DNC Video: Read His Lips: President Bush Deceives the American People

[Oilwellian]

I received this at 11:30AM, before Tenet took the blame. Note how it can still be used despite the CIA taking the fall. Also, please take the time and sign their petition. :D
http://www.democrats.org/truth/index.html?s=demnews

Oh my...check out their supporting evidence link.

[tonyblurr]

1. War Under False Pretenses? YOU BETCHA!

War Under False Pretenses?


Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, who resigned from the cabinet over the Iraq war, told the House of Commons on June 17, "We used intelligence as the basis on which to justify a policy on which we had already settled."
Evidence is mounting that something of that sort happened in the Bush White House. A retired diplomat, Joseph Wilson IV, has come forward to say that the CIA sent him to Niger in February 2002 to investigate a reported uranium deal with Iraq, but ignored his finding that the story was a hoax.
In his State of the Union address 11 months later, the president was still talking of an African uranium deal and ignoring evidence to the contrary. In the face of this embarrassing revelation, the White House has now acknowledged that including the uranium story in the State of the Union address was a mistake. It would be fascinating to know how such a mistake came about.
On television, Senate Armed Services Committee chairman John Warner and ranking Democrat Carl Levin clashed over whether the Wilson revelation justified an investigation into possible intelligence manipulation to make the case for invading Iraq.
Recently released documents indicate that the invasion of Iraq was long in the planning. A 1992 Defense Policy Guidance paper drafted by Paul Wolfowitz, undersecretary of defense for policy under President Bush the elder, called for a preemptive strike against Iraq. The stated reason - to avert the spread of destructive weapons and to ensure "access to vital raw materials, primarily Persian Gulf oil." But nothing about an imminent threat from an Iraq defeated and disarmed in the Gulf War only a year earlier.
Sept. 11 provided momentum for an attack on Iraq, although no connection between the terrorist acts and the Saddam Hussein government has ever been convincingly established. According to Bob Woodward's book, "Bush At War," at a meeting of the war cabinet four days after Sept. 11, Mr. Wolfowitz pushed for an assault on Iraq rather than Afghanistan because it would be easier.
But not as easy as Wolfowitz hoped. And now, the continuing and escalating guerrilla war against U.S. troops has raised the question of whether the administration took America into the war under false pretenses, with selective use of ambiguous intelligence.
The question of whether the president got congressional approval for a war against Iraq by manipulating intelligence comes at a delicate time. The White House may soon be asking to send troops to Liberia, and that is bound to reopen for Congress the whole issue of the administration's credibility.


http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wxxi/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=520173

[revcarol]

2. It's good.

Sign the petition. This must not stand.

[Oilwellian]

3. I'm posting the supporting evidence page

I find this astonishing...doesn't anyone else?

Evidence that Bush Misled the Nation
In February 2002, Ambassador Joseph Wilson learned that the Niger connection was false, and so informed the CIA and state department. "In early March, I arrived in Washington and promptly provided a detailed briefing to the C.I.A. I later shared my conclusions with the State Department African Affairs Bureau," Wilson wrote of his investigation into the purported Nigerian evidence. (Op Ed, New York Times, 7/6/03)

In March 2002, the CIA sent a cable to the White House to report the Niger connection was false. The cable, classified "secret," was sent "to the White House Situation Room in March 2002 reporting on a visit to the African country of Niger by a retired diplomat on a special mission for the CIA... His account said Iraq had sought closer economic ties with Niger but had not discussed a uranium sale." (USA Today, 6/13/03)

In October, 2002 the CIA considered the Niger information "so suspect the CIA also told the White House to drop a reference from a Bush speech on October 7th." (NBC News, 6/26/03)

The CIA asked the State Department to exclude Niger from its briefings. A month before Bush's State Of The Union Address, the CIA told the State Department to drop a reference to the uranium allegations from a white paper on alleged Iraqi weapons programs. In a later presentation on the white paper, John Negroponte, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, cut the Niger reference." {USA Today, 6/13/03}

When Bush gave his State of the Union address, the State Department had independently concluded the documents were false. The State Department's Intelligence Wing, "the Bureau of Intelligence and Research, independently came to the exact same conclusion" as the CIA, that the Niger documents were false, Greg Thielmann, an intelligence official there, said "When I saw it really blew me away...Not that stupid piece of garbage. My thought was, how did that get into the speech?" (Kristof Op-Ed, New York Times, 6/13/03; Newsweek, 6/9/03, emphasis added)

Early drafts of Bush's State Of The Union used even stronger language linking Niger To Iraq. "Earlier versions of the president's speech, this official says, did not cite British sources for the uranium claim. 'They were more definitive,' the official says, 'and we objected.' At that point, the official says, White House officials suggested, quote, 'Why don't we say the British say this?'" (NPR, 6/19/03}
http://www.democrats.org/truth/support.html