What are some instances when the GOVERNMENT have LIED to the public ..?

Question

I hear a lot about the government lieing to the people in the music i listen to.

But in history has there been a case where government has been caught in teh act.. of lieing ..

And i dont mean when people are BLAMING the government for lying.. eg - the iraq war, terrorism etc.

because these haven't yet been proven.

Answer 1

NO pr oven lies???

They denied area 51 existed

They denied project auora was real (a super sonic plane)

We both know these are real you get told what they want you to hear no I'm not some sci fi nut but thinking the government does not lie is just naive

Answer 2

During wwl when they told Americans that the income tax would be only for a time to support the war effort. Every single tready made to Native Americans especially southeastern and plains Indians. When Pelosi and her following said that they will reduce fuel costs 70 %. The Waco, Tx Murders. The Ruby Ridge Murders. The Bay of Pigs Invasion. There is a common denominator in the never ending lies Americans have been told and it has a lot to do with the party controlling the country at those times. Can  you guess which party that is?

Answer 3

watergate? wmds? FDA?

Answer 4

Yes Area 51, good example there, the UFOs yes they are out there, get your boots on it going to get messy !!!!! What about the OIL problem we have now, they knew about this back in the 70's, I remember this one, but would they drill,.. no Now is the time to drill !!!! Darn FAT CATS!!!!!!

Answer 5

Oy. All the Area 51 answers. For what is probably the best known example, that would be the Gulf of Tonkin incident. This was an allegation of an attack on a US ship by North Vietnamese craft. This story was used as a means to increase the military action, basically starting the full-fledged combat operations. However, it is now well established that no attack occurred, and this was probably known by those in power.

Answer 6

Actually, some of the Iraq war has been proved.

There were no WMD.

Iraq had NOTHING to do with the WTC

Here are a few I found on the web:

"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction."

- d**k Cheney, August 26 2002

  

"Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons."

- George W. Bush, September 12 2002

  

"If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world."

- Ari Fleischer, December 2 2002

  

"We know for a fact that there are weapons there."

- Ari Fleischer, January 9 2003

  

"Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent."

- George W. Bush, State of the Union address, January 28 2003

  

"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."

- Colin Powell, February 5 2003

  

"We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons."

- George Bush, February 8 2003

  

"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised."

- George Bush, March 17 2003

  

"Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes."

- Ari Fleischer, March 21 2003

  

"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them."

- Gen. Tommy Franks, March 22 2003

  

"We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad."

- Donald Rumsfeld, March 30 2003.

  

"Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases."

- Bush in October 2002.

  

"Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda."

- Bush in January 2003 State of the Union address.

  

"Iraq has also provided Al Qaeda with chemical and biological weapons training."

- Bush in February 2003.

  

"sinister nexus between Iraq and the Al-Qaeda terrorist network."

Powell in his U.N. speech prior to the Iraq War.

  

"We have removed an ally of Al Qaeda."

Bush in May 2003.

  

Stated that the Iraqis were "providing bomb-making expertise and advice to the Al Qaeda organization."

- Cheney in September 2003.

  

"Saddam had an established relationship with Al Qaeda, providing training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons, gases, making conventional weapons."

- Cheney in October 2003.

.......

  

Cheney said Saddam "had long established ties with Al Qaeda."

- June 14, 2004.

  

Bush said, "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."

- June 17, 2004.

Other than that, how about a bit longer ago ... "I did not have s*x with that woman."

"I have no recollection of that, senator"

Lying is a tradition that is seemingly long-lasting and seemingly honorable in the United States government.

Answer 7

during the depression rosevelt said they would only have income tax until they got out of the depression...........

Answer 8

Well, I beg to differ about 9\11 and the war on terror but that's your opinion and for now, you are entitled to it. There a too many proven instances that our government has lied to us to list. Check out www.prisonplanet.com  Some of the stuff is outrages on this site but if you do your homework you'll find that most of it is true.

Answer 9

Where have u been! Bush told Tim Russert -God Bless Tim soul - in an interview that HE THOUGHT SH had weapon of destruction, but did not apologise to the American public for that mistake. Makes you wonder who these people who rule us really are.

Answer 10

ufo's

Answer 11

Yes, this is proof enough for most people:

"Bush Knew Saddam Had No Weapons of Mass Destruction

By Sidney Blumenthal

Salon

September 6, 2007

Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again. Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

On April 23, 2006, CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy." Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert. Instead, said the former officials, the information was distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs. That false and restructured report was passed to Richard Dearlove, chief of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), who briefed Prime Minister Tony Blair on it as validation of the cause for war. Secretary of State Powell, in preparation for his presentation of evidence of Saddam's WMD to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, spent days at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and had Tenet sit directly behind him as a sign of credibility. But Tenet, according to the sources, never told Powell about existing intelligence that there were no WMD, and Powell's speech was later revealed to be a series of falsehoods."

