Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Prodigal Son
I know I sound like an instigator, or a disruptor, or whatever, but I'm not.

I have read this board before, and to be honest, I'm pretty sure any sources that I trust will be ones that many here don't.

But here's one lie.

The Niger claim. Bush claimed that Iraq tried to buy uranium from an African country, later revealed as Niger, in the State of the Union speech.

This was not true. The CIA let him know before the SotU. He still used this claim in the speech. The documents used to "prove" the claim were forged, according to the IAEA.

Now, the administration claims it was the CIA's fault. But the White House was informed before the SotU speech, and the CIA successfully had the statement cut. Yet it still wound up in the speech.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/justin/weekly/newsnat-14jul2003-22.htm
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,997712,00.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3063013.stm
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/13/1058034872962.html
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=424234
193 posted on 07/13/2003 9:25:16 PM PDT by FascistSlayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 184 | View Replies ]


To: FascistSlayer
I have read this board before,

You haven't read it lately then have you this (the Niger claim) has been hashed and rehashed around here for the past three days.

197 posted on 07/13/2003 9:31:53 PM PDT by CONSERVE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer; All
Oh boy...here we go again:>)
198 posted on 07/13/2003 9:32:13 PM PDT by cwb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
And where in all these links does it say your president lied to you? You need to get on the ball here. I see a bunch of links purporting this or that but nowhere do I find evidence of Presidential lying.

Furthermore, why did you not provide these links earlier? Why not provide them in your initial posts???

199 posted on 07/13/2003 9:33:34 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
Wow, the Guardian, ABC and BBC, quite a lineup of 'credible' sources you've got there.

BTW, do you honestly take us for fools? Despite the fact that fascism is an anti-individualist, anti-liberal(in the old sense of the term) movement, leftists consistently call right-wingers 'Fascist.'

So when you come on this forum TODAY, making THIS post, with the name 'FascistSlayer' you can guess what our reaction might be, can't you?

Explain to me how a constitutional republic, free enterprise and trade, ability to freely contract with others, free speech and thought and the right to self-defense are 'fascist?'
203 posted on 07/13/2003 9:38:36 PM PDT by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
And post number One Hundred Ninety something! Jeez. It took you almost two hundred posts to come up with BS links!?
206 posted on 07/13/2003 9:39:34 PM PDT by Prodigal Son
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
This thread ties together threads that counter that "lie"

Waiting for Terrance J. Wilkinson -- The Rise and Fall of the 'Bush Lied' Smear...

You are changing the subject. Your thread is about the Saddam-9/11 "lie".

If you want to challenge other "news", why don't you respond to existing threads rather than launching a fishing expedition vanity thread?

207 posted on 07/13/2003 9:47:09 PM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
This thread ties together threads that counter that "lie"

Waiting for Terrance J. Wilkinson -- The Rise and Fall of the 'Bush Lied' Smear...

You are changing the subject. Your thread is about the Saddam-9/11 "lie".

If you want to challenge other "news", why don't you respond to existing threads rather than launching a fishing expedition vanity thread?

208 posted on 07/13/2003 9:47:11 PM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
This thread ties together threads that counter that "lie"

Waiting for Terrance J. Wilkinson -- The Rise and Fall of the 'Bush Lied' Smear...

You are changing the subject. Your thread is about the Saddam-9/11 "lie".

If you want to challenge other "news", why don't you respond to existing threads rather than launching a fishing expedition vanity thread?

211 posted on 07/13/2003 9:47:22 PM PDT by weegee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
Sorry, no lie. He said the Brits intel
found this to be true. They did, they
still do. Bush didn't know about the
forged doc. 'til March, SOTU was in
Jan. Irrelevant, anyway. There were
other sources besides the fake doc.

Wake up. Congress voted for force in
Oct. of '02, months before the one
line in SOTU. They lie if they claim
now that Bush's line misled them into
war.

And they called for force against SH
in '98 based on WMD intel.

They are lying about Bush & about the
past. They are traitors to America.

You are too obvious, not to be taken
at face value. The real liars aren't
even a blip on your radar screen.
228 posted on 07/13/2003 9:53:40 PM PDT by txrangerette
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
But here's one lie.

The Niger claim. Bush claimed that Iraq tried to buy uranium from an African country, later revealed as Niger, in the State of the Union speech.

This was not true. The CIA let him know before the SotU. He still used this claim in the speech. The documents used to "prove" the claim were forged, according to the IAEA.

That is a lie.

You are the liar.

The documents that are determined to be forgeries were so determined AFTER the SOTU speech.

The British to this day stand by their intelligence and believe it is a fact that Iraq was seeking to obtain uranium from SEVERAL African countries.

And to this very day the U.S. has reason to believe it, too, as Condi Rice stated on today.

You are twisting facts for our own deceitful purposes.

232 posted on 07/13/2003 9:59:18 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
First of all you need to get what was said in the SOTU address correct.

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Then you need to realize that the British still stand behind that claim because they have other sources besides the one that depended on the false documents.

The earlier statement that the CIA nixed was more specific(about Niger) and was based on George Wilson's 8 day trip there, where he asked the government and the mining companies if they had shipped or sold any uranium oxide to Iraq. Of course, they said no.

242 posted on 07/13/2003 10:07:29 PM PDT by PeaceBeWithYou (De Oppresso Liber!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
Before you spread more of your lies, you best read Tenet's Statement.

You may be used to speaking to fatuous idiots, but this place isn't buying your b.s.

244 posted on 07/13/2003 10:10:14 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

To: FascistSlayer
You didn't do yourself a favor by posting leftist, anti American, known purveyors of lies as your sources. BBC - Guardian - for pete's sake.
312 posted on 07/14/2003 7:27:21 AM PDT by zip (I wish I had your "inside" sources of intelligence reports)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 193 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson