here.... or two minds with but a single train of thought....

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: beardedbruce
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:36 AM

Since you agree as far as truth is concerned, please try to offer true statements instead of blanket accusations in the future. That would make the discussion at least interesting if not actually worthwhile.

Subject: RE: BS: Proof that Bush lied
From: Captain Ginger
Date: 21 Feb 07 - 07:59 AM

Oops!
Sorry, I phrased myself rather clumsily back there - when I wrote "If even one of the statements on that list is true...and they all are", what I meant was that every one was a true statement, and not hearsay or an invention; a statement uttered by the person named, and I that I could cite when and where.
The statements themselves are, of course, for the most part either untrue or part truths or conflations.
I do hope that clears things up a tad. Sorry to have wasted your time and rendered your last few posts irrelevant, bbruce!