Thus bringing us to the next question. What did we go to war over? hmm?
check out what they are saying in Louisville: Saturday, April 8, 2006 E-mail this | Print page The leaker in chief So it turns out that in 2003 George W. Bush, who with the conservative media machine regularly demonizes The New York Times, authorized Lewis Libby Jr. to leak then-classified prewar intelligence estimates on Iraq to Times reporter Judith Miller. Ms. Miller's fatefully inadequate coverage had helped persuade many Americans to accept the Bush call to war in the Middle East. At the time of the leak, the administration was trying to defend its rationale for invading Iraq. Mr. Libby, Vice President Dick Cheney's indicted aide, made his disclosure concerning Mr. Bush in sworn testimony. It deserves an answer from the White House. The President has the right to leak secrets if he chooses. But the crushing irony is that he has been the chief critic of such leaking, calling it a threat to national security. This, of course, is mere hypocrisy. But the Bush administration is guilty of much worse, as commercial real estate broker Harry Taylor pointed out at a presidential town meeting last week in North Carolina. Having made it through the screening that long has protected Mr. Bush from such confrontations, Mr. Taylor said, "While I listen to you talk about freedom, I see you assert your right to tap my telephone, to arrest me and hold me without charges, to try to preclude me from breathing clean air and drinking clean water.⦠I have never felt more ashamed of, or more frightened by, my leadership in Washington." To which the ever-smirky President replied, "I'm not your favorite guy. What's your question?" Fine. The kick-butt chief executive can dismiss citizen critics. But Congress can't let his administration's assault against two centuries of constitutional protections for basic citizen rights go unchallenged. Lawmakers were given the equivalent of a dismissive hand gesture this week when Attorney General Alberto Gonzales told the House Judiciary Committee that Mr. Bush doesn't rule out wiretapping conversations between U.S. citizens, in this country, without court orders. At the town meeting, Mr. Bush told the audience, "You can come to whatever conclusion you want" about the merits of government eavesdropping -- he would not apologize. Mr. Gonzales was equally brazen in front of the committee, prompting even chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., a staunch Bush ally, to accuse him of "stonewalling." The Attorney General won't admit whether purely domestic warrantless wiretaps have been conducted. Congress should make him. As for the White House leaks, didn't Mr. Bush promise to fire whoever did it? http://www.courier-journal.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060408/OPINION01/604080363 >> Let me ask this. Has somebody proved that Saddam didn't >> seek to acquire uranium from Africa? > >That wasn't in question. The lie was that they claimed the information >about uranium in Niger which the CIA had already largely dismissed was >the primary reason for going to war in Iraq. You don't go to war over >intelligence you believe is probably innacurate. > > >s. isaac dealey 434.293.6201 >new epoch : isn't it time for a change? > >add features without fixtures with >the onTap open source framework > >http://www.fusiontap.com >http://coldfusion.sys-con.com/author/4806Dealey.htm ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:203442 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
