Fox News to air controversial 9/11 movie footage tonight

George Tenet himself admitted responsibility that his agency failed to double check their facts and gave the green light to allow the Yellow cake reference in the speech in 2003. Seriously, if he were going to knowingly lie, why then would he remove it from the first speech only to include it in the state of the union? He would have kept it in both speeches.


Any sitting president does not do the intelligence gathering themselves. They rely on the agencies who are charged with such jobs. If they tell him that so and so is fact, he has to take their word. When was the last time any president went undercover to find such evidence? None. That is what the CIA is for.

The inspections were a farce as Saddam was not allowing them unfettered access from day one. Even Clinton himself said that the inspections were a joke so long as Iraqi's were the ones choosing what locations to look at. It is tantamount to allowing a suspect to tell police what rooms they can search and what rooms they can't. There was no lie there.

"October 22. 2006 on ABC's This Week: "We've never been stay the course George." So Bush is an outright liar."

You are bringing strawman arguments to the table again. You corrected another poster when he brought up times Clinton lied that cost lives by telling him you were referring to Lewinsky. Now I must correct you in that I never said Bush never lied about anything. I said he never lied to congress or the people in the events that led to the war. Back tracking on his Stay the course" comment may be a lie, but it was not a lie that killed.


"Finally, I thank you for grouping me with Janine Garafalo and Al Franken. She turned out to be right after all when she warned that invading Iraq would be a huge mistake. She was right! A thousand times right! And Franken showed the country how Bush, Limbaugh, and Fox News constantly lie and mislead. His books are absolutely brimming with facts."

LOL thanks for the Chuckle. Frankens books are filled with his own facts, custom twisted to fit his views. I did notice how those two and most of Hollywood was dead silent when Clinton, Kerry, Biden and the rest of the "bring em home" crowd were trying to sell a war with Iraq by stating that we neede regime change because Saddam was producing WMD's and needed to be stopped. None of them wrote books or protested in Washington when the Clinton administration bombed Iraq several times during his tenure or that he acted against the U.N. security council when he joined NATO in bombing Milosovich into the stone age.

Unlike you I don't blindly support one side. I voted for Clinton in 92 and Chuck Schumer for Senator as well as Eliott Spitzer for Governor. I don't blindly follow party lines and vote for the person based on their record and or the record of their opponent. This is how I am able to see how similar Clinton and Bush are when it comes to selling a war.

LC you seem to prefer the view that Bush is a robot or a fool who cannot think for himself over the view that he lied. His whitehouse was informed that the yellowcake story was fraudulant. They removed a reference to it in an October 2002 speech. The story reappears in the State of the Union a few months later. By your view, Bush has no responsibility for what comes out of his mouth. His willful ignorance gives him a free pass in your eyes. An aid simply hands him a speech and he reads it. If you find that comforting then cling to it. But even your interpretation does not change the fact that Bush is a liar. At his press conference on 7/14/2003 he said "We gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in." The fact is the congressional vote of 2002 to allow the threat of force was precisely in order to give the president leverage at the UN to get a resolution allowing inspections. The inspections took place from December until Bush launched the war. The inspectors evacuated to escape Bush's timetable for war. Here is another lie: 8/30/06 "We will stay the course." 8/4/05 "We will stay the course. We will complete the job in Iraq." 12/15/03: "We're just going to stay the course." October 22. 2006 on ABC's This Week: "We've never been stay the course George." So Bush is an outright liar. These things mean nothing to you apparently because you don't care that people are dying for a war based on lies and deception. Meanwhile the Dear Leader has not caught Bin Laden. No amount right wing excuses can change that. Finally, I thank you for grouping me with Janine Garafalo and Al Franken. She turned out to be right after all when she warned that invading Iraq would be a huge mistake. She was right! A thousand times right! And Franken showed the country how Bush, Limbaugh, and Fox News constantly lie and mislead. His books are absolutely brimming with facts. He does not distort quotations like you do-- claiming Clinton said Sadaam was building nuclear weapons! As for re-writing history, Bush will go down as one of the worst presidents of all time. He has allowed the perpetrator of 9/11 to escape. He has deepened America's oil dependence at a time when we desperately needed to cut the rug out from under the Islamic states that foment terrorism and spread Wahabism. He has involved us in a war on false premises, at a time when we desperately needed to rally the world to our cause. History needs no re-writing from me to show that.

