Tenet has an imagination

[B. Max]

so they wish to defend committing a fraud on the US citizens -- even if they have to lie, they know it's right to take out Saddam

they are trying to argue the ends justifying the means --- which is the argument of fascism

Well if they had gone with the notion and propaganda that Saddam was bad and needed to be taken out and not lie about it, it might have never gone down. Gotta sex up everything for the masses.

But because they lied about the 'true goal', I cannot put much faith in the war on terror. and overall Iraq will be a thorn in the US's side for decades to come.

They never lied about anything. The Clinton administration had said the same thing, and congress looked at it said the same thing and voted for the war.

[Guthrie]

so they wish to defend committing a fraud on the US citizens -- even if they have to lie, they know it's right to take out Saddam

they are trying to argue the ends justifying the means --- which is the argument of fascism

Well if they had gone with the notion and propaganda that Saddam was bad and needed to be taken out and not lie about it, it might have never gone down. Gotta sex up everything for the masses.

But because they lied about the 'true goal', I cannot put much faith in the war on terror. and overall Iraq will be a thorn in the US's side for decades to come.

They never lied about anything. The Clinton administration had said the same thing, and congress looked at it said the same thing and voted for the war.

THAT defense they offer is also a lie. Clinton never said the same thing and congress never voted to declare war.

[BubberMiley]

They never lied about anything. The Clinton administration had said the same thing, and congress looked at it said the same thing and voted for the war.

Actually, no. Congress wasn't supplied the same intelligence as the administration. They had to go on the administration's word that the intelligence was sound, and the administration lied.

[GostHacked]

They never lied about anything. The Clinton administration had said the same thing, and congress looked at it said the same thing and voted for the war.

More Bush apologist/Blame Clinton meme. Bush said he was not worried about Osama. Even now he does not seam that concerned about Osama.

Actually, no. Congress wasn't supplied the same intelligence as the administration. They had to go on the administration's word that the intelligence was sound, and the administration lied.

This is important to note. We never hear any more about how right they were about the WMDs, chem weapons, ect ect,

[stignasty]

Perle: Tenet trying to shift blame for 9/11

POSTED: 9:26 p.m. EDT, May 4, 2007

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Richard Perle said Friday that former CIA Director George Tenet is attempting to "shift responsibility" for his failure to anticipate the September 11, 2001, attacks and recognize the threat terrorists posed to the United States.

The former assistant secretary of defense, singled out in Tenet's book for immediately linking former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein with the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, disputed Tenet's recollection.

"He simply makes up things I never said and places them on a date I wasn't even in the country," Perle said on CNN's "The Situation Room."

In Tenet's book about his tenure at the CIA, "At the Center of the Storm," he writes that the day after the 9/11 attacks, Perle told him, "Iraq has to pay the price for what happened. They bear responsibility."

"It never happened," Perle said Friday. "I never said the things that he attributes to me."

He said he was in France at the time of the attacks and did not see Tenet until a week later, when he encountered the CIA director coming into the White House as he was leaving. "We didn't converse at all," Perle said.

"He's just got it completely wrong," Perle said. "I never believed Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11, and by the time I returned to the U.S., it was pretty clear that it was [Osama] bin Laden. Indeed, bin Laden was claiming credit."

http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/05/04/per...enet/index.html

[B. Max]

They never lied about anything. The Clinton administration had said the same thing, and congress looked at it said the same thing and voted for the war.

Actually, no. Congress wasn't supplied the same intelligence as the administration. They had to go on the administration's word that the intelligence was sound, and the administration lied.

http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/bliraqreshouse.htm

What evidence did they have that congress didn't have that they lied about? How did the Bush administration lie in 1998?

Whereas Iraq, in direct and flagrant violation of the cease-fire, attempted to thwart the efforts of weapons inspectors to identify and destroy Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stockpiles and development capabilities, which finally resulted in the withdrawal of inspectors from Iraq on October 31, 1998;

[Guthrie]

The admin. had evidence the Niger yellowcake story was a fraud -- they used it as their strongest argument to invade Iraq

1998, naturally there was no Bush administration in DC - however, Bush was attacking Clinton for not having a clear exit strategy and a timeline for withdrawal from Bosnia --- he swore, as president he would never engage in nation building

so, the fact that it was just Bush himself lying in 1998, does that clear the Bush administration?

[B. Max]

The admin. had evidence the Niger yellowcake story was a fraud -- they used it as their strongest argument to invade Iraq

What evidence.

[Guthrie]

The admin. had evidence the Niger yellowcake story was a fraud -- they used it as their strongest argument to invade Iraq

What evidence.

