Lizard_King wrote:

laudablepuss wrote:

Dude, take a look at the link I gave you about Yellowcakegate. Scroll down to the bottom and click on the link "Did Condi give the game away?" Take a look at the rest of them while you're at it.

Read the one you cited and the Rice-specific one.

laudablepuss wrote:

Go ahead and embrace it: it was a lie. It was removed from an October speach because it was crap. Then it was deliberately put back into the State of the Union Address.

Because? Because? Give me a reason. The ones that still seem most plausible are those surrounding wishful thinking. Cheney is many things, but hardly a fool. If he is the "overriding authority" (since God forbid we allow Bush a shred of autonomy), why would he gamble on information he was certain was false, especially given the scrutiny every claim about Iraq, even the most facially obvious ones, had met in the past? I think it much more likely that he had a reasonable belief it was true.

Timothy Noah wrote:

Rice was basically correct that a reference to "a single incident"—Saddam's purported attempt to purchase up to 500 metric tons of uranium oxide in Niger—was removed from the Cincinnati speech at Tenet's request. (It would have been more precise to say this was a reference to "a single number.") But Rice was wrong to say that this was the only change Tenet requested. Hadley, her deputy, revealed at the July 22 briefing that Tenet also objected to revised language in the speech referring more generally to Saddam's purported yellowcake safari. As Hadley's comment above makes clear, Tenet didn't want Bush to mention the yellowcake allegations at all.