As I assumed, you could not prove that Bush lies about anything. He presented the public and the U.N. information that CIA analysts told him were Saddam was actively building Enrichment facilities. The Iraq prewar intelligence report proves this and it cannot be refuted. Powell brought these photos of aluminum tubes to the U.N. Nowhere was this Bush spin, but rather him giving them what analysts reported. Much of the intelligence and reasoning Bush used was also intelligence gathered for years, including what Clinton was justifying during his 1998 attacks.

If Clinton didn't think Saddam was building or even actively pursuing nuclear weapons then why in the hell did he put it in his speech? Bush DID NOT say he had concrete proof that Saddam had nuclear weapons so go ahead and hold your ears and say LA LA LA and ignore the evidence before you. Keep chanting your strawman argument of Monica Lewinsky and ignore that Clinton said that Saddam would use nukes on his neighbors to justify his bombing them where thousands died. (heavens to Betsy, that could be construed as BILL LIED AND MANY DIED).

I grow weary of your liberal spin that Al Franken and Janine Garafolo would be proud of Dan. It appears that you have been indoctrinated into their twist the facts and lets rewrite history form of arguing, so trying to convince you otherwise is futile at best. You enjoy talking about hacks like Hannity and O'Reilly as twisting facts, which is true, but then you yourself do the same thing. Pitiful. Your disdain for the political right has turned your into their foam mouthed mirror image.

LC your quotation of Clinton clearly states "Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons." No where does Clinton say Sadaam was building nuclear weapons, as you falsely claim. This is typical of Republican spin-- use just enough of the truth to make it sound plausible and hope that people aren't paying close attention. Clinton never called for a WAR against Iraq. His policy was to maintain the sanctions, provide a safe haven for the Kurds, and wait. Inspections after the war revealed that this policy was remarkably successful in preventing Sadaam from getting WMD.
You also say "Please prove that Bush lied. Perhaps you should scan over the Iraq pre war intelligence report and you will see that the blame laid firmly on various intelligence agencies." Again this is Bush administration spin--faithfully parrotted by the likes of Bill O'Reilly. Somehow the responsibility president always seeks to shift the blame to others, in this case, the intelligence agencies. Never mind that Cheney and his men cherry picked the most incriminating intelligence, including the stories told by the alcoholic Iraqi defector labeled "Curveball" by the CIA because of his unreliability. He was the source of the fable about mobile biological vans. Remember that? There is also the case of the aluminum tubes. Bush's own experts at the Department of Energy told him that they were the wrong size to be used in uranium enrichment. Instead they were components of rocket launchers. This proved to be the case. But In writing up the intelligence assessments presented to Congress, the Bush administration relegated all such doubts and counter-arguments about Iraq's WMDs to the footnotes. That is called cooking the intelligence. The most grievous instance of this involves the yellow cake uranium that Sadaam was supposedly buying from Africa. This was based on a set of forged documents. How do we know they were forged? Because they refer to a man who was no longer Niger's energy minister at the time. A crude error easily picked up by CIA analysts. That is why the CIA insisted that a reference to yellowcake be removed from a presidential speech in October 2002. The White House complied. But then, mysteriously, the claim reappeared in the State of the Union Bush delivered January 28, 2003. At that time, Bush was pulling out all the stops to justify calling back the inspectors from Iraq so he could launch the war. So even though the authorization to use the threat of force was in October 2002 (timed to precede the elections, of course) Bush still had to get the country's assent to actually start the war. (To show you what a liar he is, he later claimed (7/14/2003) that Sadaam wouldn't allow inspectors into Iraq! I guess it's hard for him to keep track of his lies.) No amount of parsing of Bush's language can cover up the fact that he deceived the American people, in much the same way Clinton tried to use language to deceive the American people in the Lewinsky affair. But that was about a blow job, and this is about WAR. Once again proving the maxim "Bill lied and no one died."

