Reply
Tue 25 Apr, 2006 03:23 pm
April 24, 2006
VIDEO - 60 Minutes Exposes Bush's Pre-War WMD Lies
David Edwards
Click on image to play video.
Better late than never, CBS News' 60 Minutes details how the Bush inner-circle misused dubious intelligence to convince the American people to back a preemptive war on Iraq.
Ed Bradley interviews Tyler Drumheller, a retired CIA official who saw first-hand evidence of how the Bush team used selective (and discredited) intelligence to support war plans which had already been set.
This 13 minute video is the complete broadcast from Sunday night's edition of 60 minutes.
source
Just name one lie, just one lie that Bush told! You can't do it!
Quote:Just name one lie, just one lie that Bush told! You can't do it!
Roxxxanne, have you been out drinking with Brandon9000 ?
I'll say it again for anybody who might have missed it.
Poisoning the US senate office building with anthrax was an act of war. We needed to take the Iraqi regime out the day after 9-11 and the only thing which really prevented that was the pathetic condition which Slick KKKlinton had left our military in. It took two years of building before we could do it.
This administration really is lying scum, isn't it?
I knew it, but kind of didn't want to ....but here is the real smoking gun.
Roxxxanne wrote:Just name one lie, just one lie that Bush told! You can't do it!
If you claim that someone told lots of lies, but are unable to give even one specific statement that's a lie, the meaning is pretty clear.
freedom4free wrote:Quote:Just name one lie, just one lie that Bush told! You can't do it!
Roxxxanne, have you been out drinking with Brandon9000 ?

No, I believe Gunga is Brandon's drinking partner....
blueveinedthrobber wrote:freedom4free wrote:Quote:Just name one lie, just one lie that Bush told! You can't do it!
Roxxxanne, have you been out drinking with Brandon9000 ?

No, I believe Gunga is Brandon's drinking partner....
Drinking...kool-aid, that is.
As usual, 60 min does a good job of confusing the issue. Drumheller admits that attempting to buy yellowcake and purchasing it are equally odious. The "16 words that are in the state of the union address" refer to an attempt to buy it. What Joe Wilson "proved" while drinking tea with officials with no inclination to share information with him was that Niger didn't sell any, as if they would keep that information in their Blackberry anyway. Nearly every reference to uranium in the 60 minutes report concerns a completed purchase, not the still credited attempt to purchase it beginning in 1999. Please pay attention to the preponderance of lies and illogical assumptions that form the anti invasion "case":
"Plame's Lame Game
What Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his wife forgot to tell us about the yellow-cake scandal.
By Christopher Hitchens
Posted Tuesday, July 13, 2004, at 12:27 PM ET
Two recent reports allow us to revisit one of the great non-stories, and one of the great missed stories, of the Iraq war argument. The non-story is the alleged martyrdom of Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Wilson, supposed by many to have suffered cruel exposure for their commitment to the truth. The missed story is the increasing evidence that Niger, in West Africa, was indeed the locus of an illegal trade in uranium ore for rogue states including Iraq.
The Senate's report on intelligence failures would appear to confirm that Valerie Plame did recommend her husband Joseph Wilson for the mission to Niger. In a memo written to a deputy chief in the CIA's Directorate of Operations, she asserted that Wilson had "good relations with both the Prime Minister and the former Minister of Mines [of Niger], not to mention lots of French contacts." This makes a poor fit with Wilson's claim, in a recent book, that "Valerie had nothing to do with the matter. She definitely had not proposed that I make the trip." (It incidentally seems that she was able to recommend him for the trip because of the contacts he'd made on an earlier trip, for which she had also proposed him.)
Wilson's earlier claim to the Washington Post that, in the CIA reports and documents on the Niger case, "the dates were wrong and the names were wrong," was also false, according to the Senate report. The relevant papers were not in CIA hands until eight months after he made his trip. Wilson now lamely says he may have "misspoken" on this. (See Susan Schmidt's article in the July 10 Washington Post.)
Now turn to the front page of the June 28 Financial Times for a report from the paper's national security correspondent, Mark Huband. He describes a strong consensus among European intelligence services that between 1999 and 2001 Niger was engaged in illicit negotiations over the export of its "yellow cake" uranium ore with North Korea, Libya, Iraq, Iran, and China. The British intelligence report on this matter, once cited by President Bush, has never been disowned or withdrawn by its authors. The bogus document produced by an Italian con man in October 2002, which has caused such embarrassment, was therefore more like a forgery than a fake: It was a fabricated version of a true bill.
Given the CIA's institutional hostility to the "regime change" case, the blatantly partisan line taken in public by Wilson himself, and the high probability that an Iraqi delegation had at least met with suppliers from Niger, how wrong was it of Robert Novak to draw attention to the connection between Plame and Wilson's trip? Or of someone who knew of it to tell Novak?"
Now, if it had been as easy to sweet talk Saddam out of power as it was to get Monica to use her kneepads all this would have been avoided, and Wilson and Drumheller would be on the winning team instead of sitting in the Loser's Lounge. We had to elect a real president with a vision more expansive than his next squirt to do so, we did, twice, and are better off for it, imo.
dlowan wrote:This administration really is lying scum, isn't it?
I knew it, but kind of didn't want to ....but here is the real smoking gun.
Let me guess ... CBS has a memo?