I was just quibbling with the words, not the sentiment. Assuming they are not in the end vindicated...
Abuse of Trust, sure. (Trust me, they have bad, bad things) Lies, sure. (Cheney's ties to Haliburton have no bearing on anything) Holding back the truth, sure. (We know they have WMD, since that guy over there in New Jersey sold them some, but since he works for the CIA and is a big contributor, we can;t tell you about it) "Fabrication" of "evidence", just wanted some concrete examples of both. As for US intelligence, there isn't a day and a topic that someone somewhere isn't saying two completely different and contradictory things. Whenever they get anything right, I think it is a miracle. Jerry Johnson >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/28/03 12:11PM >>> Jerry, They were walking around saying "We know Saddam has WMD"...they didnt exactly fabricate evidence, as they refused to produce it. They certainly however implied that it existed and that it was definitive and the reason for the invasion. This now appears to have not been the case; apparently US intelligence was actually saying the opposite. If that doesnt qualify as an abuse of trust I don't know what would. Dana On Wed, 28 May 2003 10:50:57 -0400, Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don;t thin ka "fact" consisting of a statement that "Saddam has orange > shoes" amounts to fabricated evidence. > > If, on the other hand, someone shows a picture of Saddam with orange > glitter glued to the photo, then I think "fabricated evidence" applies. > > Are you saying that the Bush administration created false evidence and > then passed it off as true? > > Jerry Johnson > >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 05/28/03 10:45AM >>> > According to the CIA? > > The 'fact' that he had active weapons of mass destruction and that he > therefore posed a credible threat to the United States and the rest of > the free world. > The 'fact' that the US knew exactly where these WMD were. > > Also, the 'fact' that he had direct links to Al Qaida. > > These were all disputed at the time that the US presented them to the > world, and they were never proven to anyone's satisfaction, apparently > not even to the satisfaction of the United States own intelligence > service. > > There were articles posted to this list about these issues before. > > -Gel > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jerry Johnson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Gel, > > I must have missed it, but what evidence exactly was fabricated? > > Jerry Johnson > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Get the mailserver that powers this list at http://www.coolfusion.com Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
