Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Watch Good Morning America!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Jacobin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-13-03 08:37 PM
Original message
Watch Good Morning America!
Former intel officer interviewed states flatly that he believes that Bush* KNEW the Niger uranium docs were falsified at the time of the SOTU speech.

Diane Sawyer actually lets him say it on TV.

:bounce:

:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 07:43 AM
Response to Original message
1. Thieleman to Sawyer: President " Deliberately Deceived" for war !!!
Edited on Thu Jul-10-03 07:50 AM by sinookas
I heard it on tv band on radio...
I will post notes I made in pieces so I don't lose my dialup connection...

Thieleman worked on info in fall of 2002.
He focused on the supposed nuclear materials supposedly sought in Niger and the aluminum tubes which the inspectors found.

He knew these assertions to be completely "dioscredited" within the intel organizations.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Thieleman to Sawyer on ABC #2
With the continual hammering of this discredited intel out to the public in speeches by the President and top admin officials he couldn't believe that they were allowing their "fantasies" about the information be hammered out as real fact in order to go to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 07:49 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Thieleman to Sawyer #3
He said it made him mad and he told Sawyer he saw it as " deliberate deception" by the president and top officials in his administration in order to go to war. His opinion in March was that the only thing they were justified in doing was using the "threat of force" to allow the inspections continue and to let the UN inspectors do their work. He said the intel components of the State Department never would have "signed off" on the discredited info as a reason for going to war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 07:56 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Thieleman to Sawyer #4
Sawyer kept making him repeat that he thought it was the president who deliberately deceived and said it was a "shocking" thing to hear.
Her tone though was such that she was non-committal as far as what she would say about it at this time? She had a weird tone in her voice everytime she said "shocking" and since I was listening to this and not watching, I couldn't get an body language clues from either her or Thieleman.

ps- I may not be spelling Thieleman's name correctly.

Greg or George ? Thieleman ?

He is pissed off I can tell. If he is, how many others ?
If he has now spoken out, how many others to follow ?

They really need to get him and others before a Senate investigating committee ASAP ! The Senate signed off on this crap and they should be pissed if they were deliberately deceived !
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:08 AM
Response to Reply #5
8. I saw that on TV
and was shocked that he actually said the President deliberately distorted the uranium charge. Thielman came across as very calm and measured--I didn't think he seemed angry, just disgusted, if anything, and very aware of the seriousness of what he was stating and being careful about his words.

Sawyer's reactions were typical for her. She always feigns a sort of gushing shock when anything serious comes up in her interviews. I think that's her way of trying to appear neutral; but really, the woman is much more confortable with fluff reporting than this caliber of story--she just doesn't know what to do with stuff like this. I guess I don't fault her for asking where he stood on the war. He did *not* flat out say he did not support the war; what he said was, he supported the threat of military intervention as a wedge to allow the weapons inspectors time to do their jobs--the most reasonable possible answer, really.

I'm impressed, but of course I wonder if this will go anywhere. There has to be a public investigation and Thielman has to be called as a witness.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
linazelle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:37 AM
Response to Reply #5
13. Was Sawyer's "Weird Tone" The Same One That She used when...
she interviewed the Dixie Chicks? She's biased in my opinion. When she "did" the Dixie Chicks her "Why Did You Say Those 13 Words..." question spoke volumes. I don't watch her and I stay away from ABC as much as possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RandomKoolzip Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 07:46 AM
Response to Original message
3. Diane Sawyer, who tried to make cutlets of the Dixie Chicks?
Hmmm. Is the tide OFFICIALLY turning? Then again, how many non-liberals will even care?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NicoleM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 08:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
6. Diane is an idiot.
"WHAT? What are you SAYING? What does that MEAN?"

She probably still doesn't think Nixon lied about anything, either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
alcuno Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 08:23 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. EXACTLY (and welcome to DU)
Diane (faux surprise) Sawyer.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terwilliger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:10 AM
Response to Original message
9. Replaying NOW on the West Coast
replaying SOTU speech at the moment
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terwilliger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
10. "Deliberate distortion" by the administration!
Edited on Thu Jul-10-03 09:14 AM by Terwilliger
said George Bush lied
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Punkingal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:27 AM
Response to Original message
11. Is this the first time.....
this guy has spoken out?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Terwilliger Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:31 AM
Response to Reply #11
12. first time I saw him was on Bill Moyers' NOW program
maybe....4-5 weeks ago?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HootieMcBoob Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 09:45 AM
Response to Original message
14. Next big thing?
He's really telling it like it is and pulling no punches. This is from a Reuters report:

"As of March 2003, when we began military operations, Iraq posed no imminent threat to either its neighbors or to the United States," Thielmann said.

http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=ZMGLK5DTNG4KCCRBAELCFFA?type=topNews&storyID=3064275
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ouabache Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jul-10-03 02:10 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. Is there any follow up by other media of this interview ?
since it played on Good Morning America this a.m. ?

:kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 04:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC