Joseph Wilson (the other one) and Iraq

[bartl]

If one would bother to read Joseph Wilson's original article which started off the whole Valerie Plame debacle, you will see that what he does is prove that what Bush said in his State of the Union speech to be true, then take a claim that Bush did not make, and prove the claim that wasn't made to be false.

Essentially, Bush said that Iraq SOUGHT to get yellow cake uranium, and Wilson's article says, effectively, "Sure, they sought to get it, but they didn't succeed." Bush never said Iraq succeeded, and if he thought they had, he would certainly have said it.

Here's a link to the article. I suspect that I will get a host of people using double talk to tell me I'm wrong, but I figure most of the people here don't write messages. Don't go by what they say, or even what I say. Read the article, and see what Joseph Wilson actually said.

State of the Union Address (http://georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html)(what Bush actually said)
Joseph Wilson's Article (http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/06/opinion/06WILS.html?pagewanted=1&ei=5007&en=6c6aeb1ce960dec0&ex=1372824000&partner=USERLAND)

[Lord Destiny]

What's in Wilson's article is irrelevant.

The Republican smear machine BETRAYED the very people who defend our freedom when it exposed one of our spies, Valerie Plame. This was an act of TREASON, pure and simple.

If a Democrat had done that, every Repug in the universe would have had a stroke. But since it was a Repug, they cheer. Total frickin lunatics, the whole lot of'em.

[dr. 3]

Here's a link to the article. I suspect that I will get a host of people using double talk to tell me I'm wrong, but I figure most of the people here don't write messages. Don't go by what they say, or even what I say. Read the article, and see what Joseph Wilson actually said.

I think your misreading Wilson's piece.

Please quote the line from the article where you think he said Iraq "tried but didn't get it." Because I can't seem to find a place that says that.

In fact he says:

Then, in January, President Bush, citing the British dossier, repeated the charges about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium from Africa.

The next day, I reminded a friend at the State Department of my trip and suggested that if the president had been referring to Niger, then his conclusion was not borne out by the facts as I understood them. He replied that perhaps the president was speaking about one of the other three African countries that produce uranium: Gabon, South Africa or Namibia. At the time, I accepted the explanation.

Emphasis mine. I think the fact that he spends a lot of time talking about the fact that Hussein didn't buy the uranium perhaps led you to the conclusion that he was admitting to an attempt, but no where in the article does he say that an attempt was made that I can find, and he specifically says that the presidents claim was false.

[badMike]

If one would bother to read Joseph Wilson's original article which started off the whole Valerie Plame debacleNot sure why I decided to step into this particular time warp today, but I believe the person who needs to read and comprehend Joseph Wilson's article is you. Nowhere in that article does Wilson write that Bush said that Saddam actually bought uranium. Actually, Wilson proves YOUR point when he writes:

Then, in January, President Bush, citing the British dossier, repeated the charges about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium from Africa.

(emphasis mine)

So, how come when Wilson uses the word "efforts," you continue six years later to make false claims against him? AND then to make scurrilous slurs against people you think speak double-speak and lack basic reading comprehension skills. I read the article, I proved what it said says nothing that YOU say it says. So, when's my apology coming?

And as Lord Destiny says, who even cares? This whole issue was about TREASON, which clearly occurred.

[Village Idiot]

No double talk here.

You're wrong.

[Steven Grant]

No double talk here.

You're wrong.

Just curious... of all the parties who've taken part in this discussion so far, who are you saying is wrong? Or do you mean all are wrong?

For clarification purposes only.

- Grant

[Village Idiot]

Just curious... of all the parties who've taken part in this discussion so far, who are you saying is wrong? Or do you mean all are wrong?

For clarification purposes only.

- Grant

My error was not using the 'Quote' reply box.

The original poster.

[king mob]

There's also no mention that the original British dossier (the September Dossier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier)) was built upon lies (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/)in order to justify the UK/US efforts to justify war.

So in short: Bart's talking bollocks again.

[Steven Grant]

There's also no mention that the original British dossier (the September Dossier (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier)) was built upon lies (http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/14/sprj.irq.documents/)in order to justify the UK/US efforts to justify war.

The buildup to the Iraq War is a superb example of intelligence networks - in this case, mainly the Italian, Israeli, German, British & American - circulating manufactured "intelligence" to each other, so that each country could use "intellingence provided by" another country's intelligence agency as "verification" of their own claims, coming to its most interesting head when the White House opted to dismiss data from the CIA and other American agencies that did not support cause for war in favor of "information" from British intelligence, which did. It was a magnificent propaganda shell game.

- Grant

[Lord Destiny]

Just curious... of all the parties who've taken part in this discussion so far, who are you saying is wrong? Or do you mean all are wrong?

For clarification purposes only.

- Grant

Bartl is wrong.

The "Valerie Plame fiasco" did not begin with Wilson's article. It began with the subsequent treasonous OUTING of Plame to the press by the Republican administration as a means of petty revenge because the Republicans didn't like what Joe Wilson said.