Quote:
|
Because he attempted to shroud the truth of that facts. He did indeed acknowledge that US had vetoed only 11 resolutions since '96, but he failed to acknowledge that there have only been 12 vetoed resolutions in that time frame all together. Wow! Big differerence there when that information is placed in the proper context now, isn't there.
|
Still doesn't mean he lied. The information may have been deceitful, but I doubt that he wanted to present it in such a manner.
Quote:
|
Then, to make matters even more confusing he tossed out the information about the Russians/Soviets having used the most vetos in the UN's history, showing there was a disproportionate number of vetos compared to those done by the United States. But when those are put into proper context, and the truth of the matter is exposed, we find that since 1965, the Soviets used only 13 vetos, the Russians used only 3, and the Americans used 81.
|
Again, still not a lie. He wasn't mentioning a timeframe, or anything of that sort. Just directly refering to how many veto's the US had used compared to other countries.
I agree that timeframe has a lot to do with it.
Quote:
|
Again, a huge difference in what the story really is. And then, to top it all off, he stated, and I am quoting him directly, "So it's not like they are VETOing everthing that might be against Israel", which is a bold faced lie. All but one resolution the USA has vetoed has been in the defense of Israel's actions or to cancel any potential censure against Israel.
|
And? Why shouldn't the US veto a resolution that goes against probably their best ally?
Just like the Soviet Union vetoed anything that went against their allies, the US has the same right.
Quote:
|
You may not call that a lie, but I was raised me to believe that if you are not being honest, you are lying. I suspect you were raised the exact same way, but are too pigheaded to admit one of your allies in this debate has been exposed as a fraud, and goes against your value system.
|
If he would lied, the information that he provided would have been WRONG.
You're just looking at it a different way.