Posted on 11/03/2003 6:26:17 PM PST by listenhillary
A Letter from Ambassador Joe Wilson:
Dear Friend,
In February 2002, George W. Bush's Administration sent me to Africa to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy materials for weapons of mass destruction. In early March, I provided a detailed briefing to the C.I.A; I concluded that Iraq had most likely not tried to buy uranium in Niger. We know the rest of the story.
The Bush White House tried to intimidate me and to discourage others from exposing the lies they told to justify the war. Some senior people in the Bush administration betrayed our country by exposing my wife's cover at the CIA because they deemed their political agenda to be more important than our national security. Not so. George Bush's Administration has betrayed our trust I know that personally. And I hope you'll join me in supporting John Kerry's campaign to wrest our democracy back from those who have so squandered the public trust. This is our cause - and it's about our future.
I wasn't ready to keep quiet when this President misled the nation in his State of the Union Address. Some people have said I was courageous to speak truth to the power of the Bush White House.
But let me tell you, what I have done doesn't hold a candle to the courage that John Kerry showed as a young man and throughout his political career. I am supporting him for President because he has shown the courage to do what's right. And I hope that everyone else who is outraged by this Administration and who wants to change America will join me in doing all you can to make John Kerry our next President.
I'm supporting John Kerry for President, and I hope you'll join me in that support. For us to take back the White House, we need to raise funds.
PLEASE DONATE NOW AND PUT JOHN KERRY IN THE WHITE HOUSE NEXT NOVEMBER.
John volunteered to serve in Vietnam, where he earned a Silver Star, a Bronze Star, and three Purple Hearts. And when he came home as a decorated hero, he didn't have to fight the war. But John helped lead the fight to end the war; he earned the wrath of Richard Nixon and his cronies, and he won the respect of Americans for his courage. Throughout his career in public service he has shown the courage to stand up to special interests and to hold government accountable.
It's almost Election Day. One year from now, we can elect a new President. Only John Kerry has the courage and credibility to be that President, and we need your support to get there.
I hope you will join us- it's never been more important.
Warm Regards,
Joe Wilson
Who knew?
Oh, really? Just who in the admin sent you, Joe? You still haven't said.
Really, Joe?
Then how did it come to pass that you wrote a column in "The Nation" mere days after that speech and failed to mention any problem with the State of the Union Address? Not a peep.
How is it that you gave several interviews in February---that is AFTER the speech, too---and you didn't say one word about misleading statements?
Joe Wilson, you are a common liar.
As to the beginning of this little "piece"
In February 2002, George W. Bush's Administration sent me to Africa to investigate claims that Saddam Hussein was seeking to buy materials for weapons of mass destruction. In early March, I provided a detailed briefing to the C.I.A; I concluded that Iraq had most likely not tried to buy uranium in Niger. We know the rest of the story.
You say you were "sent" by George W. Bush's Administration as if he sent you personally. That isn't so, is it Joe.
And your "detailed briefing" to the CIA was considered to be nothing by George Tenet. He said it was vague and inconclusive.
"We know the rest of the story" you say. Really? The story according to Joe Wilson, I suppose. The idea that Iraq was seeking to procure uranium has not been debunked, no matter how many times you stamp your tiny little feet and threaten to hold your breath until you turn blue unless we all say we believe you.
What a wretch.
Wilson misspoke himself. Based on his explanation, he clearly meant "it was impossible that this sort of transaction could be done officially".
Because, by his own description, that is the only kind of transaction he apparently investigated...
We know that leftists are not devoid of imagination -- they are adept at creating all kinds of subterfuge when it comes to corruption. So we are left with only one possible explanation: Wilson is dumb as a post.
In February 2002, George W. Bush's Administration sent me to Africa
Actually, that isn't quite true. The administration asked the CIA to look into the matter. Wilson's wife volunteered him for the mission.
The Bushes would not have sent him, and did not send him.
. In early March, I provided a detailed briefing to the C.I.A;
According to his earlier statement, he never issued anything more than a verbal statement to someone at the agency. The only written account of his trip was his op-ed piece in the Times. Would that qualify as another lie?
It would be only one more of a whole series of lies. Wilson lies when he said he investigated the matter. He did not, self-admittedly so. Read his account.
He never left the capital of Niger. He asked the government if they were engaged in illegal sales; they said no. He asked the mining company the same question; same answer. That is the basis for calling Bush a liar.
But he never audited the company's books, he never interviewed any of the drivers, he never followed the trucks to see where they go, he never staked out the port to see which ships they loaded in to, and he never checked to see where the ships went.
He never tapped mine communications, or government communications.
There was no investigation. Does that qualify as another lie?
He said that there could not have been any illegal sales, because the IAEA monitors the mines so closely as to make it impossible. But the IAEA says that they do not have the personnel to properly monitor the mines, and they furthermore are asking for laws to be placed into effect to permit them to monitor the mines. Meaning that the laws are not in effect, meaning that they are not monitoring the mines at all.
Does that qualify as another lie?
But in the end, his charge itself is a verbal sleight of hand. Bush said Iraq "sought" uranium in Africa. Wilson says there were no "sales", answering a charge that Bush never made. Does that qualify as another lie? And he answers a charge Bush did not make, testifying to something that based on his non-investigation he could not possibly know.
But Bush's charge, that they "sought" uranium, is not even controversial. Iraq's trade mission to Niger in 1999 is not even secret, it is public knowledge. All of the discussion as to whether the information came from MI6, or French intel, or Italian intel, overlooks the fact that the trade mission was public knowledge. It is not in dispute.
Does Wilson's omission of any mention of that fact qualify as another lie?
And, finally, it seems important to note that, if he was in Niger at the CIA's behest, he was acting as an agent of the agency. In publishing his op-ed piece in the New York Times, he outed himself as an agent. And he exposed something that perhaps the agency should have to answer for. If the agency had to send him to investigate the matter, why did they accept his non-investigation as authoritative? Why do they not have any of their own personnel on the ground, in a country that is of interest to Al Qaeda as possible refuge, a country that is a uranium producer, which has made past sales to Iraq... Wilson's op-ed piece exposes the agency's nakedness in the region.
Wilson is a serial liar, and the press has yet to call him on it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.