>"Did Bush say
>Saddam had tried to buy uranium from Niger?"
From the 2003 "State of the Union" address :
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. "
> or "Did Bush say Iraq was an
>'imminent threat'?"
From the 2003 "State of the Union" address :
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late."
[Intended implication - the threat is imminent, but not visible. Note also the link with terrorists that remains unproven, and unaccepted by the US intelligence community.]
"America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies."
["Serious and mounting" - how does this differ from "imminent"?]
"...for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. "
["Safety of our people" - the primary justification used here for war...]
> (The answer to both of those questions is 'no', but lots
>of anti-war people don't know that.)
The answer to both these questions is "yes", but apologists for the liar in the White House fail to remember this.
Cheers,
Graham
Powered by hypermail