The Cellar - View Single Post

Undertoad · 07-11-2003, 12:25 PM

Now that I've done some reading on it, the Niger document nonsense is just that, a load of utter nonsense in one direction, and very intriguing in another.

Bush's SOTU statement:

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

To the very point of Bush's statement, what do the Brits think? Well, they still insist that Saddam Hussein sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, based on intelligence other than the infamous forged Niger document.

So did the President lie? Nope. Did Hussein seek uranium from Africa? I don't know. And neither does CNN.

Is it a reasonable suspicion? SURE. Hussein DID buy uranium from Niger in the 80s. Hussein DID have a nuclear weapons program that he WAS hoping to reconstitute after the heat was off.

Now follow this... this whole bit of news comes out of the White House! The Niger document was exposed months ago, before the war. Why did the White House bring the story back up - during a slow news period? They knew that the regular suspects would report it. They should have known the media would foam at the mouth, CBS would make it their lead and CNN would talk about it all day. Even Fox reported it ad infinitum. Is this all political maneuvering of some sort?

Bush wouldn't lead us all on to complain about his mistakes and then pull the rug out from under everyone, would he? It couldn't be, because Bush is dumb, right?

It's really hard to predict the future, and I want to take 'splice's open-ended question and run with it. Instead, I predict that ALL of the open-ended questions that exist right now will be miraculously solved by election season. WMDs will be found in abundance. The entire nuclear story will be clarified.

I could be wrong, who knows, but it's a fun game to play... the only thing at stake is all of history.

07-11-2003, 12:25 PM	#14
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	Now that I've done some reading on it, the Niger document nonsense is just that, a load of utter nonsense in one direction, and very intriguing in another. Bush's SOTU statement: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." To the very point of Bush's statement, what do the Brits think? Well, they still insist that Saddam Hussein sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa, based on intelligence other than the infamous forged Niger document. So did the President lie? Nope. Did Hussein seek uranium from Africa? I don't know. And neither does CNN. Is it a reasonable suspicion? SURE. Hussein DID buy uranium from Niger in the 80s. Hussein DID have a nuclear weapons program that he WAS hoping to reconstitute after the heat was off. Now follow this... this whole bit of news comes out of the White House! The Niger document was exposed months ago, before the war. Why did the White House bring the story back up - during a slow news period? They knew that the regular suspects would report it. They should have known the media would foam at the mouth, CBS would make it their lead and CNN would talk about it all day. Even Fox reported it ad infinitum. Is this all political maneuvering of some sort? Bush wouldn't lead us all on to complain about his mistakes and then pull the rug out from under everyone, would he? It couldn't be, because Bush is dumb, right? It's really hard to predict the future, and I want to take 'splice's open-ended question and run with it. Instead, I predict that ALL of the open-ended questions that exist right now will be miraculously solved by election season. WMDs will be found in abundance. The entire nuclear story will be clarified. I could be wrong, who knows, but it's a fun game to play... the only thing at stake is all of history.