Woodward's words. Cheney was "beyond hell-bent" to invade.... beyond
hellbent. Not a frame of mind where the facts really matter.
----- Original Message -----
From: Won Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2004 13:19:02 -0400
Subject: Re: OReilly vs. Moore
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
At 12:00 7/28/2004 -0500, you wrote:
>I thought it was a good interview. I thought it was pretty silly for
>Moore to not admin that if Bush was given bad evidence and based his
>words on them that he wasn't lieing. At the same time, Moore was 100%
>right that even if Bush didn't lie, even if it was an accident, it
>doesn't make it ok.
>
>-r
I too agree the interview was very good. I can see Moore's point
though. There some that believe that Bush's reason to go into Iraq wasn't
really about the WMD but something else. WMD was just a convenient excuse
and the validity of the intelligence reports weren't checked because it
wasn't the true reason for going in the first place.
I for one, don't think there is enough evidence to support that
statement. I have heard it enough to believe that it's shared by more then
a few people. A common belief is that we went in for oil - just as an
example.________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
