to. Takes me to this post:
Ted Koppel reported: "We wanted to see whether the
conclusions reached by the Intelligence Committee
would have made any difference to the other senators
who voted to authorize the war in Iraq, so we called
them.
"Of the 42 we reached, only three said they would have
changed their minds had they known then 'what they
know now.'
And then there's Sen Rockefellers statement on October
10, 2002
http://www.senate.gov/~rockefeller/news/2002/flrstmt0102002.html
Seems like we would have still gone to war.
WMD's were just a part of the reason we went to war.
When you say Saddam was legally in charge, is that
because he won the election with 100% of the votes?
World War II
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declarations_of_war_in_the_United_States
-sm
I am just getting back to this, spent all of Friday and the weekend at
some part of the hospital. So maybe the Percosset is making me
confused? But I don't see the link. Please illuminate me :)
On the memo that I was going to read and come back to, I still have
not been able to look at it in detail; but if the point is that the
Democracts consider various political strategies, I do not consider
this to be shocking information. Just finished Plan of Attack, and
there is an extensive discussion of the marketing of the war. I can
see the necessity for this, but there seem to have been many instances
where the president or his advisors made statements that were at best
literally true: ie "I have no plan of attack on my desk" six or eight
months after planning started. OK, maybe it wasn't "on his desk" but
he was definitely working on it.
If the above does not respond to your point, please let me know.
Thanks
Dana
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 16 Jul 2004 08:34:37 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: pop quiz for cf-community
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=m:5:13248:119836
--- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Tsk :) It's tough when talking to you :) Weren't you
> saying that in
> your opinion Sen Rockefeller's statements about the
> intelligence
> report were somehow due to this memo or pressures
> described in this
> memo? I though you said something of the kind in a
> post which also
> said nobody ever said Niger sold the yellowcake?
>
> Dana
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2004 16:46:19 -0700 (PDT)
> Subject: Re: pop quiz for cf-community
> To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Nothing to do with yellowcake.
> You asked
> >just curious, why would you think he is under a lot
> > of pressure to
> > make Bush look bad?
> Refering to Rockefeller so I mentioned the memo.
>
> Stay with us :)
>
> -sm
>
> --- dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I found the guy's website but I was like, wtf does
> > this have to do
> > with yellowcake :)
> >
> > Thanks
> > Dana
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
>
>
>
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
