Where are Democrats and the media - now that Bush may have been right?

WASHINGTON - Lost in the cheering over the John Edwards pick and the
cacophony following President Bush's refusal to speak at the NAACP
convention this past week were reports that Bush might have been right
after all when he said that Iraq had sought uranium for nuclear
weapons.
CHOP<

Where are Democrats and the media - now that Bush may have been right?

WASHINGTON - Lost in the cheering over the John Edwards pick and the
cacophony following President Bush's refusal to speak at the NAACP
convention this past week were reports that Bush might have been right
after all when he said that Iraq had sought uranium for nuclear
weapons.
Bush was forced to back off the assertion, made in his 2003 State of
the Union speech, after Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador to the West
African nation of Gabon, concluded that it was highly doubtful that
any such Iraqi effort to buy uranium ever took place.

In a July 6, 2003, op-ed piece in the New York Times, Wilson suggested
the reports were based, in part, on "probably forged" documents. And
he charged that the Bush administration "twisted (the intelligence) to
exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Wilson's charges, embraced by Democrats and publicized far and wide by
a news media all too willing to believe the worst about Bush, were
given great credence because Wilson was the man chosen by the CIA to
investigate the suspected Iraqi effort.

By his concluding that the Iraqi uranium-buying attempt was pure
fiction, it gave critics of the war in Iraq one more chance to call
Bush a liar and say he took the United States into battle under false
pretenses.

Thus, Wilson became a great hero. And the laurel-leaf crown on his
head became thicker and shinier when allegations arose that someone in
the White House, in apparent retaliation against Wilson's
whistle-blowing, leaked to newspaper columnist Robert Novak the fact
that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was an undercover CIA agent.

That further inflamed the Bush critics, touching off cries for a full
criminal investigation into the leak. That probe is under way.

Time magazine put the saintly Wilson on its cover last October. Wilson
subsequently wrote a book about the whole nasty business, depicting
himself and his wife as martyrs in the cause of truth. That set off a
whole new round of media swooning. For two weeks in May, Wilson was
everywhere.

But now, two reports have surfaced that suggest Wilson might have been
wrong, and Bush might have been right in saying Iraq tried to buy
uranium in the African nation of Niger.

The first came in the widely ballyhooed Senate Intelligence Committee
report, which earlier this month concluded that much of the
intelligence Bush relied on to make his case for war against Iraq was
faulty.

It also found that Wilson's investigative trip to Niger in 2002
actually "lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the
uranium deal."

Second, the Senate report said that Wilson "was specifically
recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to
what he has said publicly."

Wilson, in several media interviews, denied that his wife had anything
to do with suggesting that he undertake the mission.

ABC News' Ted Koppel, on the Sept. 30, 2003, edition of "Nightline"
asked Wilson, "Did your wife propose to her CIA colleagues that they
call her husband, you?" Wilson replied, "No."

Further knocking down Wilson's case was this past week's release of a
British board of inquiry report into intelligence leading up to the
Iraq war. "The British government had intelligence from several
different sources" that Iraqi officials tried to buy uranium from
Niger in 1999. "The intelligence was credible," the report said.

But now that the Wilson case has been debunked, it is interesting to
note that the news media, so eager to build him up, and tear Bush
down, now seem reluctant to tell the rest of the story, or at least
the next chapter. Wilson, who had been a fixture on television, now
seems to have disappeared. Democrats are silent.

Why were the media so willing to believe Wilson when he was an obvious
Democratic partisan? He not only worked for the National Security
Council in the Clinton White House, he also is a foreign policy
adviser to the Democratic presidential campaign of John Kerry. Why,
indeed?

Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department®
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

GO GO LANCE!

spammers can send mail to

Where are Democrats and the media - now that Bush may have been right?

WASHINGTON - Lost in the cheering over the John Edwards pick and the
cacophony following President Bush's refusal to speak at the NAACP
convention this past week were reports that Bush might have been right
after all when he said that Iraq had sought uranium for nuclear
weapons.
Bush was forced to back off the assertion, made in his 2003 State of
the Union speech, after Joseph Wilson, a former ambassador to the West
African nation of Gabon, concluded that it was highly doubtful that
any such Iraqi effort to buy uranium ever took place.

