[LANMaster]

Kerry Dumps Joe Wilson From Campaign Team



Link

By Jeff Gannon
Talon News
July 27, 2004

WASHINGTON (Talon News) -- Last week, the presidential campaign of Democratic candidate Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) very publicly distanced itself from former National Security Advisor Samuel "Sandy" Berger after it became known that Berger was under investigation for removing highly classified documents from the National Archives. Talon News reported that Kerry's anti-terror policy was removed from the candidate's web site immediately following Berger's dismissal as a campaign advisor.

But in the last few days, another advisor has apparently been jettisoned from the Kerry campaign. All traces of former Ambassador Joe Wilson, the central figure in the controversy of faulty intelligence about Iraq and uranium has disappeared from the Kerry web site. Wilson had appeared on a web site www.restorehonesty.com where he restated his criticism of the Bush administration. The link now goes directly to the main page of www.johnkerry.com and no reference to Wilson can be found on the entire site.

Wilson was discredited by a Senate Intelligence Committee report that contradicted Wilson's public statements about how he was selected for a sensitive mission to Niger in 2002 and the results of his report about Saddam Hussein's attempt to purchase uranium in Africa. Wilson represented his investigation as proof that President Bush misled the United States in making the case for the invasion of Iraq. An investigation into British intelligence confirms that Bush's claim was "well founded."

It is likely that Kerry's handlers took advantage of the Berger affair to quietly break official contact with someone who has proved to be something of a loose cannon. The ambassador was known for his vitriolic rhetoric against members of the Bush administration, particularly political advisor Karl Rove. Last year he suggested that Rove be "frog-marched from the White House in handcuffs," over the alleged leak of his wife's identity.

The Kerry campaign did not respond to a Talon News inquiry about Wilson's departure.

[bassetman]

An investigation into British intelligence confirms that Bush's claim was "well founded."

I did a Google on that issue, and got conflicting information.

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewForeignBu...20040714c.html

[Pacalis]

I believe it a wise move for Kerry to distance himself from anyone who, during the Bush presidency, had anything to do with Information gathering . I would be leery of most that were involved prior to Bush's administration also. It would be prudent to start with a clean a slate as possible. Whether those people were correct or not , they are tainted with the mis-information group.

[plschwartz]

LAN
looked at Talon site.
Well you did find a site that makes Fox seem mainstream
BTW
http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/st...262610,00.html
You reproduce the Butler report's conclusion in support of the government's lonely view that Iraq sought to procure uranium from Niger (Evidence stretched to "outer limits", July 15). But in the main body of the report, the weakness of this conclusion is exposed. After stating that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999, the explanation given as to how the UK came to "know" the visit's purpose is: (a) because uranium ore accounts for almost three-quarters of Niger's exports; (b) Iraq had purchased uranium from Niger in the 1980s; (c) Iraq could not access indigenous uranium; and (d) due to "other evidence of Iraq seeking to restart its nuclear programme". However, Butler also tells us that "the JIC cautioned that, on Iraq's nuclear programme, we have no clear intelligence".
Lynne Jones MP
Labour,Birmingham Selly Oak
Llew Smith MP
Labour, Blaenau Gwent

I have not see you covering the British press but to quote them secondhand is not very useful. There have been detailed refutations in their press. The Butler logic was basically Iraqis were in Niger. Niger seels Uranium therefore the Iraqis wanted Uranium.
If you want a miracle to prove Bush correct on these issues I suggest you go to a RC church and light candles to Saint Jude.

[LANMaster]

Originally Posted by plschwartz

LAN
looked at Talon site.
Well you did find a site that makes Fox seem mainstream

HAHAHAHA .... and then you continue on, and link to The Guardian.

That is funny.

[plschwartz]

LAN
Fox and Talon are the candles you light to St Jude

[LANMaster]

If you say so.

[DNeurococo]

"An investigation into British intelligence confirms that Bush's claim was 'well founded.'"

Yes, an investigaton INTO the British BY the British. Sort of like Al Capone releasing a study finding that he is not involved in bootleg liquor!

