Cannes Movie Review: Fair Game (2010)
A fast-paced bit of political popcorn
Photo: Summit Entertainment
With ten Oscar nominees for Best Picture I think it's pretty safe to say that Summit's Fair Game will be one of them. I don't say this because it completely bowled me over, but because it's not an overly aggressive political feature, but one that sticks pretty much to the facts of the case as detailed by outed CIA agent Valerie Plame Wilson in her 2007 book of the same name, which derived from a statement Karl Rove made to MSNBC's Chris Matthews in July of 2003 saying, "Wilson's wife is fair game."
The "Wilson" Rove was referring to is Joe Wilson, played here by Sean Penn, looking awfully disheveled for most of the feature as his wife, Valerie (Naomi Watts), has gone from being a covert CIA agent investigating the existence of WMDs in the Middle East to being outed by Robert Novak in the "Washington Post."
The cast includes Naomi Watts, Sean Penn, Bruce McGill, Brooke Smith, David Denman, Noah Emmerich, Michael Kelly, Ty Burrell, Thomas McCarthy and David Warshofsky. For more information on this film including pictures, trailers and a detailed synopsis choose from the following menu.
Review
"Fair Game" is a Summit Entertainment release, directed by Doug Liman and is rated PG-13 for some language. The running time is 1 hour 48 minutes.
These instances make up the details behind Doug Liman's Fair Game, which is just as much a story about government injustice as well as a story of a marriage dealing with hard times, taking on all comers and never giving up. As a result, the film works. It's fast-paced and comes to an end before you know it. Clocking in at only an hour and 46 minutes, it isn't very long in the first place, but once it comes to a close you certainly wouldn't mind if it had gone further.
Watts and Penn are excellent in the two lead roles of a couple doing what they can to survive as their government has thrown them under the bus for telling the truth. As Joe, Penn is forced to carry the brunt of the load as a disgraced ambassador called a liar. Outside of the distracting bird's nest on Penn's head, his performance is top notch and thankfully underplayed as Penn often loves to ramp up the drama for more emotional scenes.
Right beside him is Watts, who will most likely make a charge at the Best Actress category come nomination time in one of her better performances to date. Throughout much of the film she keeps a cool head thanks to her CIA training, but as the cracks begin to show Watts carries the performance home.
Some of the best scenes, though, happen early on, before Valerie has been outed and a gaggle of their friends are discussing politics around the table. As an audience we, along with Valerie and Joe Wilson, are aware of the details of the constantly mentioned "aluminum tubes" that pretty much gave reason for the invasion, but to hear a group of people digest and explain what they've heard on the news and watching as Valerie can't say anything and Joe is trying to hold his tongue is dinner table tension at its best. Liman uses it as this film's battlefield and it's a tall order but he succeeds.
Liman, who's probably best known for The Bourne Identity, not only directed the film, but served as his own cinematographer for the first time since Go in 1999. His ability to shoot action is well noted but this is almost popcorn politics kept lively through the use of predominately handheld camerawork. I'm not sure what kind of play this film will get with audiences, but Liman has created a wholly accessible political story using a couple's relationship as the access point. The film moves at such a quick pace you're hardly given time to breathe and whenever possible actual network news footage is used to service the story.
Additionally, the continuing of Liman's relationship with composer John Powell again proves useful. Powell rarely creates a score that dominates the picture and here it offers all the right notes.
The only real question I have is just what was left on the cutting room floor. I've read Plame's book and I thought it was deceitful to bring up the Vanity Fair article and then play as if it never happened, when in fact it did happen and the photo that resulted became a major problem. I also thought it was interesting to play it as if Plame was instantly dismissed from the CIA and to avoid much talk about the family's money problems. Also, the sentencing of Scooter Libby (David Andrews) seems to come out of nowhere in the end, announcing the film is nearly over, which had me looking at my watch surprised it was all done.