In a July 6, 2003, op-ed piece in the New York Times, Wilson suggested
the reports were based, in part, on "probably forged" documents. And
he charged that the Bush administration "twisted (the intelligence) to
exaggerate the Iraqi threat."

Wilson's charges, embraced by Democrats and publicized far and wide by
a news media all too willing to believe the worst about Bush, were
given great credence because Wilson was the man chosen by the CIA to
investigate the suspected Iraqi effort.

By his concluding that the Iraqi uranium-buying attempt was pure
fiction, it gave critics of the war in Iraq one more chance to call
Bush a liar and say he took the United States into battle under false
pretenses.

Thus, Wilson became a great hero. And the laurel-leaf crown on his
head became thicker and shinier when allegations arose that someone in
the White House, in apparent retaliation against Wilson's
whistle-blowing, leaked to newspaper columnist Robert Novak the fact
that Wilson's wife, Valerie Plame, was an undercover CIA agent.

That further inflamed the Bush critics, touching off cries for a full
criminal investigation into the leak. That probe is under way.

Time magazine put the saintly Wilson on its cover last October. Wilson
subsequently wrote a book about the whole nasty business, depicting
himself and his wife as martyrs in the cause of truth. That set off a
whole new round of media swooning. For two weeks in May, Wilson was
everywhere.

But now, two reports have surfaced that suggest Wilson might have been
wrong, and Bush might have been right in saying Iraq tried to buy
uranium in the African nation of Niger.

The first came in the widely ballyhooed Senate Intelligence Committee
report, which earlier this month concluded that much of the
intelligence Bush relied on to make his case for war against Iraq was
faulty.

It also found that Wilson's investigative trip to Niger in 2002
actually "lent more credibility to the original CIA reports on the
uranium deal."

Second, the Senate report said that Wilson "was specifically
recommended for the mission by his wife, a CIA employee, contrary to
what he has said publicly."

Wilson, in several media interviews, denied that his wife had anything
to do with suggesting that he undertake the mission.

ABC News' Ted Koppel, on the Sept. 30, 2003, edition of "Nightline"
asked Wilson, "Did your wife propose to her CIA colleagues that they
call her husband, you?" Wilson replied, "No."

Further knocking down Wilson's case was this past week's release of a
British board of inquiry report into intelligence leading up to the
Iraq war. "The British government had intelligence from several
different sources" that Iraqi officials tried to buy uranium from
Niger in 1999. "The intelligence was credible," the report said.

But now that the Wilson case has been debunked, it is interesting to
note that the news media, so eager to build him up, and tear Bush
down, now seem reluctant to tell the rest of the story, or at least
the next chapter. Wilson, who had been a fixture on television, now
seems to have disappeared. Democrats are silent.

Why were the media so willing to believe Wilson when he was an obvious
Democratic partisan? He not only worked for the National Security
Council in the Clinton White House, he also is a foreign policy
adviser to the Democratic presidential campaign of John Kerry. Why,
indeed?
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/columnist/benedetto/2004-07-18-benedetto_x.htm


Ken (NY)
Chairman,
Department Of Redundancy Department®
___________________________________
email:
http://www.geocities.com/bluesguy68/email.htm

GO GO LANCE!

spammers can send mail to

Where are Democrats and the media - now that Bush may have been right?

WASHINGTON - Lost in the cheering over the John Edwards pick and the
cacophony following President Bush's refusal to speak at the NAACP
convention this past week were reports that Bush might have been right
after all when he said that Iraq had sought uranium for nuclear
weapons.

From:

View this article only
Newsgroups: alt.personals.fetish, alt.sex.fetish.watersportsDate: 1997/03/30
swm/34 houston tx. looking for females to use me as an oral slave.
no physical penetration,just use my tongue and mouth for your
satisfaction. will perform toilet service for both golden and brown
showers. will worship feet and *****. trampling and smothering ok
also. cyber or in person. ladies tell me your fantasy,on watersports.
-------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====-----------------------

Where are Democrats and the media - now that Bush may have been right?