Replies

> Bush did not say Niger. He said from Africa which could be any of several countries.

Which intelligence was he referring to if not the Niger doc?

I'd love to be able to offer this as an alternative angle, but only if it stands up. If there's no other uranium acquisition intelligence other than the Niger stuff, then this dog won't hunt.

well as I understand it, Wilson's ACTUAL findings and as well as the Senate Intel Committee's WERE that Saddam had "sought to buy" as Dubya said. The thing is the media and Wilson at the hands of the Dems pulled a switcheroo and made it about how "Saddam didn't buy" Uranium. Now that's true. And to the average person who doesn't scrutinize the media, they might think "WHAA!? That means Bush lied!"... But if you look, Bush, said "British Intelligence" had found that Saddam had "sought to buy" (which is intel they stand by). He never said or even implied that Saddam had the stuff, just that he wanted it. Which as far as I know is the truth..

Didn't Niger not sell because they were afraid of what would happen if they got caught? Isn't this confirmed by their own government? The whole "forged documents" thing had nothing to do with what Dubya said... I'm pretty sure those were some French documents or something anyway.

Either way, the media pulled the switcheroo and decided to pretend Bush had said Saddam "bought" the stuff, rather than the truth which is that he said (and Saddam did) "sought to buy". So they basically put words in his mouth to call him a liar about, and to this day they still do it. I don't even hear the FNC folks correcting the record when they have a "Fair and Balanced" debate and some lefty spouts off about Niger. Ah... I'm bored with this for now...

"I'd love to be able to offer this as an alternative angle, but only if it stands up. If there's no other uranium acquisition intelligence other than the Niger stuff, then this dog won't hunt."

Just a guess, not ALL intel is public.