Of course, knowing most of the story going in I was prone to notice omissions here and there, but some of the details that did remain — such as the small gifts Joe received from the free speeches he gave — were a nice touch. Probably the best aspect of the film is that it never seemed like a political movie with an agenda, but a political movie with a story. Green Zone earlier this year got caught up in the politics of it all and became "WMD this" and "WMD that," whereas Fair Game uses the potential collapse of the Wilson's marriage to tell a story that just happens to involve a major political blunder. It's nice work and it certainly makes for a very solid effort.
Fair Game is played In Competition at the 63rd Cannes Film Festival and will be competing for the Palm d'Or.
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 47 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
"Fair Game" is one of mine must see's this year. I been waiting for a good Sean Penn movie for a while. I know this is it. I hope Sean and Watts get at least a nod. Good review Brad.
Sounds great. Can't wait to see the right-wing media pounce on this and attempt to quash whatever success it has.
The right wing may actually have a case, especially with the leaving out of the Vanity Fair piece I mentioned. It's one of the only major "issue" flaws I saw in the film.
Oh, they have alot more of a case than a Vanity Fair article. Like the FACT that Valerie Plame claimed that she didn't recommend her biased, partisan husband for the trip…a lie that was exposed in the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Wilson's Niger trip. Or the FACT that Joe Wilson was a bald-faced liar in his claims that Iraq wasn't seeking uranium in Niger…another LIE that was exposed in the Senate Intelligence Committee report on Wilson's Niger trip. Or the FACT the film conveniently glosses over the fact that it was Richard Armitage – a State Dept. critic of the Iraq War – who actually outed Plame, NOT a Bush, Cheney, Rove, or Libby. IOW: the film is pure fiction, just like Wilson's and Plame's credibility.
Not to mention failing to mention Richard Armitage, the guy who leaked Valerie Plame's name to the press. You can't really have a movie about a covert CIA agent who had her name leaked to the press without telling us who did the leaking. Well, I guess you can, since All the President's Men didn't tell you who Deep Throat was, but that's a little different in that it wasn't public knowledge that Felt was Deep Throat at the time the movie was made. Everyone knows Armitage was the leaker, but somehow they didn't include that in the movie. I'm guessing because Armitage wasn't a fan of W and it deflates the idea of this being a political hit job and kind of defeats the drama of the movie. But to those of us that know that fact, that makes this movie MORE polical than Green Zone.
Sorry, but the Bush Administration had no credibility on Iraq. From the use of two forged documents (the Niger document included), the Downing Street memos, WHIG, to the Office of Special Plans which was to help "fix" the intelligence around policy, it was all a setup for authorization of force.
Not to mention how Iraq didn't have any "weapons of mass destruction" and that Plame was outed as a result of her husbands criticism of how Americans were lied to about the Iraq war and the pretenses which we enterted under.
Wilson didn't actually lie about what he found there the closest thing he to "uranium" was business man that wanted to expand sales in Niger. It was actuallly the CIA that was interested in Wilson and asked Plame to contact him for his investigation in Nigeria. It was not only Armitage but also Libby, and Rove that discussed her employment and her cover. Armitage, like Rove and Libby discussed her cover and it was revealed by Robert Novak in 2003. In 2005 they revealed that it was all three men that had Libby told Novak her identity. Armitage was never tried for comitting treason and Libby was never convicted of it unfortunatley with most jury members of Lbby'ss trial believing that he was just a fall-guy.
***Sorry, but the Bush Administration had no credibility on Iraq.*** Bush's asssertion that Iraq sought uranium in Niger has been proven to be TRUE. The Downing Street memos, WHIG, "fixing" policy prove…what? Nothing. What is Plame's claim-to-fame? That she was patriotic truth-seeker who was viciously outed by a vengeful Bush Administration. This has been definitively proven to be a LIE. What is Wilson's claim-to-fame? That he was patriotic truth-seeker who was viciously smeared by the Bush Administration for having the temerity to report that Iraq hadn't sought uranium in Niger. This has also been definitively proven to be a LIE. So if you want to hand awards for "no credibility", this film is certainly a contender.
***Wilson didn't actually lie about what he found there the closest thing he to "uranium" was business man that wanted to expand sales in Niger.*** Right…"expand sales"…in a country where the average person is subsistence farmer, with a per capita GDP of $739 per person. On the other hand, Niger is one of the world's largest uranium exporters. ***It was actuallly the CIA that was interested in Wilson and asked Plame to contact him for his investigation in Nigeria.*** Not according to the Washington Post: "The [Senate] report states that a CIA official told the Senate committee that Plame "offered up" Wilson's name for the Niger trip, then on Feb. 12, 2002, sent a memo to a deputy chief in the CIA's Directorate of Operations saying her husband "has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." One day later, on Feb. 13, 2002, that operations official contacted an overseas CIA officer to float the idea of sending Wilson. ***In 2005 they revealed that it was all three men that had Libby told Novak her identity.*** Who is "they"? Source that claim.
Again Wilson didn't lie about what was founded there. Bush had twisted workds of his op-ed piece. Even George Tenet the director of the CIA, admitted that words regarding the yellow cake uranium from President Bush's state of the union adress should have been removed due to the fact that they had bad information. Just days before the U.S. invaded Iraq the IAEA concluded that documents pertaining to the evidence of yellow cake urnaium were in forged. Even shortly after the war in the summer of 2003 the administration admitted that accusation made in Bush's address were inaccurate. The administration chose to cherry. Wilson never found yellow cake uranium for the uses that the former administration claimed. Bush and his cronnies chose to cherry pick Wilsons report for there own gain. The reviews that challenged Wilson, both the Butler report and the Senate Intelligence comitte report have been proven inconclusive. John McLaughlin who was deputy director of intelligence at the time admitted that the sources for where the Iraqs urnaium search was were not credible.
Oh and another Washington Post article reported that the NIE report did not fairly represent the intelligence communities confidence in the intelligence reports findings. There was also a 2004 report from the senate select commitee on intelignce which noted that the state department that Wilsons report clearly stated that Niger was not able to nor woruld they have been willing to sell to Iraq.
Oh and they being CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, just about the the entire news organization that had reported it. And while Armitage was determined to be a leak, many have still speculated the involvemnt of Libby, Rove, even former Vice President Dick Cheney. This is ultimatley the story of an administration that wanted revenge against someone for there criticism of an unjust war that we had no place in.
@RVASTAR-clearly you have a biased opinion on the order of events that played out. but just like everything that was considered questionable at the time (although many knew what was actually happening), the bush administration and the majority of republicans felt they were justified in creating a need to go to war. we all know how much money was to be made for certain defense contractors and the people that backed them. so get off your high horse and consider the idea that you may actually be wrong about certain things. including your opinion on this film, which by the way is the only american contender for the cannes film fest. on top of that, it is already receiving oscar nods. so lets be a little patriotic here and support an american film by a brilliant director.
