Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 7 Post(s)
Tell us all, Botnst, why he did not add "....but our own intelligence services have reported that this claim is based on forged documents." Why did he not add that? It is in fact, the phrase that Wilson added to it, in his New York Times piece. Was it correct and ethical to assert the British report was true? That was what Bush was doing, was it not? Or was he asserting it was false? What exactly are you asserting, that Bush merely reported this fact in the most important, constitutionally required speech he makes? Wasn't the purpose of his assertion to rouse the country to war? Again, why did he leave out the part that our own CIA, when it read the first draft of the SOTU, stated that they believed these reports were falsehoods based on a forgery? In the original version, Bush stated flatly it was true. He changed it to the "British Intelligence" canard when the CIA refused to vette the speech. Why did he do that?
And who forged the documents in the first place?
Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.
-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address