Revising the story again

flavio

flavio

Banned
The CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear material in Africa, White House officials said yesterday.

The officials made the disclosure hours after they were alerted by the CIA to the existence of a memo sent to Bush's deputy national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, on Oct. 6. The White House said Bush's chief speechwriter, Michael Gerson, on Friday night discovered another memo from the CIA, dated Oct. 5, also expressing doubts about the Africa claims.


The information, provided in a briefing by Hadley and Bush communications director Dan Bartlett, significantly alters the explanation previously offered by the White House.
Click to expand...


More....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A31597-2003Jul22.html?nav=hptop_tb
 
I heard on the news this morning that the speechwriter who wrote the state of the union put the nuclear thing in by mistake. :faptard: Can you say "scapegoat?" I knew that you could. :) I don't know which is sadder; that dubya doesn't proof-read his speeches ahead of time (and doesn't know what he's saying while he's saying it, apparently), or that he's stupid enough to think this makes a difference. :shrug:
 
It's very nice of Clinton to call it a "mistake". When you have been caught in a lie on more than one occasion on the matter it's obviously not a mistake.
 
i just wish they'd make their bloody minds up which member of which department made the cockup. constantly moving the target does nothing for instilling confidence.
 
:D Like I said, Bush and Cheney need to put their heads together and see what Cheney can come up with...:shrug:
 
that could take a while squiggy. theyre kind of losing their credibility. wish they could stick to one damn story.
 
There should have been no apology in the first place. That has taken a simple problem & made it worse. He originally sourced it as British Intel. Blair is sticking to his guns. The one source has been discredited but not all sources. It's now making Bush look weak for not letting "the Buck stop here".

The main reason I'm ignoring this whole fiasco is it was one line, said one time, out of the rest of the argument for the war. If anybody decided to support the war on one sentence, they don't count anyway.
 
i just wish they'd make their bloody minds up which member of which department made the cockup. constantly moving the target does nothing for instilling confidence.
Click to expand...

It was the speechwriter. It was on the news this morning. He offered his resignation, but Dubya told him to stick around. Who knows when they're going to need another scapegoat. Apparently, proofreading and/or knowing what you're actually saying aren't requirements of presidency.

The main reason I'm ignoring this whole fiasco is it was one line, said one time, out of the rest of the argument for the war. If anybody decided to support the war on one sentence, they don't count anyway.
Click to expand...
I'd probably agree with you Gonz, if it weren't for all the guilty looking backing and filling.
 
The "line" was, in fact, stated MANY times. The reason they are attacking that instance is because it was in an official address. Just like Clinton being under oath....I am amazed at how you've suddenly become so tolerant of a President lying, Gonz...:D
 
Squiggy said:
The "line" was, in fact, stated MANY times.
Click to expand...

By Bush? I can't find a single instance of that particular incident being referred to any other time by our beloved & adored Commander in Chief.
 
Must be. Of course, I ain't going past 3 or 4 pages of other shit before I quit looking :D
 
They've been caught in a lie and lied to get out of it, got caught and lied again, now they've been caught again. In a STU Address no less, in attempt to get people to invade another country.

Apparently this is good government to you Gonz? As you are willing to forgive repeated lies about a serious topic such as this.

This isn't the only line of the STU that they've been called on either.

Does it make you proud to support this type of governing?
 
flavio said:
They've been caught in a lie...
Click to expand...

Until the truthis known, that is a mis-statement. The Brits say this wasn't the only source for that information & they are standing behind the other sources.

As far as lying to cover up a non-needed apology, THAT is looking really stupid. Dubya needs to find the plaque from Trumans office & read it. As soon as he makes a statement, I'll pay attention. Right now it's peons looking for the best spin.

This is the same government we've had for 40 years. Johnson, Nixon, Ford, Carter,Bush & Clinton have all proven to be shitheads. I'm still tossing around Reagan & Dubya is going down the drain fast. In more an answer to your implied question YES, I still support our action in Iraq.

Don't get all holier than thou flavio, Clinton was nothing to be proud of. His #1 main & only concern was CYA. (as he once again proved last night)
 
Anyone care to provide some links as to when else Bush referred to the African uranium, or the other lines of the STU address that are under fire?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top