Bush Back pedaling on WMD has begun

[Fluffdaddy]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/08/international/worldspecial/08PREX.html?ex=1058932800&en=880820b2b663129e&ei=5004&partner=UNTD

Bush Claim on Iraq Had Flawed Origin, White House Says
By DAVID E. SANGER


WASHINGTON, July 7 — The White House acknowledged for the first time today that President Bush was relying on incomplete and perhaps inaccurate information from American intelligence agencies when he declared, in his State of the Union speech, that Saddam Hussein had tried to purchase uranium from Africa.




The White House statement appeared to undercut one of the key pieces of evidence that President Bush and his aides had cited to back their claims made prior to launching an attack against Iraq in March that Mr. Hussein was "reconstituting" his nuclear weapons program. Those claims added urgency to the White House case that military action to depose Mr. Hussein needed to be taken quickly, and could not await further inspections of the country or additional resolutions at the United Nations.

The acknowledgment came after a day of questions — and sometimes contradictory answers from White House officials — about an article published on the Op-Ed page of The New York Times on Sunday by Joseph C. Wilson 4th, a former ambassador who was sent to Niger, in West Africa, last year to investigate reports of the attempted purchase. He reported back that the intelligence was likely fraudulent, a warning that White House officials say never reached them.

"There is other reporting to suggest that Iraq tried to obtain uranium from Africa," the statement said. "However, the information is not detailed or specific enough for us to be certain that attempts were in fact made."

In other words, said one senior official, "we couldn't prove it, and it might in fact be wrong."

EDITED BY ADMIN: COPYRIGHT

[Caution]

1. Good thing we spent all that time, effort and money on

Tom Ridge's office. You know the one that was supposed to consolidate our intelligence and produce clear and concise information? The one that was supposed to prevent things like a massive intelligence failure akin to what happened on 9-11 when there were ample warnings provided that were ignored, or simply passed over. This administration is trying to tell us that the single most important speech of the year (the State of the Union Address) wasn't checked, double checked, triple checked and compared against the intelligence that was available? That even though the CIA knew this information was false that somehow it made it into a speech that where literally every single comma and word is scrutinized? Or do we believe that someone indeed did know this information was incorrect and purposefully left it in there in order to further an agenda? This is BULLSHIT and we should all (and I mean you too lurking Republicans and Moderates) be angry as hell that this man LIED to us about this and put our fellow citizens in danger, leading to the deaths of hundreds of our soldiers, an invasion and occupation of a foreign country and the deaths of innocent civilians.

Where is the accountability? We should DEMAND an inquiry now.

[Old and In the Way]

2. So when do the Impeachment hearings start

Bush Knew, Terrorists Flew
Bush Lied, Americans and innocent Iraqi's Died

[PATRICK]

3. Bush spinning on empty

Next time get a Resident that shamelessly spout numbing sophistry like Blair.

Pathetic.

Media cringing tiptoeing.

Pathetic.

[mike_c]

4. damage control....

The rat bastards lied, plain and simple. Bush* was driven by a pathological need to conquer Iraq-- he'd have told nearly any lie or pulled nearly any subterfuge to get his war on.

[Lizz612]

5. Wow lookit em go!

If they've started now, how far are they going to get?
They'll back peddle all the way back to... "We always said this was about freeing the people of Iraq, the weapons were just something we were generally concerned about."
Will the media pick this up? I can see it being mentioned casually like the aluminum tubes and promptly forgotten.
"long acknowledged" bs.

[Barney]

6. No Accountability Whatsoever

Bush lied and people died. He wanted to get the guy his father couldn't get, and he was going to do it no matter what.

[bigwoody]

7. There is hope

On Monday The Akron Beacon Journal ran TWO full pages of the New Republic story by John B. Judis and Spencer Ackerman about the total fabrication of chimpy's push for war. This was INSTEAD of the usual syndicated columns and local opinions they would publish! Needless to say, I was floored! Every single thing in that article had been documented here on DU many times over. As most of us suspected, chimp's push for war was a total politicizing of the intell. process. They might as well dissolve all current intell. agencies and write what they fucking want. This issue must NOT be allowed to die! If elections are truly decided by the undecideds(20% or so), I can't believe this abuse of power by the whole adm. wouldn't resonate with an objective minded person. BTW, this is in the middle of Ohio which the gop has had a 100% lock on statewide offices for 10 fucking years! They're so arrogant here that the pigs just run for each other's seats after term limits, like a game of Musical Nazis or something! Hound your reps. and local papers, etc. 250,000 soldiers sent into harm's way under a series of lies has to be a bigger deal than consentual sex between 2 adults.

[Hand]

8. Wow!

If the Akron Reekin' Urinal is publishing this, there's really no doubt--the issue has legs! And if ever one deserved to have legs, this one does!

[bigwoody]

9. I know

I thought someone was playing a game with me. I don't know how to link stuff, but the New Republic article should be required reading/ammo on here. Unlike Monica, Whitewater, etc. this issue is not about the past or sex. The credibility of this adm. on the 1 issue they believe is their strong suit is powerful stuff and IMO isn't petty or vindictive. Can you be trusted with power, will you abuse it? The answers are becoming more clear by the day.

[Old and In the Way]

10. Welcome onboard folks!

Hand meet Bigwoody.....:evilgrin:

[lfairban]

11. Linking couldn't be easier.

Just copy the URL address from the navigation line at the top of the browser and paste it in the reply, like this:

http://12.100.23.254:8080/archive/07-07-03/editorials.html#war

There is a slicker way that is cool for longer URLs, but it took me a few tries to get it right. Instructions are in the HTML lookup table, click the link at the top of the window where you write your message.