@GumGumBattleAxe:
i didn't mean they were correct, i meant that they perceive (albeit incorrectly) that he is in fact that way. So when they yell out that label, they don't believe they're wrong.
So in other words there is no difference in your world between the two examples.
I want proof that he lied,
Where the hell have you been.
There was never any evidence of WMD's, the reports did not indicate any and yet he lead his public calls and appeals to us, the scared shaky post-911 people, that there were in fact WMD's.
Or did you forget WMD's were the reason we went in there?
proof that he instigated a "disaster zone"
Iraq has plummited in it's infrastructure and is a hotbed of vaguely Yugoslavian secretarian violence. They have YET to form a government.
In fact there are growing protests right now against all these failures from the angry people there. Intelligence agencies have even concluded it instigated worse in terrorism.
and proof that it was a total waste of time.
We accomplished nothing for the war on terror. In fact we because of it turned our backs on the REAL war on terror while Bush and his people convinced us and our congress that we were fighting the war on terror in Iraq.
Meanwhile everyone ignored Afghanistan and it surged up again into the current fucking mess we have on our hands.
Lying makes one a liar, not necessarily a war criminal.
When you lie about a war that costs so much life. Essentially fabricating a conflict? That is far more then a lie.