The latest on pre-war intelligence.

[Annie]

I'm arguing with you for the simple reason that you and your one-sided opinion are just more left-wing blowing smoke. It's gotten old after 5+ years.

It's perfectly normal for party members to start positioning themselves for the next election when a President is on his second term. Bush can't be reelected. Giving him 100% support is no longer necessary. Time to jockey for position.

Twisting that into anything else is just left-wing, wishful thinking.

It's called 'google gaming':

http://weblogs.macromedia.com/jd/archives/2004/02/google_gaming_l.cfm

 

[Mariner]

Huh? I was just trying to provide a reference for the widely reported news of Hadley's comments, since others didn't seem to believe me that he'd actually said it.

Once more, I completely disagree on the WMD issue. It's become increasingly clear that the President had access to plenty of information suggesting WMD's weren't there. He chose to ignore it, and now he chooses not to cooperate with the Republican-led investigation into how he used that intelligence.

Read my above posts for a list of the various forms of so-called "evidence" that have since been proven to be KNOWN wrong at the time Bush and his team said WMD's were there. We're not liberals blowing smoke. We're people learning about things like aluminum tubes and uranium from Niger, people like Chalabi and Curveball. Instead of putting me and other skeptics down, why not talk about specifics? Show me a piece of WMD evidence that has since been proven right?

I'll say it again--I predict that when we finally get to see the security memos that Bush had access to, and put them on a time line with the comments he and his staff made, it'll be crystal-clear that we were duped into war--a war whose current goals (to spread Democracy throughout the middle east) are too gauzy liberal for even a liberal like me.

Mariner.

 

[dmp]

Huge Sense of entitlement going on here.