<g> ok :) Read it again tomorrow though. From the top, the infor was classified, arguably being declassified (though see my thought experiment in the other thread) and probably also false.
Ok so, the point is that this discredited classified information that they "declassified" by leaking it? They knew it was wrong when they leaked it. Dana > That's not true at all. The CIA accepted the state of the union > speech. It wasn't until months later when the forgeries appeared that > the 16 words were being questioned. > > As for that article it's seems a shame the loony left is so desperate > to hang Bush they become blinded to the facts. > > Wilson claimed Bush lied in the state of the union, he didn't and > declassifying the NIE proved it. Now the author seems upset that Bush > declassified info that was being disputed at the time, but it wasn't > being presented as new evidence against Saddam. It was showing the > intelligence the President had at the time of the SU speech proving > Bush didn't lie. The reason the attempted purchase was in dispute > when > it was declassified was because of the forged documents that were > released to discredit the claim. The same ones Wilson claimed as > proof > the President was lying. Even though they appeared months after that > lying sack of shit says they convinced him there was no attempted > purchase. Once everyone realized the forgeries were planted the > original claim became valid again, even Wilson himself confirmed the > meeting with the Iraqis. So it wasn't a lie because Saddam did > attempt > to make the purchase but was turned down because Niger had no control > of it's own uranium. > > Another thing the author says is all the equipment to enrich the > uranium was destroyed after Gulf war I while in fact the centrifuge > needed was buried in a scientists rose garden. > > Wrote a book about it, want to here it, here it goes ? > JK > > Sorry if I'm not making cense, was sampling 12 and 18 year old > Glenfiddich?yum. > Pewters with breatalizers?what a concept > > > On 4/8/06, Dana Tierney wrote: > > Because that would be the honest way to proceed? > > > > As for the lie -- they made a false statement in the State of the > Union speech, knowing it was false, then they leaked false statements > about classified information knowing that the classified information > was false. > > > > Now, maybe in your eyes and in the eyes of the other hard-core > loyalists, all those false statements cancel each other out, but I'll > tell you what I see -- I see a a big fucking lie, repeated over and > over again, that we've been sending brave and idealistic > twenty-year-olds to die for. > > > > It makes me .. ugh. I can't even talk about it right now. > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:203469 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=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
