Did Bush lie to the American public about wmd's?

[V. Barbarino]

**still waiting for the real answer from Saleen and supporting statements

For me

1. putin

2. Jordanian King

3. Tony Blair

4. UK Intel

5. FBI

6. CIA

7. Even Hans Blix

8. Bill Clinton

At the time, all said he had them. The president has advisors and his CIA was ran by the same dude Clinton had running it. Sure hindsight is 20/20, but I feel his only mistake is what blix said, he should have just waited a few more months and the international community would have come on board.

As for what tech posted, I still haven't read it, I don't have to, every newspaper and media source are in agreement that he didn't lie.

[Guest web_norah]

Putin? not sure about him.............UK Intel hmmm..they captured 13 people yesterday.....hmmmm

[V. Barbarino]

Putin? not sure about him.............UK Intel hmmm..they captured 13 people yesterday.....hmmmm

spin spin and more spin...

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up. Moore on national tv, couldn't dispute the facts, he just spun to give hypothetical moral questions. If your leader moore can't dispute it, then you and tech certainly can't.

But hey it's america, you have the right to be ignorant. rock on sister!

[Guest web_norah]

do you have anything more eloquent than to reply with than SPIN?

it is ironic that you mention ignorance, cos yours is blatant but as people say, it can be BLISS .............coming from someone who glorifies O Reilly...and his lack of acknowledgment of reality

[V. Barbarino]

do you have anything more eloquent than to reply with than SPIN?

it is ironic that you mention ignorance, cos yours is blatant but as people say, it can be BLISS .............coming from someone who glorifies O Reilly...and his lack of acknowledgment of reality

lol.. you wackos get funnier by the day.

[ryan2772]

i can't wait to vote.

[Guest web_norah]

[Guest endymion]

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up.

Okay, if that's your response after I pulled out the concrete for five pages to back up my position then this whole thread is pointless. I honestly thought that you had something useful to say. There are three clear concrete lies documented just in this thread. Your response to them is to bury your head in the sand.

I suspected that you were bluffing and that you had nothing the whole time but I really honestly thought that you had something to say. I was really just disappointed to wake up and read your message. O'Reilley would be pretty disappointed in you too if he could read any of this. Oh well.

[V. Barbarino]

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up.

Okay, if that's your response after I pulled out the concrete for five pages to back up my position then this whole thread is pointless. I honestly thought that you had something useful to say. There are three clear concrete lies documented just in this thread. Your response to them is to bury your head in the sand.

I suspected that you were bluffing and that you had nothing the whole time but I really honestly thought that you had something to say. I was really just disappointed to wake up and read your message. O'Reilley would be pretty disappointed in you too if he could read any of this. Oh well.

dude, you don't get it, the national media, and 4 countries are on the side of bush on this one. why would you know something they dont?????

[Guest web_norah]

no Saleen YOU dont get it and cant admit any wrongdoing, lies, deceit, etc from this current administration ...however, you have the guts to call those who question it....wackos and ignorant.

[Guest bcnjunkie]

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up.

Okay, if that's your response after I pulled out the concrete for five pages to back up my position then this whole thread is pointless. I honestly thought that you had something useful to say. There are three clear concrete lies documented just in this thread. Your response to them is to bury your head in the sand.

I suspected that you were bluffing and that you had nothing the whole time but I really honestly thought that you had something to say. I was really just disappointed to wake up and read your message. O'Reilley would be pretty disappointed in you too if he could read any of this. Oh well.

dude, you don't get it, the national media, and 4 countries are on the side of bush on this one. why would you know something they dont?????

the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right, the more you post the more ridiculous you sound (your strength in numbers is really weak, there are plenty of civilized countires that consider this war a disgrace)

[V. Barbarino]

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up.

Okay, if that's your response after I pulled out the concrete for five pages to back up my position then this whole thread is pointless. I honestly thought that you had something useful to say. There are three clear concrete lies documented just in this thread. Your response to them is to bury your head in the sand.

I suspected that you were bluffing and that you had nothing the whole time but I really honestly thought that you had something to say. I was really just disappointed to wake up and read your message. O'Reilley would be pretty disappointed in you too if he could read any of this. Oh well.

dude, you don't get it, the national media, and 4 countries are on the side of bush on this one. why would you know something they dont?????

the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right, the more you post the more ridiculous you sound (your strength in numbers is really weak, there are plenty of civilized countires that consider this war a disgrace)

ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner...

"the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right"

this is the best quote i've seen in a long long long long time. you need to get out more, put down the pipe.

[V. Barbarino]

no Saleen YOU dont get it and cant admit any wrongdoing, lies, deceit, etc from this current administration ...however, you have the guts to call those who question it....wackos and ignorant.

you guys are saying, clinton, blix, putin, blair were all in on it, lol...

[Guest web_norah]

http://www.cooljunkie.com/forums/index.php?board=6;action=display;threadid=5604

[rbs]

http://www.cooljunkie.com/forums/index.php?board=6;action=display;threadid=5604

That site was pretty dumb IMO.

[Guest endymion]

I keep documenting lies here using government reports rather than media so that you can't use your standard tactic of blaming "liberal media" and dismissing anything that comes from any media report other than Fox News. The 9/11 commission report and the report from Congressman Waxman's office specifically.

If you bury your head in the sand and refuse to even read my the documentation that I'm using to back what I'm saying then that's your call and as a neoconservative that would be consistent with your party line. You can't bury your head in the sand and then waltz about gloating about me having "nothing concrete to back it up" or ridiculing my reaction "when faced with facts". Height of hypocrisy, sorry. I honestly thought that you had some useful input, my mistake.

If you want media reports instead then here you go. Let's talk about the January 28, 2003 state of the union address. In September of 2002 the CIA tried to get British intelligence to drop their claim that Iraq was trying to purchase nuclear material from Nigeria. ( article, article, article, article, article ) In October of 2002 the National Intelligence Estimate refers to the Nigerian uranium claim as "highly dubious". ( article ) Also in October of 2002 the CIA manages to have a misleading statement about the nonexistent uranium removed from a presidential speech ( article ) because of course we wouldn't want our president overstating the facts, that would have been lying. There was a great deal of controversy within the Bush administration as to whether to include the statement in the state of the union address. ( article, article, article )

That's the background. Then on January 28, 2003, the president of the United States gave his state of the union address. He told us "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." ( US government transcript, article ) That was a huge willful lie and he knew that it was a huge lie when he spoke it during the state of the union address.

[ryan2772]

come on, tech, all that stuff is just spin. :

you're supposed to post from the fox news archives

bwah ha ha ha ha

[Guest endymion]

you're supposed to post from the fox news archives

I just checked the Fox News archives and oddly enough they didn't cover any of this. Not one shred of mention in the Fox News archives of the intelligence community dissent.

They did this article about how Bush has so much faith in Tenet that he disregarded the mountain of documents on his desk contradicting the Nigerian uranium claim. They also ran a State Department press release from Powell that basically says to stay calm an sit back down in your seats, your administration is looking out for you. The Powell story includes this quote:

"The sentence in the State of the Union was not put in there without the knowledge and the approval of the intelligence community that saw the speech, but I can't tell you what level saw it."

Well gosh, that was a lie too, from a Bush apologist. The disapproval of the intelligence community regarding that statement was all over the media and it was the big issue at the white house for two months leading up to the state of the union address.

None of that dissent was covered by Fox News. The day after that July 13, 2003 statement that Bush made from Nigeria, 'somebody' in Washington 'accidentally' exposed Valerie Plame as a CIA operative after her husband tried to point out that all of this was bullshit and that the president lied to us about it. Fox News barely covered that either. There's your "fair and balanced".

[V. Barbarino]

blair and his goverment came out a month ago and said the african story is legit...

but' you won't post that.. hmmm

[Guest bcnjunkie]

when faced with facts, you wackos just seed doubts but have nothing concrete to back it up.

Okay, if that's your response after I pulled out the concrete for five pages to back up my position then this whole thread is pointless. I honestly thought that you had something useful to say. There are three clear concrete lies documented just in this thread. Your response to them is to bury your head in the sand.

I suspected that you were bluffing and that you had nothing the whole time but I really honestly thought that you had something to say. I was really just disappointed to wake up and read your message. O'Reilley would be pretty disappointed in you too if he could read any of this. Oh well.

dude, you don't get it, the national media, and 4 countries are on the side of bush on this one. why would you know something they dont?????

the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right, the more you post the more ridiculous you sound (your strength in numbers is really weak, there are plenty of civilized countires that consider this war a disgrace)

ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner...

"the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right"

this is the best quote i've seen in a long long long long time. you need to get out more, put down the pipe.

I think you need to get out more often, your sheltered views are obvious !

[Guest web_norah]

however i will post this

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.a...%5E1702,00.html

Saudi prince gave Bush family $130k in jewelry last year

By Matthew Lee

August 03, 2004

A SAUDI prince lavished nearly $US130,000 ($185,000) of fine jewellery on US President George W. Bush, his wife, children and top aides in 2003, but the weightiest gift for the first family last year was kilos of raw meat.

Documents released today showed that, while Crown Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz's exquisite baubles may have cemented US-Saudi friendship amid tension over Iraq, Argentine President Nestor Kirchner's 136kg present most likely did more to slake war-time appetites.

Although valued at only $US1500 ($2140) - far less than the crown prince's $US128,000 ($182,000) largesse - President Kirchner's meat was arguably the most unusual gift the president received.

Presented to Bush during an official visit to Washington in July, during which Mr Kirchner secured US support for a new international loan program, the lamb was transferred to the General Services Administration, presumably for distribution to government cafeterias or charity.

Unfortunately, there is no record of what actually became of the meat or whether there was any connection between it and the sheep responsible for a $US214 ($304) grey wool poncho that Mr Kirchner and his wife also gave to the first family during the visit.

[Guest bcnjunkie]

come on, tech, all that stuff is just spin. :

you're supposed to post from the fox news archives

bwah ha ha ha ha

the only one using spin tactics is salteen

ladies and gentlemen, we have a winner...

"the rest of the civlized world isn't, plus media here is right or extreme right"

this is the best quote i've seen in a long long long long time. you need to get out more, put down the pipe.

that's hardly an intelligent comment, it isn't even a rebutal, it's a silly spin... he's dancing around ! how sad ... but then again how typical of a salteen statement, wouldn't expect any less (if there is less)

[Guest endymion]

He told us that he was certain and that we should trust him and go to war. He was not certain but he told us that he was so that we would support him. That's lying no matter how you look at it.

The presense or absense of WMD in the form of chemical or biological weapons or a nuclear program is irrelevant to that lying. Not a defense anyway since there has been no evidence of any of it.

Bush's motives are also irrelevant. Whether or not you're a conspiracy theorist who is alarmed by the Halliburton connections, motive is still not a defense for a perjury charge.

He told us that he knew what was going on and that we were facing a "mushroom cloud" if we didn't get on board and support him. He was lying. If he had told the whole story then there would have been a lot of debate about whether to go to war and we probably wouldn't have reached a consensus. He could only get his way by lying to the American people.

[Guest endymion]

Although valued at only $US1500 ($2140) - far less than the crown prince's $US128,000 ($182,000) largesse - President Kirchner's meat was arguably the most unusual gift the president received.

Importing Argentine beef is currently illegal because of mad cow disease. Unless you're above the law.

[Guest web_norah]

well Saudis are above the law in this country, they invest big time with the Bush family and the Carlisle group...