The evidence given them by George Tenet, the evidence given them by Joe Wilson, the evidence given them by the Italian govt but I guess the biggest piece of evidence came from the International Atomic Energy Agency who only needed two hours and Google to show the document to be a, "crude forgery"

I don't suppose some folks ever bothered to look at the real evidence.

[B. Max]

The evidence given them by George Tenet, the evidence given them by Joe Wilson, the evidence given them by the Italian govt but I guess the biggest piece of evidence came from the International Atomic Energy Agency who only needed two hours and Google to show the document to be a, "crude forgery"

I don't suppose some folks ever bothered to look at the real evidence.

Tenet has a bad memory and subsitutes that with imagination. Wilson had nothing and as it turned out was wrong. Iraq did try to buy yellow cake but were turned down, and already hand 500 tons.

[Guthrie]

The evidence given them by George Tenet, the evidence given them by Joe Wilson, the evidence given them by the Italian govt but I guess the biggest piece of evidence came from the International Atomic Energy Agency who only needed two hours and Google to show the document to be a, "crude forgery"

I don't suppose some folks ever bothered to look at the real evidence.

Tenet has a bad memory and subsitutes that with imagination. Wilson had nothing and as it turned out was wrong. Iraq did try to buy yellow cake but were turned down, and already hand 500 tons.

It takes quite a case of cognitive dissonance to believe all of those lies -- Wilson had the facts, Tenet had the facts, Iraq did not try to buy yellow cake and no, they had no nuclear weapons program

[GostHacked]

It turns out the Nigerian official who's name was on that document had retired some years befor this. Can't be calling that proof now.

Does not matter who presented the intelligence, it was outright wrong and it was fraud. So in my eye, they are all guilty of the crime.

edit le

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...0030712-11.html

MR. FLEISCHER: Let me explain to you the President's thinking on this. A greater, more important truth is being lost in the flap over whether or not Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. The greater truth is that nobody, but nobody, denies that Saddam Hussein was seeking nuclear weapons. He was pursuing numerous ways to obtain nuclear weapons. The United States never said that he had nuclear weapons. We have said that he was pursuing them. It should surprise nobody that Saddam Hussein was seeking to acquire the means to produce from a variety of sources and a variety of ways.

He had previously obtained yellow cake from Africa. In fact, in one of the least known parts of this story, which is now, for the first time, public -- and you find this in Director Tenet's statement last night -- the official that -- lower-level official sent from the CIA to Niger to look into whether or not Saddam Hussein had sought yellow cake from Niger, Wilson, he -- and Director Tenet's statement last night states the same former official, Wilson, also said that in June 1999 a businessman approached him and insisted that the former official, Wilson, meet an Iraqi delegation to discuss expanding commercial relations between Iraq and Niger. The former official interpreted the overture as an attempt to discuss uranium sales.

This is in Wilson's report back to the CIA. Wilson's own report, the very man who was on television saying Niger denies it, who never said anything about forged documents, reports himself that officials in Niger said that Iraq was seeking to contact officials in Niger about sales.

What did the President say in the State of the Union? He said: according to British reports, Iraq is seeking uranium from Africa. And the intelligence cited two other countries, in addition to Niger.

WTF?? Good ol Ari. I suggest taking the time to read this whole thing.

[B. Max]

The evidence given them by George Tenet, the evidence given them by Joe Wilson, the evidence given them by the Italian govt but I guess the biggest piece of evidence came from the International Atomic Energy Agency who only needed two hours and Google to show the document to be a, "crude forgery"

I don't suppose some folks ever bothered to look at the real evidence.

Tenet has a bad memory and subsitutes that with imagination. Wilson had nothing and as it turned out was wrong. Iraq did try to buy yellow cake but were turned down, and already hand 500 tons.

It takes quite a case of cognitive dissonance to believe all of those lies -- Wilson had the facts, Tenet had the facts, Iraq did not try to buy yellow cake and no, they had no nuclear weapons program

Wrong.

[Guthrie]

B. Max

post Today, 09:42 AM

...

Wrong

prove it

[GostHacked]

Forgot this

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/07/09/...ain562312.shtml

(CBS/AP) Amid questions about prewar intelligence, the White House is acknowledging that President Bush was incorrect when he said in his State of the Union address that Iraq recently had sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa.

Iraq had a pretty ambitous nuclear programme right up untill the first Guf War. Iraq never had a snowballs chance in hell of resurecting it's programme. First off, a hit in the 80s from Israel took out one facility. And the power infrastructure for Iraq during the first Gulf War was pretty much destroyed. They tried. But they did not have the resources to resurect the programme. It never really went anywhere after that. Sure he had plans. But he had no means in order to fullfill those plans.

This and the other article I posted show how many lies are actually around. So what are those lies?