***Even George Tenet the director of the CIA, admitted that words regarding the yellow cake uranium from President Bush's state of the union adress should have been removed due to the fact that they had bad information.*** And that proves that Bush "lied" in what way? Tenet and the CIA were aware of the Niger intelligence, they were aware of the Bush Administrations plans to the cite the Niger intelligence, and they never said a word. ***Just days before the U.S. invaded Iraq the IAEA concluded that documents pertaining to the evidence of yellow cake urnaium were in forged.*** SOME documents were forgeries, but they in no way constituted ALL of the evidence that the Bush Administration relied upon. Also, many intelligence sources believe that those fake documents were a deliberate attempt to "poison the well" of the Iraq-Niger evidence, thus giving those opposed to a US invasion of Iraq a way to cast into doubt ANY evidence that fell short of video tape of Saddam Hussein himself asking the president Niger "Hey, got any uranium we can use to build nukes?" And speaking of those fake documents, the Senate Report indicates that Wilson also lied about having used those documents as evidence to come to his conclusions, when the US didn't have possession of the docs until 8 months after Wilson's trip. Yet another Wilson LIE…wonder if that's included in the movie? ***Wilson never found yellow cake uranium for the uses that the former administration claimed.*** The Bush Administration never claimed that Iraq purchased uranium from Niger…Bush stated that Iraq "sought" to purchase uranium in Niger. After the Wilson flap, both the British and French intelligence communities held inquiries into the evidence: both stood by their previous claims that Iraq "sought" to purchase uranium in Niger. ***Oh and another Washington Post article reported that the NIE report did not fairly represent the intelligence communities confidence in the intelligence reports findings.*** And…….? ***There was also a 2004 report from the senate select commitee on intelignce which noted that the state department that Wilsons report clearly stated that Niger was not able to nor woruld they have been willing to sell to Iraq.*** Sooooo…what? Who cares what Niger was able or willing to do? Niger wasn't the issue. The only thing that matters is what Saddam Hussein was TRYING to do, which was to purchase uranium. ***Oh and they being CNN, MSNBC, FOX News, just about the the entire news organization that had reported it.*** Then if those news organizations reported it – "it" being that Libby and Rove also leaked Plame's name – then you should be able to source it. ***And while Armitage was determined to be a leak, many have still speculated the involvemnt of Libby, Rove, even former Vice President Dick Cheney.*** And that proves what? ***This is ultimatley the story of an administration that wanted revenge against someone for there criticism of an unjust war that we had no place in.*** A story of revenge for which you have absolutely ZERO proof.
***@RVASTAR-clearly you have a biased opinion on the order of events that played out.*** And you don't? ***but just like everything that was considered questionable at the time (although many knew what was actually happening), the bush administration and the majority of republicans felt they were justified in creating a need to go to war.*** Cue the violins. ***we all know how much money was to be made for certain defense contractors and the people that backed them.*** Right, right, right…"Haliburton"…"no blood for oil"…"make love, not war"…got it. ***so get off your high horse and consider the idea that you may actually be wrong about certain things.*** Maybe…but I'm not wrong about the fact that both Plame and Wilson are proven LIARS. ***so lets be a little patriotic here and support an american film by a brilliant director.*** Yeah, a "brilliant" director Who just so happened to omit the character – Richard Armitage – who was the actual source of the "leak" that the entire movie centers around. How brilliant.
I loved how you used the word sought in quotations. Not that it will make much of a difference to you one way or the other, but even before teh infamous sixteen words of Bush's state of the union adress, the same CIA director at the time, George Tenet, sent out a memo to prevent those words about uranium being in the presidents speech. Showing if no one lied there was at the very least some very inaccurate information that was used to justify going to war that had not been properly investigated and given the levcel of doubt over that accuracy it was incompitent that it was still included even after the director of intelligence demanded that the information should not be mentioned in the presidents speech. The UN security inspector at the time, Hans Blix determined that Iraq did not have in posession weapons of mass destruction. The Italian military intelligence was the first to reveal the forged documents in regards to the urnaium. The administration later admitted that the sixteen words from the presidents adress should have been removed because that information was again, inaccurate. Foreign affairs comittee secretary Kack Straw stated that information was pertaining to the sale of WMD's was fraudualent. IAEA determined that these documents were forgeries. The Foreign Affairs Comittee themselves determined that Iraq was not trying to produce uranium and did not have the means to obtain it. The Butler report has been criticized because it did not offer enough evidence and was not conclucsive enough to back up it's claims. In 2006 The New York Times released a 2002 memo indicating that the chances of Iraq obtaining uranium was unlikely for various reasons. The British Intelligence report.
As far as the CNN MSN FOX thing goes, I doubt you would be willing to submit any of your sources, sicne most of them have obviously come from wikipedia, and sicne you are clearly resouceful enough to figure thungs out for yourself. Look it up! I think that Roves claim about her being "fair game" is a prety good indication for the vengance that they wanted for her husbands criticism, no matter how he was reccomended, which we was reccomended by both the CIA and his own wife because he was qualified, not because he was any of the things that the far right has accused him of being. This is not only the story of revenge but also of betrayed trust from a damaged democracy and a corrupted leadership, and a country that is still dealing with the incompotience of a past administration.
