> A Second Take on Scooter-gate. It’s all about treason
7 October 2005, 00:32
Your opinions and beliefs are getting in the way of obvious facts. You call the Pres. a liar for the "16 words", yet, you don’t quote the actual statement. Remember, it refers to the UK’s intelligence service reports, right, not to Wilson’s statements. Read the "16 words" again (if you somehow missed the words of the actual quote and not what you hope the uninformed reader will be misled to believe). So, how is an accurate quote about UK intelligence reports a lie? Especially after the UK confirmed since in the Butler investigation’s report that the UK still stands behind their uranium report? If you expect to have any credibility in your opinions and beliefs you should not commit the obvious sin of lying to try to prove a lie. If you have deliberately concedaled or distorted (or just got plain wrong by accident) such a documented issue, what else if factually wrong in your article?
Your opinions and beliefs are getting in the way of obvious facts. You call the Pres. a liar for the "16 words", yet, you don’t quote the actual statement. Remember, it refers to the UK’s intelligence service reports, right, not to Wilson’s statements. Read the "16 words" again (if you somehow missed the words of the actual quote and not what you hope the uninformed reader will be misled to believe). So, how is an accurate quote about UK intelligence reports a lie? Especially after the UK confirmed since in the Butler investigation’s report that the UK still stands behind their uranium report? If you expect to have any credibility in your opinions and beliefs you should not commit the obvious sin of lying to try to prove a lie. If you have deliberately concedaled or distorted (or just got plain wrong by accident) such a documented issue, what else if factually wrong in your article?