[Guthrie]

Iraq's nuclear program pretty much died with it's super-gun program-- somewhere in there, it looks like Saddam went spare and while he still ordered executions and parades, he had no real control over what was going on in his own military, they just told him what he wanted to hear -- he was very close to entering, 'Uncle Teddy Land,' when he found himself crouching in a dirt spider hole

[BC_chick]

So that means the tiny fraction of the world's population who still supports Bush are the ones in touch with "reality" while the vast majority who disagree are out of touch and a closet Democrats.

Thanks for setting the record straight.

[Guthrie]

So that means the tiny fraction of the world's population who still supports Bush are the ones in touch with "reality" while the vast majority who disagree are out of touch and a closet Democrats.

Thanks for setting the record straight.

come again??

[B. Max]

B. Max

post Today, 09:42 AM

...

Wrong

prove it

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/2/220331.shtml

[Guthrie]

B. Max

post Today, 09:42 AM

...

Wrong

prove it

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/2/220331.shtml

Sorry, your pathetic article doesn't address your claims - and in fact, admits Saddam hadn't bought Uranium since the 80's

and that from the white power fake news site, 'Newsmax'

[B. Max]

Sorry, your pathetic article doesn't address your claims - and in fact, admits Saddam hadn't bought Uranium since the 80's

and that from the white power fake news site, 'Newsmax'

It backs up the claims that Iraq had yellow cake, and now puts you behind the wheel of another typical left wing drive by smear.

[Guthrie]

Sorry, your pathetic article doesn't address your claims - and in fact, admits Saddam hadn't bought Uranium since the 80's

and that from the white power fake news site, 'Newsmax'

It backs up the claims that Iraq had yellow cake, and now puts you behind the wheel of another typical left wing drive by smear.

no, it does not

[Guthrie]

Iraqi yellow cake is just another right wing wet dream

...

There has never been any link shown between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and it is indisputable that the yellow-cake uranium we originally went to war over never existed and that the intelligence that pointed to such nuclear material existing in Iraq was a hoax. It is also indisputable that Saddam and his regime, while brutal and authoritarian, were also secular and would never have supported al-Qaida operatives or knowingly sheltered terrorist cells. ...

Link

... Even the Republicans of the Senate intelligence committee in a recent report approvingly referenced the Duelfer report's conclusions that Saddam had no nuclear weapons program after the first Persian Gulf War and that there's no evidence Iraq sought uranium in Africa or anywhere else after 1991. Hitchens' Zahawie-centric tale rests upon nothing but speculation and is undermined by established facts that he disregards in favor of his own hypothesis....

Link

[B. Max]

Iraqi yellow cake is just another right wing wet dream

...

There has never been any link shown between Saddam Hussein and 9/11, and it is indisputable that the yellow-cake uranium we originally went to war over never existed and that the intelligence that pointed to such nuclear material existing in Iraq was a hoax. It is also indisputable that Saddam and his regime, while brutal and authoritarian, were also secular and would never have supported al-Qaida operatives or knowingly sheltered terrorist cells. ...

Link

... Even the Republicans of the Senate intelligence committee in a recent report approvingly referenced the Duelfer report's conclusions that Saddam had no nuclear weapons program after the first Persian Gulf War and that there's no evidence Iraq sought uranium in Africa or anywhere else after 1991. Hitchens' Zahawie-centric tale rests upon nothing but speculation and is undermined by established facts that he disregards in favor of his own hypothesis....

Link

Wrong and wrong.

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2004/6/29/232820.shtml

Plainly miffed that Dr. Allawi hadn't accepted the U.S. media's attempt to cover-up links between Saddam, al Qaida and 9/11, Brokaw reprimanded him as cameras rolled:

"Prime minister, I’m surprised that you would make the connection between 9/11 and the war in Iraq. The 9/11 commission in America says there is no evidence of a collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and those terrorists of al-Qaida."

But Dr. Allawi refused to back down, telling the top TV anchor:

"No. I believe very strongly that Saddam had relations with al-Qaida. And these relations started in Sudan. We know Saddam had relationships with a lot of terrorists and international terrorism. Now, whether he is directly connected to the September atrocities or not, I can’t vouch for this. But definitely I know he has connections with extremism and terrorists."

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/9/17/232349.shtml

Here's what the New York Times said about the camp six weeks after 9/11:

"New information does suggest that Mr. Hussein was actively training terrorists to attack American interests throughout the 1990's.

"One example is the testimony of Sabah Khodada, a captain in the Iraqi army who emigrated to Texas in May after working for eight years at what he described as a terrorist training camp at a bend in the Tigris River just southeast of Baghdad."

[Guthrie]

sorry, Newsmax has already been shown up as a useless source and Allawi has been, more than once been refuted for bad information - even Republicans have had to make the admission - done is done