That investigation was a bunch of B.S. It told half-truths. For example it claimed that the British intel received the forged Niger documents AFTER they made their conclusions. True enough, but doesn't mention the fact that those conclusions were based upon a SUMMARY of those very same forged documents.

Also, doesn't address the fact that the 1999 meeting by the Iraqi official only raised
SUSPITIONS by the British - - there is no hard evidence provided by the Brits that uranium was even mentioned. Also, a 1999 meeting is hardly evidence of RECENT attempts to purchase uranium, as claimed in Bush's famous "16 words" which were derived from the Brits.

Name one bit of objective, solid evidence that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium in the time frame prior to the invasion. Bush quoting the British quoting the French quoting "God knows who" is not evidence. A report by the British, patting themselves on the back and finding that their own guess-work was "well founded" is not evidence. Name a piece of tangible evidence.

[GrumpyHermit]

Do you really want to wait until you have an airtight, rock-solid case when uranium is part of the mix? If so, the first concrete evidence you receive might well be a mushroom-shaped cloud or a sub-critical release of radiation, at which point you'd be hopping up and down, blaming Bush for failing to protect America. A real no-win situation if I ever saw one.

[plschwartz]

Originally Posted by GrumpyHermit

Do you really want to wait until you have an airtight, rock-solid case when uranium is part of the mix? If so, the first concrete evidence you receive might well be a mushroom-shaped cloud or a sub-critical release of radiation, at which point you'd be hopping up and down, blaming Bush for failing to protect America. A real no-win situation if I ever saw one.

Grumpa
Do you have any idea how hard it is to go from yellowcake ore to a bomb? Think Manhattan project if'n you ever heardof it if not look it up?
Doesn't it ever bother you that you make statements like the above without any real knowledge of what you are ranting about

You sure enough sound like Chicken Little

[Ciberblade]

Easy, no. Still with advanced science, once he was able to extract the isotopes from the ore...the rest would be like dominoes falling on eachother. It is a begining, yes?

[plschwartz]

Originally Posted by ciberblade

Easy, no. Still with advanced science, once he was able to extract the isotopes from the ore...the rest would be like dominoes falling on eachother. It is a begining, yes?

ONCE here is like once upon a time. Remember the other part of Powells speech about the AL tubes (wrong there) and what motors and magnets all to make ultracentrafuges.
Actyally I think that it is easier to make a plutonium bomb IF you have a reactor. Proably the way most of the other nuke owners have. And why we will not allow Iran to finish theirs. But from yellowcake I don't think it is easy not with Iraq he was left with post GWI and sanctions.

[DNeurococo]

Originally Posted by GrumpyHermit

Do you really want to wait until you have an airtight, rock-solid case when uranium is part of the mix?

No, let's all go off half-cocked, spill the blood of foreigners and of our own people on the basis of heresay, speculation and rumor - - just as long as someone scares us with the word "uranium".

Tarot cards and cystal balls are good enough evidence for me, just as long as it is about something IMPORTANT, like uranium.

[Ciberblade]

not so much once upon a time, more like once upon a dream...the desire was there, had been for decades. Would that be an obsession, that would return results...all it would take is time.

[GrumpyHermit]

Originally Posted by plschwartz

Grumpa
Do you have any idea how hard it is to go from yellowcake ore to a bomb? Think Manhattan project if'n you ever heardof it if not look it up?
Doesn't it ever bother you that you make statements like the above without any real knowledge of what you are ranting about

You sure enough sound like Chicken Little

Well, in just the last few years, North Korea has developed the bomb, making a fool of Bill Clinton and Jimmy Carter in the process; Iran is trying awfully hard, or so the headlines say; the Russians have so much radioactive material in advanced states of readiness that the US has agreed to dispose of much of it for them.

As for Chicken Little - - Go to downtown Manhattan to a certain crater, and think hard on what is possible and impossible, before you start accusing people of ranting. It's well known that Al-Qaeda, given the opportunity, will happily detonate a nuke in the US.