Oh and I forgot one part, because of the prior administrations tramendous fuck-ups, it not only resulted the identity of an operative being ruined but it has also resulted in the deaths of thousands of American soldiers and the ruined lives of many many others, for reasons which were fabricated mis-represented. But I'm sure that those deaths and losses are never on your conscience every goddamn day. Let me know how you sleep at night and call yourself an American. Cause at this point I don't quite see just how you can.
***Sought, something that Iraq was not doing with Niger.*** Except that they were, which has been proven over and over again. You still lose. ***Enjoy your freedoms, even though I can see clearly that individuals like yourself are prehaps better off without them*** Spoken like a good little indoctrinated Leftist. Then again, it's nothing surprising…you Leftists always show your true authoritarian colors when you lose an argument :)
***I loved how you used the word sought in quotations*** Bush's quote: "The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently SOUGHT significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Not "purchased"…not "refined"…not "created…SOUGHT. The end. You lose. ***This is not only the story of revenge but also of betrayed trust from a damaged democracy and a corrupted leadership*** sniffle…sniffle… ***and a country that is still dealing with the incompotience of a past administration.*** Oh, the clown in the WH now is reaching all new heights when it comes to incompetence. ****Let me know how you sleep at night and call yourself an American.*** Irritating brain-dead Leftists like you with FACTS allows me to sleep like a baby :) ***Cause at this point I don't quite see just how you can.*** It's not surprising that you have trouble seeing, Lefty…after all, you somehow continue to convince yourself that Plame and Wilson aren't abject liars after it's been definitively proven over and over again. But enjoy the movie. For my part, the trailers look a little boring. See, if I'm going to pay good money for a fantasy flick, I at least want there to be some trolls or elves or unicorns.
Sought, just one of those sixteen words that they admitted should not have been used in his speech. Sought, something that Iraq was not doing with Niger. I loose? Ha! You lose by the fact that for whatever demented reason you believe those words in that speech to be true despite continued admissions that they were grossly false. Oh and that sniffle remark really shows your true colors and how much you actually care about lives lost and billions of dollars wasted on a war based on a much bigger fantasy then what you ridiculously claim this film to be. The current administration isn't performing anywhere near as recklessly or as stupidly as its predecessor did despite the efforts of a party hell bent on obstruction for it's own gain. I sleep perfectly knowing that the last presidency is no longer in charge and that individuals like you that divide this country are no longer in power. I can see with perfect clarity about where this world is now as opposed to the last eight years. Unlike you who only sees the threat of a foreign entity in charge and actually condones the betrayal of someone who served this country. Enjoy your freedoms, even though I can see clearly that individuals like yourself are prehaps better off without them.
***Sought, something that Iraq was not doing with Niger.*** Except that they were, which has been proven over and over again. You still lose. ***Enjoy your freedoms, even though I can see clearly that individuals like yourself are prehaps better off without them*** Spoken like a good little indoctrinated Leftist. Then again, it's nothing surprising…you Leftists always get a little emotional when you lose an argument :)
No you apparently are just as incompitent and ignorant as the last administration. They have admitted before that those words should have been removed. Because of the lack of accuracy. You apparently ignored or dismissed that part pretty quickly. If I'm emotinal sorry, it's not cause you clearly can't read it's because thousands of Americans are dead over this enormous mistake and you like a traditional right-winger don't care one way or the other. Even Bush himself before he left office admitted that his biggest regret was the failed intelligence on Iraq. You are truly, truly pathetic to keep condoning what the prior administration did. Typical right-wing coward.
It's not about left vs. right but falsehood vs truth. As far as Arimitage goes, he was added to the civil suit. Americans generally do not know that we were able to turn two members of Hussein's inner circle and that they confirmed there was no operational nuclear weapons program. In fact, the second forgery was used in trying to say the opposite. The lies of the Bush era will forever divide us. I know if I live to be 100 hundred years old, I cannot vote Republican again for any position in government. That is how it affected me. The so called "left" has done nothing but protect the Bush Administration on very level also. America needs a truth commission or at least an inquiry like Britian recently had (and inquiry American media hasn't bothered to share with the American public).