"The Secret Downing Street Memo

July 23, 2002

SECRET AND STRICTLY PERSONAL - UK EYES ONLY

DAVID MANNING

From: Matthew Rycroft

Date: 23 July 2002

S 195 /02

cc: Defence Secretary, Foreign Secretary, Attorney-General, Sir Richard Wilson, John Scarlett, Francis Richards, CDS, C, Jonathan Powell, Sally Morgan, Alastair Campbell

IRAQ: PRIME MINISTER'S MEETING, 23 JULY

Copy addressees and you met the Prime Minister on 23 July to discuss Iraq.

This record is extremely sensitive. No further copies should be made. It should be shown only to those with a genuine need to know its contents.

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The Defence Secretary said that the US had already begun "spikes of activity" to put pressure on the regime. No decisions had been taken, but he thought the most likely timing in US minds for military action to begin was January, with the timeline beginning 30 days before the US Congressional elections.

The Foreign Secretary said he would discuss this with Colin Powell this week. It seemed clear that Bush had made up his mind to take military action, even if the timing was not yet decided. But the case was thin. Saddam was not threatening his neighbours, and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran. We should work up a plan for an ultimatum to Saddam to allow back in the UN weapons inspectors. This would also help with the legal justification for the use of force.

The Attorney-General said that the desire for regime change was not a legal base for military action. There were three possible legal bases: self-defence, humanitarian intervention, or UNSC authorisation. The first and second could not be the base in this case. Relying on UNSCR 1205 of three years ago would be difficult. The situation might of course change."

"Greenspan, Kissinger:

Oil Drives US in Iraq, Iran

By Robert Weissman

Huffington Post

September 17, 2007

Alan Greenspan had acknowledged what is blindingly obvious to those who live in the reality-based world: the Iraq War was largely about oil. Meanwhile, Henry Kissinger says in an op-ed in Sunday's Washington Post that control over oil is the key issue that should determine whether the U.S. undertakes military action against Iran.

These statements would not be remarkable, but for the effort of a broad swath of the U.S. political establishment to deny the central role of oil in U.S. involvement in the Middle East. Greenspan's remarks, appearing first in his just-published memoirs, are eyebrow-raising for their directness: "Whatever their publicized angst over Saddam Hussein's 'weapons of mass destruction,' American and British authorities were also concerned about violence in the area that harbors a resource indispensable for the functioning of the world economy. I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows: the Iraq war is largely about oil."

His follow-up remarks have been even more direct. "I thought the issue of weapons of mass destruction as the excuse was utterly beside the point," he told the Guardian. Greenspan also tells the Washington Post's Bob Woodward that he actively lobbied the White House to remove Saddam Hussein for the express purpose of protecting Western control over global oil supplies. "I'm saying taking Saddam out was essential," Greenspan said. But, writes Woodward, Greenspan "added that he was not implying that the war was an oil grab." "No, no, no," he said. Getting rid of Hussein achieved the purpose of "making certain that the existing system [of oil markets] continues to work, frankly, until we find other [energy supplies], which ultimately we will."

"The So-Called "War on Terror:"

A Masterpiece of Propaganda

By Richard W. Behan *

Atlantic Free Press

August 29, 2007

Iraq

The Iraqi war was conceived in 1992, during the first Bush Administration, in a 46-page document entitled Draft Defense Planning Guidance. The document advocated the concept of preemptive war to assure the military and diplomatic dominance of the world by the United States. It asserted the need for "...access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil." It warned of "...proliferation of weapons of mass destruction." And it spoke of "...threats to U.S. citizens from terrorism."[7] It was a template for today's war in Iraq. The Draft Defense Planning Guidance was signed by the Secretary of Defense, Richard Cheney. It was prepared by three top staffers: Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, and Zalmay Khalilzad. In proposing global dominance and preemptive war, it was a radical departure from the traditional U.S. diplomacy of multilateralism, and it was an early statement of the emerging ideology of "neoconservatism." The document was too extreme. President George H.W. Bush publicly denounced it and immediately retracted it.

But five years later William Kristol and Robert Kagan created a neoconservative organization to advocate preemptive war and U.S. global dominion - to achieve, in their words, a "benevolent global hegemony."[8] It was called the Project for the New American Century - quickly abbreviated as PNAC. Among the founding members were Richard Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, Lewis "Scooter" Libby, Zalmay Khalilzad, Donald Rumsfeld, and Jeb Bush. In a letter to President Clinton on January 26, 1998, the Project for the New American Century urged the military overthrow of the Saddam Hussein regime. President Clinton ignored the letter. The unprovoked invasion of a sovereign nation violates the charter of the United Nations: it is an international crime.

As the presidential campaign of 2000 drew to a close the PNAC produced yet another proposal for U.S. world dominion, preemptive war, and the invasion of Iraq. It was a document called Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces, and Resources For a New Century. Weeks later, in January of 2001, twenty nine members of the Project for the New American Century joined the Administration of George W. Bush."

"No Qaeda-Saddam Links:

&

Answer 12

area 51 lol

Answer 13

Jim Jones and the People's Temple "mass suicide" (mk-ultra)