Skip to comments.
The Tenet Fiasco - Discussion Thread
self
Posted on 07/12/2003 12:52:33 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 941 next last
To: Cathryn Crawford
No that's what you've done.... Remember
....If they are inaccurate now, then of course they were inaccurate when spoken.........
341
posted on
07/12/2003 3:48:51 PM PDT
by
deport
(On a hot day don't kick a cow chip...... only democrat enablers..)
To: huck von finn
Wait a minute...State obviously did know about it. Tenet refers to this in his statement when he says Powell refused to use the Niger uranium bit in his speech before the U.N.!I'm sorry for being unclear.
I was saying Cathryn's statement that we had not heard from the NSC much was false when Condi Rice has commented all week about it, and granted a 50 minute interview with multiple reporters yesterday morning. I should have cut off the part I was responding to as follows(The following is what Cathryn Crawford stated):
Speaking of the NSC...we haven't heard too much about this from them
I then pointed out that was false.
To: cyncooper
Thank you for the correction.
To: William McKinley; lelio; Wild Irish Rogue
I will be following along in parallel the attempt to ascertain the particulars which connect George Tenet and Joseph C. Wilson.
I don't much care for Tenet's passive voice, "was sent to the region by CIA"--come on, Tenet, you are CIA.
Who hired Craig Livingstone?
No, I mean, who sent Joseph C. Wilson?
The brouhaha smacks of a partisan ambush engineered by hacks from top to bottom.
Terry McCauliffe, George Tenet, Joseph C. Wilson--this isn't intelligence--this is Embarrass the CINC.
Yet Bill Gertz on Fox last night says he is not optimistic that any heads will roll on this matter.
344
posted on
07/12/2003 3:56:45 PM PDT
by
PhilDragoo
(Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
To: Cathryn Crawford
So, did you get a chance to read Jack Straw's letter that I linked at #30? What do you think? Do you see that the president didn't give flawed or incorrect information in his speech?
What do you think of Tony Blair coming to the U.S. next week and addressing a joint session of Congress? Do you think he might address his confidence in his country's intelligence?
To: Dan from Michigan
Just got back. Haven't read the posts yet. Hope you get a chance to read the posts.
To: PhiKapMom
You are right! We don't know what we are talking about because we are women and support the President! Cathryn writes this barbara striesand all the time. She thinks she has a grasp of what's 'really going on'. When in reality she embarrasses herself time after time with incorrect facts usually gleaned from parts of the media that dislike President Bush.
Young skull full of mush, let's hope over the years things firm up in there.
The men around here that take women like you and me to task for supporting our president are angry we don't fall for the kook hype about GWB. Women who do are held up as paragons of intellect.
347
posted on
07/12/2003 4:07:09 PM PDT
by
BigWaveBetty
(Beat me, whip me, make me vote for Ron Paul or Harry Browne or Alan Keyes or the nut du jour!)
To: cyncooper
Yeah, I read em.
348
posted on
07/12/2003 4:07:21 PM PDT
by
Dan from Michigan
("Crashed and Burned, eh gungrabbers?")
To: cyncooper
Understood.
To: Cathryn Crawford
Cathryn, I'm not trying to pick on you or go off topic .. but who said this war was over? and do you really think Iraq can be cleaned up in 2 months?
The Uneasy War
Jun 27, 2003
http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_5923.shtml Liberation will not be achieved - the war will not be over - until all the opposition is rooted out and the acts of violence and vandalism against both civilians and troops is stopped. Whether you agreed with this war or not, you cannot logically say that its finished. It is a case of the wrong words being used by the government this is not an uneasy peace, this is an uneasy war.
350
posted on
07/12/2003 4:08:10 PM PDT
by
Mo1
(Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
To: William McKinley; Dog; lelio; Wild Irish Rogue
Just jumping in with an interim hypothesis.
I posit CIA is salted with Clinton moles bent on at the least embarrassing Bush and at the worst facilitating [another] security breakdown.
Woolsey was adamant Ramzi Yousef was an Iraqi agent and was booted to make way for that POS Deutch--whom John Millis called "the worst DCI for counterintelligence". Millis, the career CIA case officer and Goss' COS sucked a shotgun in a bathtub of the Breezeway Motel in Alexandria, Virginia.
A similar shoot-the-messenger cover-up was instigated at FBI with SA James M. Fox.
[see also Coleen Rowley]
I suggest the outing of Aldrich Ames and Richard Hanssen was to cover for the remaining moles.
The sending of Joseph C. Wilson was no small matter. His negative finding has the credibility of a Jimmy Carter on Cuba, Madeleine Albright on North Korea, and Scott Ritter/Hans Blix on Iraq.
It was done to put to bed a damaging trail of evidence.
And to let Democrats in dirty diapers play Yellowcake Yellowcake.
351
posted on
07/12/2003 4:08:47 PM PDT
by
PhilDragoo
(Hitlery: das Butch von Buchenvald)
To: Lauratealeaf
He didn't say that the Iraqis were not trying to buy the uranium. That is the key point. Bush said in his speech that the British had evidence that Iraq had tried to buy, not that they bought. In an earlier post Wilson was quoted as saying that one former official he talked to said he didn't doubt that Iraq was trying, there were rumors, but that he doubted they could ever be successful.
Just the fact that they were trying to buy uranium is enough to implicate them as seekers of nuclear weapons, else no need for uranium. Plus the British still insist they are correct and have other collaborating evidence.
352
posted on
07/12/2003 4:09:48 PM PDT
by
Mind-numbed Robot
(Not all things that need to be done need to be done by the government.)
To: huck von finn
The media are in fact gearing up for this. CNN has been touting a full-blown production that it will air tomorrow.Oh, brother. I believe it. What a mishmash of misstatements, half-truths, and lies it will have to be to make a case againt President Bush, but I'm sure they'll give it their all.
They're probably already working out "Scandal" and (in their fondest dreams) "Impeachment of a President" graphics and music.
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
How come no one ever pings me to these things???
354
posted on
07/12/2003 4:13:16 PM PDT
by
Neets
(Sometimes you feel like a nut; sometimes you are a nut.)
To: Scenic Sounds
I find it rather amusing that some of the same people who whined over President George H. W. Bush's "failure" to remove Saddam Hussein during his presidency are the same ones who are finding fault with the man's son for finishing the job.
Proof positive that you just can't win with some folks.
To: Cathryn Crawford
smell blood You may not like me, but please don't plagarize me.
Why would you say that to anybody about those particular words?
I used that phrase just yesterday.
How in the world can you claim ownership of the phrase "smell blood"?
To: Neets
I'd be honored to ping you. : )
In fact, here:
PING!
To: Neets; DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
PING........ BUT GOOD.
358
posted on
07/12/2003 4:17:04 PM PDT
by
deport
(On a hot day don't kick a cow chip...... only democrat enablers..)
To: Cathryn Crawford
Are you part of that liberal media that smells blood? I do believe you are. I can spot a liberal anywhere!
To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet; deport
Thanks!!!
HA!
360
posted on
07/12/2003 4:18:13 PM PDT
by
Neets
(Sometimes you feel like a nut; sometimes you are)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 321-340, 341-360, 361-380 ... 941 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson