Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (31)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • Libby's conviction was a misscarriage of justice. He should have been given ten years for treason and Cheney should have been made to resign. When you are in power you can do whatever you wish but if it is petty and ilegal you have to cover your tracks. If you are caught you are through. At least in a democracy.

    Only just now have we become a democracy again.

  • Rewriting history without facts doesn't make it accurate, something right-wingnut posters should keep in mind.

  • It's Olbermann who is re-writing history. Wilson wrote a editorial that appeared in the N.Y. Times where he said Iraq had not tried to by uranium. However, Wilson was also testified before the US Senate Intelligence Committee. Under oath he said Niger officials told him Saddam had tried to by uranium. Google it.

    Everything about Scooter Libby, Richard Armitage etc. that I wrote is also 100% accurate. watch?v=OwJCUZHZjV8 (wolf blitzer interview with Richard Armitage)

  • Don't need to. I've followed this story quite closely, and I don't rely on third party source interpretations of facts to fit an agenda. Did you even bother to read Wilson's editorial? I suggest YOU Google it. Then actually read it.

    Your argument is so completely twisted with misleading half-truths and inaccuracies that there is not enough space on a Youtube board to even begin to refute it. And I'm certainly not going to waste my time when you refuse to stay within the facts.

  • Wilson's editorial was bogus. If you want the truth look at his testimony before before the senate intelligence committee. You shouldn't have to be told which is most likely to be the accurate account. I have read the committees report, have you?

    There is nothing twisted, inaccurate or half true. Actually that is exactly how I would characterize Olbermann's report which definitely fits an agenda. I was very factual and even included my sources which are non-partisan and credible.

  • Yes I have, which is why I recognize your pontifications for what they are.  But let me address your jab. YOUR first point stated: "Wilson wrote a editorial that appeared in the N.Y. Times where he said Iraq had not tried to by [sic] uranium." This is factually incorrect - if you've really read it, then it's a deliberate lie. So I called you on it.

    Again, I've neither room nor desire to debunk your lies and/or obfuscations. Start with the truth Sunny Jim, and I'd be happy to debate you.

  • Comment removed

  • For you I just re-read Wilson's editorial. Your right he doesn't state that Iraq did not attempt to buy uranium from Niger. He wrote that Bush said Iraq had bought uranium which is not true. Bush said Iraq had sought to purchase uranium which is true and was confirmed by Wilson during his trip to Niger.

    Bush: "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

  • Please don't do a damn thing for me, do it for yourself, and for truth. You now claim, "He [Wilson] wrote that Bush said Iraq had bought uranium which is not true."

    In fact the editorial says, "Then, in January, President Bush, citing the British dossier, repeated the charges about Iraqi EFFORTS [emphasis mine] to buy uranium from Africa...[I] suggested that if the president had been referring to Niger, then his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them. "

  • There's a world of difference between "had bought" and "efforts to buy," with major political implications. This is the consistent problem with virtually all your claims, small discrepancies that have huge ramifications.

    If insisting that facts be adhered to is a "high horse," I'll stay with my stand. I'll allow that your intent isn't to lie, though I'm at a loss to understand the continued misquoting. But since that demonstrably is still a problem, there is little point to continued debate.

  • I admit I let my exasperation run away with me so this time I will try to be concise and accurate as possible. Please reply with specifics as to what you believe I have wrong:

    1. President Bush repeated a British Intelligence report that Iraq had attempted to buy uranium from a country in Africa.

    2. Wilson traveled to Niger, in Africa, and learned that Iraq had sent a delegation there to attempt to buy uranium.

    3. Wilson wrote editorial stating Niger had not sold uranium to Iraq.

  • This is a HUGE issue - how can it be condensed? Only one portion in brief, and it will take multiple posts.

    Supposedly sparked by the British Intell report (which had problems of its own), Cheney focused on Niger, per CIA memo dated 2/14/2002. Wilson was sent to Niger in 2/02, and the CIA's debriefing memo of 3/8/2002 pretty much corresponds to Wilson's op ed claims. No uranium from Niger. No other African countries investigated.

  • Skel, I just read through your exchange with Seasoned from 6 months ago, I agree with your facts. What it brought to mind was on rachel maddows site there is a video with bill maher's picture, Aug 18. It's interesting because it shows how fox viewers and republicans think they know the facts but really don't. That doesn't prevent them from insisting that they have the facts and you're wrong. So we both know the truth only theirs really isn't true. That's what your debate brought to mind.

  • On 1/28/03 in his State of the Union speech, Bush said the infamous 16 Words - "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," even though US intelligence from Wilson had discredited that. Wilson's concern drove him to write the editorial after the war started.

  • Now we are at the root. Wilson did not discredit that. Nigerian officials told him that Iraq had sent a delegation to discuss the purchase of uranium. Niger said no but it confirms that Iraq was seeking to purchase uranium.

  • Regarding the 16 Words, on 7/9/2003 at a press conference Ari Fleischer officially rescinded them when he said, "But we still do not know whether or not Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa...So what we have said is it should not have risen to the level of a presidential speech."

    A war was started on the implied threat that because Hussein WANTED uranium, he could get it. The only intell the US pursued showed this hadn't and wouldn't happen.

  • And that, so far as I have been able to ascertain, is the fullness of the truth of the situation. This doesn't even address the whole Libby thing, but I am satisfied that the facts warranted his conviction (not for who told who what, but mostly for perjuring himself in sworn testimony).

    I appreciate your willingness to communicate reasonably, and apologize for my own exasperation. And now let us, reasonably, agree to disagree. Besides, frankly, I'm damn tired of typing!

  • Yes, lets agree to disagree. I bet heathr456 is anxious for us to go.

  • Maybe you should come down off of your high horse and tell me what you think the truth is. Apparently we each believe a different version of the story. Instead of calling me a liar, tell me what you think really happened.

    I'm confident in what I believe, I never lie and I always concede when I am mistaken.

  • 1. Wilson didn't debunk British Intelligence report that Saddam tried to buy yellow cake uranium from Niger. In fact Niger officials told Wilson that Iraq had sent a delegation to negotiate the purchase of Yellow cake. 2. Richard Armitage in the state department revealed Plames name to the press, not the V.P.'s office. The prosecutor new that before the trial started. He new it when he convicted Libby for lying to cover up a crime he already new hadn't been committed. It was all a total farce.

  • What's the weather like on your planet? That cubic shape must play havoc with the weather patterns. And do they all still wear their underwear over their blue jumpsuits there?

  • What are you talking about?

  • You never read Superman as a kid? Or maybe you just never saw the issues of an alternative universe with the earth shaped like a cube.

  • Nope, I didn't read Superman. My comment pertained to current events in the U.S. political scene relevant to the video. You must be on the wrong board.

  • The people who read Superman know what I'm talking about. They're giving me a thumbs-up and you a thumbs-down. And they're crapping themselves laughing at you.

    Enjoy your alternate dimension...

  • I'm sorry I've lost the lonely 38 year old nerd who lives in his parents basement vote.

  • No wonder you're sorry. That's the entire Republican demographic. You're fucked, dude.

  • If Rove says it, it must be true.

  • Dick Cheyney should go fuck himself.

  • Fuck Dick Cheney.

Loading...
0 / 00Unsaved Playlist Return to active list
    1. Your queue is empty. Add videos to your queue using this button:
      or sign in to load a different list.
    Loading...Loading...Saving...
    • Clear all videos from this list
    • Learn more