Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Brumar89 who wrote (174666)	11/9/2005 7:21:13 PM
From: geode00	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

According to Hersch that's a theory that he heard. If corporate media, Congressional oversight, the UN had pushed back hard against the SOTU crappola then it would have been exposed...earlier. As it is Libby is under criminal indictment and Bush has strong support of a whopping 20% of the public. ============ "No, the documents were written to be exposed. The papers are hopeless, and even the Italian reporter who looked at them, Elisabetta Burba, was able very quickly to determine that they were false. They’re bad forgeries. And I think the idea was simply to embarrass the government internally. Don’t forget, Niger had already been a source of great dispute between the C.I.A. and the Pentagon and the Vice-President’s office. There was this tension. And so the thought was that somebody like Cheney or Rumsfeld and their aides would flash them at a meeting, and then the other side could counterattack. It would be an embarrassment, because the papers were such obvious fakes. Or Rumsfeld or somebody would go public with the papers, not vet them, not analyze them, and the press would go after them. But that didn’t happen. Instead, lo and behold, the President used the Niger story to make the case against Iraq in his State of the Union speech in January. newyorker.com