Who's Lying: George Bush or Sylvio Berlusconi? --->>>

[Stephanie]

What a meeting of minds that must have been! Two wannabe dictators attempt to revise history. But which one is lying? Did George really tell Berlusconi that the U.S. did not use intelligence from Italy? Italy was the source for the forged Niger document.

According to Josh Marshall, Bush and Berlusconi cancelled thier joint press conference yesterday, presumably to avoid answering questions on SISMI's involvement in the Niger forgery, which is now under investigation in Italy.

Who's lying here?

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/006900.php

(October 31, 2005 -- 07:12 PM EST // link)

In Washington today, at a session with members of the Italian press, PM Silvio Berlusconi said, "Lo stesso Bush mi ha confermato che gli USA non hanno avuto alcuna informazione dai servizi italiani." That loosely translates to "Bush himself confirmed to me that the USA did not have any information from Italian agencies." And the answer was reference to whether the United States had gotten any of the Niger intelligence from Italy.

The claim here is simply a lie. US suspicions about Niger and Iraq began with intelligence reports from Italy in October 2001. Those reports were based on the forged documents. Did President Bush really say that? Berlusconi must know this is false.
-- Josh Marshall

Josh Marshall's history of the Niger forgery is a must read:

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/

(excerpted here > http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=5226810&mesg_id=5226810 )

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/361321p-307818c.html

Dodgy W sees Italy PM

WASHINGTON - President Bush played duck and cover yesterday, dodging questions about the CIA leak probe and avoiding a traditional news conference afforded to visiting leaders.

In a break with tradition, the White House did not schedule a joint news conference with Bush and visiting Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi of Italy.

Berlusconi's government is investigating whether Italian spies were responsible for forged documents that claimed Saddam Hussein tried to buy uranium in Africa to build a nuclear bomb - an issue that cuts close to the core of the CIA leak probe.

[ihaveaquestion]

1. If Berlusconi believed anything * told him - shame on him!

I don't think * knows much about anything, mainly because he doesn't want to put in the effort to learn (he's too lazy and it's too much work for his frat-boy self). He has no idea if what he's saying is true or not and doesn't care, therefore everything he says is potentially (even arguably) a lie and should be suspect.

[Captain Hilts]

2. They're BOTH lying! That's why they won't face the press! nt

[yellowcanine]

4. My thought also - they could both be lying.

[Stephanie]

13. How so? Bush either got intel from Italy or he did not.

And either Bush told Berlusconi he did not get intel from Italy, or he did not say it, and Berlusconi is making it up. Can't be both ways.

[yellowcanine]

14. The intel did come from Italy but Bush did not tell Berlusconi it didn't?

I don't know, but if either of these two can find a way to lie, they will.

[No DUplicitous DUpe]

3. Mr. Berlusconi looks like he's having a really fun time, eh?

not even close to a smile.

[yellowcanine]

6. Lots of warm fuzzy vibes going back and forth there.....Heh Heh

:sarcasm:

[rateyes]

5. Those three pics are very interesting....

First one, Bush offers handshake--looks like Berlusconi is considering whether or not to reciprocate.

Second one, Berlusconi is not looking at Bush, like he's wishing he was anywhere but in the room with Bush.

Third one, Berlusconi is looking in same direction as #2.

In none of them does Berlusconi look "pleased."

Interesting.

[Brotherjohn]

8. Berlusconi knows his assoc. w/ Bush has cooked his goose.

Bush knows he needs Berlusconi to play nice or his goose could be cooked, too.

[Brotherjohn]

7. So "Bush told" Berlusconi that the US didn't receive any intel from Italy?

Why the hell doesn't he ask his own intelligence agency? Shouldn't he himself know the answer to that question anyway?

I'm reminded of Scotty saying "Karl and Scooter told me" they didn't have anything to do with the leak, and Bush saying anyone involved will be fired (but then never getting around to actually asking them).

It's so couched... I guess both Bush and Berlusconi are going to play the naive dupes.

"Well, that's what my people TOLD me! I don't know. I just work here!"

[Stephanie]

9. Here's Josh Marshall story from yesterday - the Niger docs were the basis

The Niger docs were the basis upon which Italy tipped off the US about a Niger/Iraq connection. They then found "proof" of the connection -----> the Niger docs! Voila!

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/006896.php

According to US government sources I spoke to in the course of my reporting, there was far more tying the forgeries to Italy than the mere fact that they had first emerged in Rome in October 2002. Almost a year earlier, US suspicions about an illicit uranium trade between Iraq and Niger had begun with intelligence reports from Italy. Soon after the September 11th attacks, the Italian military intelligence agency SISMI sent its first report to the US government including details of an alleged Iraqi purchase of 500 tons of lightly-processed uranium ore from Niger.

Details of this and a subsequent SISMI report formed the basis of a reference to alleged Iraq-Niger uranium sales which was included in a CIA briefing Vice President Cheney received in early 2002. It was that briefing that prompted Cheney's request for more information on the Iraq-Niger sale. And that request led, in turn, to the CIA's decision to dispatch Joe Wilson on his trip to Niger. The Italian reports had set the whole process in motion.

But there was another key detail: The reports out of Italy were not a separate source of intelligence from the forgeries. They were the forgeries. To be precise, the intelligence reports from Italy were actually text transcriptions and summaries of the forged documents. The reports from Italy and the forgeries were one and the same. The distinction is rather like saying you haven't seen the PDF of a letter only the text from the letter that someone copied down from the PDF. The fact that the Italian reports came from as-yet-to-be-revealed forgeries of course could not be known at the time. That only became clear to intelligence officials much later when these post-9/11 Italian reports and the forgeries were compared. But looking back in retrospect, it was clear that the whole Niger uranium canard seemed to lead back to those forgeries.

***

In addition to these clues, there was one more piece of information. And here is where the two streams of information I noted above flowed together. A US government source pointed me toward a series of suspicious points of overlap between the forgeries story and a series of unauthorized meetings between Italian intelligence figures, two Pentagon employees working under Doug Feith, other Americans and the disgraced Iran-Contra figure Manucher Ghorbanifar. (These meetings were the subject of an article ("Iran-Contra II?") I published with Laura Rozen and Paul Glastris in the Washington Monthly in early September 2004.) Around the same time, another source -- this one outside the US government – told me a murky series of details about the meetings which purported to connect them to the emergence of the forgeries in Rome in October 2002.

[Stephanie]

10. This Italian investigation into the forged docs may be crucial

If they uncover who actually forged the docs it may lead straight to the Bush administration. How can George repress an Italian investigation? He can't!

[Brotherjohn]

11. No, but he can rename Italian Sausage "Star Spangled Sausage"! (nt)

[hang a left]

12. with democracy dressing eom