Bush Claims To Have Been Mislead On Iraq War So If The

[Jon8503]

Repukes say Rather should resign because he was mislead on some documents, should'nt Bush resign for being mislead about a war that has killed thousands.

Also, the documents Dan Rather was supposedly mislead about only could not be proven to be authentic. They were according to the sources familiar with them however true.

The documents Bush was mislead about were not true and lives were lost.

[Parche]

1. documents

Note the words could not prove they were authentic,
but they can not prove they are not.

[CrispyQ]

2. Exactly! I heard the one guy on Wolf say that Rather should resign . . .

& I thought exactly the same thing: shouldn't Dim son resign for being mislead about the war? Why don't the media shills ever pounce on comments like this? Whores.

[Sub Atomic]

3. Link?

Do you have a link to that quote?

[Jon8503]

4. What quote

[Sub Atomic]

5. You stated

that Bush claims he was misled on the Iraq intel.

Do you have a link for that?

Thanks

[Jon8503]

6. Maybe I should have said that Bush or his staff always claimed

they were mislead about the war. If you remember they claimed to have gone to war based on the documents and information they got from our Intelliegence that turned out not to be true.

[Sub Atomic]

7. Damn.

I thought there was some new Bushism out there that I could use to make the heads of a couple of resident freepers on another board explode.

[Jon8503]

8. Sorry Dweeb, but I can't remember for sure if Bush ever

admitted to himself being mislead. He never admits to a mistake, has never admitted that the war was wrong. But I do know that out there is either his press secretary or someone on his staff basically saying that they were mislead about the uranium, WMDs, from the intelligence they were getting.

[Sub Atomic]

9. No worries.

I only wish that it was uttered by Boy Blunder himself.

:cheers:

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

10. I think it was the "slam dunk" comment by Tenet

by which the Bush Administration has sought to be relieved of responsibility for going into Iraq, based on the CIA respresentations regarding the WMD.

[ohio_dem_52186]

12. They clearly weren't misled:

Maybe the President was naively misled by the CIA (ha,ha...)

But still, the State Dept. from 2000 to 2003 has issued a report saying in plain English: "Iran remained the most active state sponsor of terrorism in 2003." They also elaborate on the ties of Iran to al Qaeda.

The same report does not mention any link of Iraq to al Qaeda until 2002, citing Powell's speech to the UN as "proof".

The CIA reports on countries with WMD, Iran is on the top of the list for 2000 to 2003.

Even if the Iraq intel was bogus, there was plenty of other intel saying Iran was the bigger player in terrorism. They can't claim they were misled when there all the other existing evidence that Iran was a bigger threat.

The links to the documents are on my website:
http://getthefacts.atspace.com/

[skip fox]

11. Not too nice a point (where nice means "fine") but one that

packs a punch!

:toast: