To: William Creel
as he tried to undermine a prominent debunker of those claims, Joe Wilson
I'll post this again:
Let's see; Wilson writes an op-ed piece AFTER he goes to work for John Kerry, claiming that he was sent to Niger at the request of Dick Cheney and declares that the words Bush spoke in the SOTU were lies and were the false basis with which Bush led the country to war.
Are they insinuating that the White House was to do NOTHING? Say nothing? Not defend themselves? Not try to at least correct Wilson's claims -- which, we all know now, turned out to be, almost to a word, a pack of lies.
Just stop and think a minute about that: if the White House hadn't refuted the lies Wilson told, his "facts" would have been used to what end - why, to get John Kerry elected, right?
posted on 07/18/2005 8:47:56 AM PDT
(Is Valerie Plame a mute?)
The media have forgotten Clinton's vicious attacks against HIS "enemies" - Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Linda Tripp, Kenneth Starr, etc. All of these people were viciously savaged in the press for months, Clinton did everything he could to impede and vilify Starr, and yet the press is now making a huge thing out of Rove making a factual statement that WASN'T EVEN INTENDED AS A SMEAR, because it ISN'T a smear.
Does Joe Wilson realize that he is a traitor to his country? The fact that is lost to these self serving hacks is that their lies put us at great risk. If a nuke device is used by terrorist here in America and because Wilson lied about procurement efforts to further political gains to the detriment of our country he should be executed as a traitor!
posted on 07/18/2005 9:04:48 AM PDT
(You can't be lost if you don't care where you're at !)
if the White House hadn't refuted the lies Wilson told, his "facts" would have been used to what end - why, to get John Kerry elected, right?
Yes, indeed -- that's why they are hopping mad!
posted on 07/18/2005 9:47:50 AM PDT
"Let's see; Wilson writes an op-ed piece AFTER he goes to work for John Kerry, claiming that he was sent to Niger at the request of Dick Cheney and declares that the words Bush spoke in the SOTU were lies and were the false basis with which Bush led the country to war."
Don't forget that Wilson had been on with Bill Moyers one month after the "16 Words" were spoken in Bush's SOTU, and never said boo about them. Quite the contrary, in fact:
NOW with Bill Moyers. Transcript. Bill Moyers Talks with Joseph C. Wilson, IV. 2.28.03 | PBS
"MOYERS: President Bush's recent speech to the American Enterprise Institute, he said, let me quote it to you. "The danger posed by Saddam Hussein and his weapons cannot be ignored or wished away." You agree with that?
WILSON: I agree with that. Sure.
MOYERS: "The danger must be confronted." You agree with that? "We would hope that the Iraqi regime will meet the demands of the United Nations and disarm fully and peacefully. If it does not, we are prepared to disarm Iraq by force. Either way, this danger will be removed. The safety of the American people depends on ending this direct and growing threat." You agree with that?
WILSON: I agree with that. Sure. The President goes on to say in that speech as he did in the State of the Union Address is we will liberate Iraq from a brutal dictator. All of which is true. But the only thing Saddam Hussein hears in this speech or the State of the Union Address is, "He's coming to kill me. He doesn't care if I have weapons of mass destruction or not. His objective is to come and overthrow my regime and to kill me." And that then does not provide any incentive whatsoever to disarm."
posted on 07/18/2005 9:56:12 AM PDT
by Sam Hill
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson