Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<Our own CIA is telling them that the Brits have exaggerated this. Yet, to this day, right-wingers are telling us it was okay to include the designed-to-frighten-us phrase in the SOTU because the British were okay with it.>> <No, right-wingers are telling you it was okay because it was true. <a href="http://www.slate.com/id/213960" target="_blank">http://www.slate.com/id/213960</a> 9/> Only "true" in its very broadest, most meaningless way. As Hitchens himself (as rabid a supporter of this war as you'll find) said in this piece: "The European intelligence services, and the Bush administration, only ever asserted that the Iraqi regime had apparently tried to open (or rather, reopen) a yellowcake trade "in Africa." It has never been claimed that an agreement was actually reached." But, of course, the Bush admin. never added any explanation such as that. Heaven forbid - that might have made us think (correctly) that Iraq was not an imminent threat. Once again, they treated us like children, spoon-feeding us only the information they wanted us to know. This treating us like children is one of the aspects that disturbs me the most in this whole thing. As though the American public couldn't be trusted to reach the "correct" decision if they had all the facts - so we'll just give them some. And so the SOTU contained only the ominous sounding words, designed to frighten us. Without any explanation, one could very well say, designed to mislead us. Particularly since Rice and Cheney and others had been talking non-stop about Iraq and "mushroom clouds." They knew there was no evidence that Saddam had obtained this uranium, they knew he already had 500+ tons sitting unenriched because he lacked the ability to enrich it even if he did have it, but they said these things anyway. And they were able to say "hey, technically it was true." And their defenders continue to do the same. Unfortunately, in both cases it is a textbook example of: disingenuous adj : 1. not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness; 2. Not ingenuous; wanting in noble candor or frankness; not frank or open; uncandid; unworthily or meanly artful. <<As I've said before "attempting to buy" is so broad as to be virutally meaningless.>> <It was another example of Saddam refusing to comply with the UN resolutions.> Which does not mean invasion and occupation was wise. <<You called me a "Saddam apologist.">> <No, I didn't. I simply said I didn't want to be one. > Oh brother. disingenuous adj : 1. not straightforward or candid; giving a false appearance of frankness; 2. Not ingenuous; wanting in noble candor or frankness; not frank or open; uncandid; unworthily or meanly artful.
