Liar, Liar. Your Pants Are on Fire!
Comments by the Parodist
I have heard from a source that we should expect some explosive news in a few days. A congressional committee is about to release a report on what the president knew about 9/11 prior to the events. The news will be shocking. According to my source, the CIA gave a very detailed, specific report to the president. It was impossible for the president not to have known the events were coming.
But speaking of the CIA and its reports, don't think for a minute that the president is off the hook because of George Tenet's statements that he alone is responsible for false information in the President's State of the Union address. First, there's so much falsity in the speech, the prez could start a cottage industry with it.
But if you want to put on your Sherlock's hat, take a look at what the CIA director said the CIA did--and look at the words the president spoke. Do that and you'll know we're looking at fraud. But first, if you'd like to know what the argument is and will be in the future, go to www.yuricareport.com and read the text of Tenet's statement and then read the text of the president's State of the Union speech. Just click on them.
Here's the deal: If you believe the CIA was coerced by the president into "cooperation" then the president is guilty of high crimes and can be impeached. If you believe the president was an innocent dupe of unscrupulous CIA officials, then he gets away scot free, but George Tenet goes to jail.
The president said in his State of the Union address, "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Tenet said those 16 words should not have been in the speech. Then Tenet explained the CIA agreed the text in the speech was "factually correct, i.e. that the British government report said that Iraq sought uranium from Africa."
But that is not what the President said. He said the government of Britain had "learned" certain scary facts. When governments "learn" something and announce it, citizens pay attention. By citing the British government, the president placed the Niger uranium scam under the official imprimatur of the British government. He legitimized his assertions.
Nevertheless the CIA signed off on the president's speech by creating an artifice that misdirected attention to a totally different subject. And because the president's remarks were couched in a ringing endorsement of the British findings as facts, there is no way the English language can be tortured into an interpretation that makes the president's speech true, factual and accurate.
The president was making false statements to the members of Congress and the American people. How could the honorable specialists in the CIA allow it? Mr. Tenet explained it, "agency officials in the end concurred that the text in the speech was factually correct."
Poor Mr. Tenet. He tried to rise to the occasion. He couldn't help it. He forgot "concur" means "acting together with someone to produce a single effect." Who did the CIA officials act together with? What pressures were placed on them to agree?
If you believe the president was ignorant of the falsity of his speech, you have to say the CIA committed an intentional fraudulent act by concealing, suppressing and withholding vital information affecting the national security of the U.S. On the other hand, if you believe the president knew the statement he made was false, then he was guilty of fraud. Either way, fraud was committed.
Richard Nixon was about to be impeached for abusing his power by manipulating, controlling and interfering with the work of a federal agency. To do so is a criminal offense. George Tenet is acting more like a man who has been coerced to bend the rules--than one who was free to allow his agency to do its job.
10:26:31 AM 
|
