[nailspitter]

I haven't read all the hundreds of posts, and maybe I should. This is only about my fourth post on FreeRepublic, so if I'm commiting some sort of breach by not reading everything before I post, let me know. My feeling is that Bush didn't lie at all. He stated a fact. He said that the Brits had found that Iraq was trying to buy uranium in Africa. I believe those are about his exact words. The Brits still believe this to be true. So where is the lie, mistake error, etc.? Perhaps since our CIA couldn't confirm it, it shouldn't have been in the speech. That's a simple mistake. But since the Brits did tell us about the attempt to purchase uranium, and since they still believe it, there is certainly no lie or scandal involved. Bush simply repeated what the British told him. I think we've handled this all wrong. Tenet isn't to blame, there's really very little to blame anyone for. Bush should simply have said that the British believed then and still believe today that Iraq wanted to buy uranium in Africa. Our CIA wasn't sure, but Bush felt that the British intelligence was valid, and still does. If the Dems want to err on the side of Saddam not being a bad guy, then let them make that case to the American voter. End of discussion.

[Peach]

Good fourth post! To further what you said about perhaps if the CIA couldn't verify the intel it shouldn't have been in the State of the Union, although as you mentioned the Brits stand by that story - I thought folks here would find it interesting that based on another thread on FR this evening - we always have a CIA agent sit in on M15/British intel meetings.

[Lauratealeaf]

Excellent post. I agree.

[cyncooper]

Your #362 sums up exactly my understanding and I agree with your observation that it has been handled a bit clumsily, but nothing to warrant the dipsey-doodles being performed by the nuts in the media and the expected demwits.