Gravitymaster 0 #1 July 9, 2004 According to this story, it's true. I feel I've been lied to and given false information based on bad intelligence from many on this site. http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373567507 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #2 July 9, 2004 Actually, what the -story- says is . . . Quote People with knowledge of the report said Lord Butler has concluded that this claim was reasonable and consistent with the intelligence. Which is not quite the same thing. I'd prefer to wait to see what the actual report says.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #3 July 9, 2004 QuoteActually, what the -story- says is . . . Quote People with knowledge of the report said Lord Butler has concluded that this claim was reasonable and consistent with the intelligence. Which is not quite the same thing. I'd prefer to wait to see what the actual report says. Here... / try grasping at this straw. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 4 #4 July 9, 2004 Hey, we'll see in a couple of days.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
b1jercat 0 #5 July 9, 2004 Might have been stopped by this guy. Just in the nick of time. blues jerry Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #6 July 9, 2004 QuoteMight have been stopped by this guy. Just in the nick of time. blues jerry "Image cannot be displayed because it contains errors" Bwahahahaha Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Botellines 0 #7 July 9, 2004 Errr... It may be your browser the one with errors. I can see it just perfectly... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tunaplanet 0 #8 July 9, 2004 QuoteI feel I've been lied to and given false information based on bad intelligence from many on this site. ROFLMAO. NOOOOOOOOOO. HERE? ON THIS SITE? Now there's a shocker. Can't imagine you getting incorrect information on these boards. This is why I always take what people say on these boards with a grain of salt. Half of what people say (moderators especially) are false and incorrect. Too many people pawn of their opinions as fact. Forty-two Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Ron 10 #9 July 9, 2004 So if the report comes out and it DOES say that Iraq tried to get Nuclear materials... Are you and the other left leaning greenie gonna say you were wrong?"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
crozby 0 #10 July 9, 2004 I was wrong in believing that Saddam had not attempted to buy plutonium fron Niger. Like your own party, I believed the authorities who stated that the documentary evidence supporting such a claim was forged. Is Bush going to appologise for backing away from supporting the claim? Not likely. What is Really interesting about this though is that someone who knew Saddam was trying to buy this stuff decided to make it public and produced forged documents in order to make the claim credible. Which person or organisation would have done that, and why? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #11 July 9, 2004 QuoteSo if the report comes out and it DOES say that Iraq tried to get Nuclear materials... Are you and the other left leaning greenie gonna say you were wrong? And don't forget about the "credible sources" like Seymour Hersch etc. I think this casts into doubt the the entire intellegence gathering capabilities of those opposed to the war. I think this intellegence was intentionally distorted to try and bring down the President and perhaps qualifies as treason. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflydrew 0 #12 July 9, 2004 Thye CIA rebuked these claims a year before Bush used it to convince the wortld that Iraq was a threat... This isn't democratic this or Liberal that, this is just fact... It only goes to show how little most of the people who post here actually researched anything they heard before the war. Sad... Saddam was not seeking uranium. We should all move on now because there's no point to this discussion. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #13 July 9, 2004 QuoteThye CIA rebuked these claims a year before Bush used it to convince the wortld that Iraq was a threat... This isn't democratic this or Liberal that, this is just fact... It only goes to show how little most of the people who post here actually researched anything they heard before the war. Sad... Saddam was not seeking uranium. We should all move on now because there's no point to this discussion. Which only goes to explain that the CIA has had some problems in the past with their intel gathering. Hopefully, with the resignation of Tenet, this will be corrected. The irony is that the Libs were so quick to believe the CIA on this point, but claimed it was GWBs fault the CIA provided him with bad intel on Iraq. Are the Libs now willing to admit to the possibility that GWB thought Iraq had WMDs based on bad intel from the CIA, or are they going to try and distance themselves from this report? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflydrew 0 #14 July 9, 2004 Quote Are the Libs now willing to admit to the possibility that GWB thought Iraq had WMDs based on bad intel from the CIA, or are they going to try and distance themselves from this report? Not this one... I think the whoile thing was bullshit, the invasion of Iraq was unwarranted, unjustified, and plain old wrong. I think that it has made the world anything but safe, and I think that GWB and Cheney knew what they were doing the entire freakin time. The whole thing was documented in 2000 by the PNAC which basically spelled out the entire movement into the Middle East so specifically that it predicted the bump up in annual military spending to the exact percentage. Tell me Bush didn't know exacvtly what he was doing... These threads are hilarious!!! We did not go into Iraq because of anything having to do with WMDs... Try reading a little of this... http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1221.htm "uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC)." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #15 July 9, 2004 QuoteAccording to this story, it's true. I feel I've been lied to and given false information based on bad intelligence from many on this site. http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1087373567507 This story then supports the Bush Administrations assertion that it was going to war with Iraq "BEFORE" is became an imminent threat. (which is what he said all along)"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #16 July 9, 2004 QuoteQuote Are the Libs now willing to admit to the possibility that GWB thought Iraq had WMDs based on bad intel from the CIA, or are they going to try and distance themselves from this report? Not this one... I think the whoile thing was bullshit, the invasion of Iraq was unwarranted, unjustified, and plain old wrong. I think that it has made the world anything but safe, and I think that GWB and Cheney knew what they were doing the entire freakin time. The whole thing was documented in 2000 by the PNAC which basically spelled out the entire movement into the Middle East so specifically that it predicted the bump up in annual military spending to the exact percentage. Tell me Bush didn't know exacvtly what he was doing... These threads are hilarious!!! We did not go into Iraq because of anything having to do with WMDs... Try reading a little of this... http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article1221.htm "uncovered by the Sunday Herald, for the creation of a 'global Pax Americana' was drawn up for Dick Cheney (now vice- president), Donald Rumsfeld (defence secretary), Paul Wolfowitz (Rumsfeld's deputy), George W Bush's younger brother Jeb and Lewis Libby (Cheney's chief of staff). The document, entitled Rebuilding America's Defences: Strategies, Forces And Resources For A New Century, was written in September 2000 by the neo-conservative think-tank Project for the New American Century (PNAC)." Read the report. I agree with it but I do not agree with the conclusion of the article by Mr MacKay. What is wrong with protecting our interests. It is because of the liberals wanting to give of ourselves to the UN and the "Global Community" that we should do this!!!!"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nacmacfeegle 0 #17 July 9, 2004 I thought al this sounded familiar, The Sunday Herald is a pretty good Scottish newspaper. 'Tam Dalyell, the Labour MP, father of the House of Commons and one of the leading rebel voices against war with Iraq, said:' This is garbage from right-wing think-tanks stuffed with chicken-hawks -- men who have never seen the horror of war but are in love with the idea of war. Men like Cheney, who were draft-dodgers in the Vietnam war.' To be fair....Tam is a wee bit eccentric sometimes though.-------------------- He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #18 July 9, 2004 Wrong.. The 9/11 report states that nobody in the intel community was pressured. You are just going to have to admit that all your ideas about the world have been a bit Psycotic. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jimbo 0 #19 July 9, 2004 Yup yup - you can read all about it here. - Jim"Like" - The modern day comma Good bye, my friends. You are missed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #20 July 9, 2004 Quote Yup yup - you can read all about it here. - Jim Guess whats for dinner tonight? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflydrew 0 #21 July 9, 2004 QuoteWrong.. The 9/11 report states that nobody in the intel community was pressured. You are just going to have to admit that all your ideas about the world have been a bit Psycotic. I didn't mention the 9/11 report... what exactly are you speaking of? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #22 July 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteWrong.. The 9/11 report states that nobody in the intel community was pressured. You are just going to have to admit that all your ideas about the world have been a bit Psycotic. I didn't mention the 9/11 report... what exactly are you speaking of? Apparently you are a little behind the curve today. Turn on a radio or TV. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflydrew 0 #23 July 9, 2004 QuoteQuoteQuoteWrong.. The 9/11 report states that nobody in the intel community was pressured. You are just going to have to admit that all your ideas about the world have been a bit Psycotic. I didn't mention the 9/11 report... what exactly are you speaking of? Apparently you are a little behind the curve today. Turn on a radio or TV. I'm not a little behind the curve... The CIA rebuked this before Bush said it... He used the info anyway. At the time it was clear that he was using information that had already been proven false. IT WAS ALL OVER THE NEWS!!! This is so freakin stupid that you're saying that this, specifically, was the misinformation of the CIA, when the CIA had already publically said the findings were false. Bush used them anyway! What a silly arguement! There was no evidence supporting anything that Bush used to convince the public that the war was warranted! There is still no evidence for anything! Even He had to have figured that out when he was up there making his speeches... Of course Bush isn't at fault for leading this country into a war based of untruths, and a threat that didn't exist... You can't blame Bush for anything having to do with the Invasion of Iraq! Just put him in front of a teleprompter, and turn on the camera. To Add: Finding the CIA at fault shouldnb't come as any surprise to anyone since the Head of the CIA resigned a little while ago... It doesn't take a rocket scientist to connect the dots and see who was going to take all the blame. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #24 July 9, 2004 Apparently the CIA was wron again on this one. The truth is Iraq did try to buy Uranium from Niger. Spin it anyway you like. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
freeflydrew 0 #25 July 10, 2004 QuoteApparently the CIA was wron again on this one. The truth is Iraq did try to buy Uranium from Niger. Spin it anyway you like. "wrong" is spelled with a g at the end... The claims were false. It was made public before Bush used it in his speech to gain support for the invasion of iraq. He should never have mentioned it at all. It wasn't true then and it isn't true now. There's no evidence anywhere supporting this claim was true. No WMD's, no programs, no threat, no evidence... Prove it any different. There's nothing to spin! (I'm fighting off bursting out in laughter) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
