Bush Lied

[Tiger Al 0]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

[AFTiger 282]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I don't think TT's head is in the sand!

[AURaptor 1,126]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm being shown NOTHING. Yours and TT's argument is exactly the same if we were talking Alien UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, ...... nothing but empty claims with zero credible evidence.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm being shown NOTHING. Yours and TT's argument is exactly the same if we were talking Alien UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, ...... nothing but empty claims with zero credible evidence.

Hey TA, which one of these guys is Tweedle Dee and which one is Tweedle Dumb? I can't keep them straight.

[Tiger Al 0]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm being shown NOTHING. Yours and TT's argument is exactly the same if we were talking Alien UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, ...... nothing but empty claims with zero credible evidence.

Hey TA, which one of these guys is Tweedle Dee and which one is Tweedle Dumb? I can't keep them straight.

More like Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder.

[TigerStar 0]

I don't keep up with any of your's political leanings, but I do see a few asking for you to present evidence of what you say and all you can do is call names. Is that typical for you when you don't have the answers or when you don't want to see the answers?

[TexasTiger 13,028]

I don't keep up with any of your's political leanings, but I do see a few asking for you to present evidence of what you say and all you can do is call names. Is that typical for you when you don't have the answers or when you don't want to see the answers?

If the agenet wasn't covert, as Plame wasn't

Anybody who still says this at this point is utterly immune to evidence. If you kept up with this board, you would also know that is Raptor and AFTigers standard operating procedure. Context is key.

WASHINGTON - An unclassified summary of outed CIA officer Valerie Plame's employment history at the spy agency, disclosed for the first time today in a court filing by Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald, indicates that Plame was "covert" when her name became public in July 2003.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18924679/

The CIA referred the case because she was covert. They know who their covert agents are. The prosecutor confirmed she was covert. But Raptor says, "no, no, no." Utterly delusional. I don't know your political leanings, but is it typical for you to be like Raptor.

[AURaptor 1,126]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm being shown NOTHING. Yours and TT's argument is exactly the same if we were talking Alien UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, ...... nothing but empty claims with zero credible evidence.

Hey TA, which one of these guys is Tweedle Dee and which one is Tweedle Dumb? I can't keep them straight.

More like Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder.

Ha ha! More moronic replies from the peanut gallery. But no evidence. Surprised ? Not in the least.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

The truth is out there, but you must be interested in finding it.

Nothing? Then stfu.

Like I said... Keep your head in the sand if you want.

There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

I'm being shown NOTHING. Yours and TT's argument is exactly the same if we were talking Alien UFO's, the Loch Ness Monster, Bigfoot, ...... nothing but empty claims with zero credible evidence.

Hey TA, which one of these guys is Tweedle Dee and which one is Tweedle Dumb? I can't keep them straight.

More like Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder.

Ha ha! More moronic replies from the peanut gallery. But no evidence. Surprised ? Not in the least.

See how he ignores evidence? Sad, really.

[AURaptor 1,126]

See how he ignores evidence? Sad, really

Can't ignore what doesn't exist.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

See how he ignores evidence? Sad, really

Can't ignore what doesn't exist.

Are you a member of the flat Earth society?

[AURaptor 1,126]

See how he ignores evidence? Sad, really

Can't ignore what doesn't exist.

Are you a member of the flat Earth society?

Thanks. Forgot that one. Flat Earth, UFO's, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster..... you give as compelling arguments for all these as well.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

See how he ignores evidence? Sad, really

Can't ignore what doesn't exist.

Are you a member of the flat Earth society?

Thanks. Forgot that one. Flat Earth, UFO's, Bigfoot, Loch Ness Monster..... you give as compelling arguments for all these as well.

Any rational person reading this thread is concerned about you.

[AURaptor 1,126]

I'm just concerned that a grown up will continue acting like a 4 yr old on a message board. All you need to do is post some evidence , and instead you keep replying " Bush is too a liar - you're blind, you're tweedle dum, you're ray charles, you got your head in the sand ", over and over again, and still you refuse to simply act like and adult and post what ever the hell evidence you claim validates your point.

Most rational folks would conclude that you HAVE no evidence, and simply enjoy playing childish games.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

I'm just concerned that a grown up will continue acting like a 4 yr old on a message board. All you need to do is post some evidence , and instead you keep replying " Bush is too a liar - you're blind, you're tweedle dum, you're ray charles, you got your head in the sand ", over and over again, and still you refuse to simply act like and adult and post what ever the hell evidence you claim validates your point.

Most rational folks would conclude that you HAVE no evidence, and simply enjoy playing childish games.

I've always questioned whether you were actually a grown up, but nonetheless, I'm concerned that you keep ignoring that I've offered exactly what you say I haven't.

http://www.aunation.net/forums/index.php?s...st&p=443112

[AURaptor 1,126]

All it does is claim that Plame was covert, not a thing about Bush lying.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

All it does is claim that Plame was covert, not a thing about Bush lying.