Dan you can certainly have your own opinions, but you cannot have your own facts. Please prove that Bush lied. Perhaps you should scan over the Iraq pre war intelligence report and you will see that the blame laid firmly on various intelligence agencies. The vote to authorize war powers also happened well before the Iraq/Africa uranium connection and was voted on based on Iraqs compliance with U.N. inspections with a deadline of March 17th 2004.

Now in hindsight, the information was wrong. Please feel free to open up a dictionary to see the difference between lying and being wrong.

Also, since you seem to hold Clinton to such a high standard, I will direct you to an article about a speech he made during a bombing campaign against Iraq in late 1998.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons,"


"Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors."

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said."

Now of course it can be debated on whether or not the situation in Iraq would improve if a different approach was used in maintaining security after Saddam was removed, but you are only deluding yourself in thinking that when it comes to Iraq that Clinton and Bush were any different, but then again I assume you didn't think Bill was "lying" when he said that Saddam was building nukes.

Right wing logic isn't like normal logic. In normal logic, the phrase "Bill lied and no one died" clearly implies that no one died as a result of his lie about having sex with Monica Lewinsky. It does not mean that no one died while Bill Clinton was president, or that all of his policies were correct and successful. In contrast, Bush and his fellow deceivers lied about Iraq buying uranium from Africa. This was part of their lie about Iraq having an active nuclear program, just one of the lies they used to get the nation to launch a war with Iraq, while letting Bin Laden and company escape from Tora Bora. No amount of right wing propaganda can hide these facts. And let's not forget that Bush read the memo "Bin Laden Determined to Strike Within the United States," and promptly went to his ranch in Texas to clear brush. No emergency meetings. No action of any sort. That's the way he is, as we saw with Katrina. So yes, Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died.

Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died.

Except all those people in various African and Slovakian nations. And those in the terrorist attacks by al Queda that he ignored. And the WTC/Pentagon attack in 2001, which was conceived of and planned while Clinton was "not killing anyone."

The list goes on and on. Clinton's hands are plenty bloody and anyone who doesn't admit that is simply lying, both to the world and to themselves.

Of course Hannity wouldn't have aired it; Keith Olbermann would have. People often confuse Hannity, Olbermann, and similar to being "Journalists" when they are in fact "Analysts". There is nothing wrong with an analyst having a bias as long as he is upfront about it. Neither of these two try to pass off their analysis as journalism.

The problem with bias is in reporting. Too often in the newspaper and the network news work completely appropriate to the opinion pages is passed off as journalism. This is the reason many one the right complain about the liberal media, while they embrace O'Reilly and Hannity. It isn't that they despise bias in political discussions (they love talk radio, don't they), rather, they are disgusted with Journalists crossing the line into analysis.

Oh, and to add fuel to the fire about a double standard with Disney, Mr. Hannity works for WABC radio in New York, owned, as you can imagine, by ABC and by extension, Disney.

"If it were the other way around and the Bush administration had pressured ABC to change its script"

The New Your Times and Dan Rather came to mind as I read that line...

News flash to the dupes of Faux News: Your gullibility has led us into a war on false premises. Hannity, O'Reilly and all the other liars at the Republican Party's Ministry of Propaganda have blood on their hands. And to complain about some campaign finance issue against Hillary Clinton, when the sitting president lied in the State of the Union speech (remember 'Uranium from Africa') reveals the shallowness of right wing values. Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died. Bill lied and no one died.