So do you recognize that Plame was covert?

[AURaptor 1,126]

All it does is claim that Plame was covert, not a thing about Bush lying.

So do you recognize that Plame was covert?

That's the first I'd heard of it, despite speculation and contradictions to the matter coming time and time again.

When did this info become official ?

[TexasTiger 13,028]

All it does is claim that Plame was covert, not a thing about Bush lying.

So do you recognize that Plame was covert?

That's the first I'd heard of it, despite speculation and contradictions to the matter coming time and time again.

When did this info become official ?

She was covert for years. The CIA requested this investigation a few years ago because she was covert. Right-wing radio talk show hosts and Fox anchors keep saying she wasn't as if they know better than the CIA whom the CIA considers covert.

[TigerStar 0]

Thanks for the link TexasTiger.

More questions.

According to THIS story, for it to be a crime to 'out' an agent, that a "covert agent" must have been on an overseas assignment "within the last five years.".

Prior to her being outed, she hadn't been overseas since July 1997, which would be 6 years.

If true, wouldn't this prove that no law was broken?

I am not saying that those involved were not wrong in what they did.

[TexasTiger 13,028]

Thanks for the link TexasTiger.

More questions.

According to THIS story, for it to be a crime to 'out' an agent, that a "covert agent" must have been on an overseas assignment "within the last five years.".

Prior to her being outed, she hadn't been overseas since July 1997, which would be 6 years.

If true, wouldn't this prove that no law was broken?

I am not saying that those involved were not wrong in what they did.

The article you cite reaches a conclusion based on a reading of a book that they were no longer permanently stationed overseas since 1997. But as the report cited in the article I posted clearly indicates:

Plame worked as an operations officer in the Directorate of Operations and was assigned to the Counterproliferation Division (CPD) in January 2002 at CIA headquarters in Langley, Virginia.

The employment history indicates that while she was assigned to CPD, Plame, "engaged in temporary duty travel overseas on official business." The report says, "she traveled at least seven times to more than ten times." When overseas Plame traveled undercover, "sometimes in true name and sometimes in alias -- but always using cover -- whether official or non-official (NOC) -- with no ostensible relationship to the CIA."

She was stationed in the U.S.A., but frequently traveled overseas undercover after 2002.

[AURaptor 1,126]

She was covert for years. The CIA requested this investigation a few years ago because she was covert. Right-wing radio talk show hosts and Fox anchors keep saying she wasn't as if they know better than the CIA whom the CIA considers covert.

The question is when did the CIA officially release the info that she was 'covert' ? It had been speculated for a long time, even by the newscasts, not just right wing radio. Also, if she HAD been covert, but was no longer, that is relevent also. I jsut dont' recall hearing that news while Libby's trial was ongoing.

And regardless of all that, it still doesn't answer the question as to where Bush lied

[TexasTiger 13,028]

She was covert for years. The CIA requested this investigation a few years ago because she was covert. Right-wing radio talk show hosts and Fox anchors keep saying she wasn't as if they know better than the CIA whom the CIA considers covert.

The question is when did the CIA officially release the info that she was 'covert' ? It had been speculated for a long time, even by the newscasts, not just right wing radio. Also, if she HAD been covert, but was no longer, that is relevent also. I jsut dont' recall hearing that news while Libby's trial was ongoing.

And regardless of all that, it still doesn't answer the question as to where Bush lied

The CIA doesn't just "officially release" that information. She was covert at the time of the leak. They provided that information to the grand jury. As the article stated:

After the Novak column was published and Plame's identity was widely reported in the media, and according to the document, "the CIA lifted Ms Wilson's cover" and then "rolled back her cover" effective to the date of the leak.

The CIA determined, "that the public interest in allowing the criminal prosecution to proceed outweighed the damage to national security that might reasonably be expected from the official disclosure of Ms. Wilson's employment and cover status."

The CIA has not divulged any other details of the nature of Plame's cover or the methods employed by the CIA to protect her cover nor the details of her classified intelligence activities.

[autiger4life 3]

In an excerpt from his forthcoming book, McClellan recount the 2003 news conference in which he told reporters that aides Karl Rove and I. Lewis "Scooter" Libby were "not involved" in the leak involving operative Valerie Plame.

"There was one problem. It was not true," McClellan writes, according to a brief excerpt released Monday. "I had unknowingly passed along false information. And five of the highest-ranking officials in the administration were involved in my doing so: Rove, Libby, the vice president, the president's chief of staff and the president himself."

Just a re-cap since you obviously missed the first post.

In the book, he is insinuating that Bush lied or was decietful. Now, I of course know that even though it is an inside person saying this, it will still be called untrue because Bush couldn't possibly lie, but there is the evidence for it.

I'm not positive, but if he published something like this and he was lying about it, couldn't he be sued for slander or libel?

[TigerStar 0]

If he 'unknowingly passed along false information', how and when did he discover the info was false? How did he find out that 5 people were involved? Wouldn't he typically get his notes from one source?