Hey rvastar, gota question for you, where is the WMD? Yeah I thought you'd choke up, it's very simple you donkey riding lemming, there has been none found to this day! Period point blank! Can you eveing tell me what was Saddam put to death for? Nevermind i'll tell you, he was charged with genocide over a campaign against the Kurds in the 1980s which culminated with the gassing of Halabja, the largest-scale chemical weapons attack since the Second World War, Raid Juhi, the investigative judge said: "These people were subjected to forced displacement and illegal detentions of thousands of civilians. They were placed in different detention centres. The villages were destroyed and burnt. Homes and houses of worshippers and buildings of civilians were levelled without reason or a military requirement."
Saddam and seven others members of his former regime had been on trial over the the deaths of more than 140 Shia Muslims in the village of Dujail. The defendents are accused of sanctioning a massacre following an assassination attempt on the president.
So ummm Rva? What your diatribe and rantings against the "facts/fantasies" about this movie really means a hill of beans when THE TRUTH that you RIGHTIES seem to want to act bullheaded and stubborn(like an ass aka Donkey) about really is pointless, who cares what was said by Armitage, both Wilsons, Liddy AND BUSH! The bottom line is we were sent into a war with NO justfible reason! And this point is proven in the charges and hanging of Saddam, He wasnt put to death due to his involvment with 9-11(unlike what you righty yokels cont to beLIEve in) He wasnt seeking a reason to have hell rain down upon him either you ignorant righty soap box preacher, Know what it is your talking about FIRST before someone like me sets you in your place! It's not about what you think, it's about what you can PROVE!
Can't wait, I really hope this is Liman's return to form. The man is a great director.
The film is getting very mixed reviews at Cannes. It was booed this morning. Saying that it will be a Best Picture nominee at this time is completely absurd IMO.
hmmmmm, this film looks to have about as much truth in it as a "moore documentary"… which is NONE!
List an "untruth" from a Michael Moore documentary. Chances are you haven't ever watched one. Cowardly stance. Capitalism-a Love Story would be a good start for you but you're probably a busy multi-billionaire so you don't have time to watch.
Are you kidding me?
The main theme behind "Roger & Me" was Moore's inability to speak with Roger Smith, the CEO of General Motors. Moore had an extended back & forth with Smith at a shareholder's meeting in 1987 (two year prior to the movie) as documented in "Manufacturing Dissent".
There's the fact that the bank that offers a free gun with a new account in "Bowling for Columbine" doesn't actually keep guns on the premises and had to specially courier the gun for the purpose of the documentary (Moore lied to the bank in order to stage the scene shown in the documentary).
There's that Willie Horton advertisement in BFC that Moore actually had to splice together two different campaign adverts and add his own subtitles to make it seem racist. That "from my cold dead hands" speech that C.Heston gave right after the Columbine shootings? Actually, it was over a year later in North Carolina. That $245 million to the Tabliban that the US gave? Humanitarian Aid, but Moore omits that part.
Do some research. It's out there.
Try watching FarenHYPE 9/11 and also check out Dave Kopel's "59 Deceits of Farenheit 9/11." Only the insipid would consider Michael Moore as a source of truth for anything. He peddles duplicity & mendacity. Even he, himself, said that this movie was NOT a "documentary," but rather a "mock-umentary" and he actually LAUGHED at those who took it literally & seriously, his audience.
I guess .. with three powerful performances under her belt in a single year .. Naomi is all set to go up the dais in the next year Oscars for Fair Game .. wat say ??
I do wonder why they left Armitage out of it, and didn't really discuss the Vanity Fair article. I also remember her neighbors saying that they knew she worked for the CIA as she had brought it up at dinner parties, so the dinner party scene doesn't seem to have much credibility either. If they wanted credibility they should have presented all sides. I guess the real question is why didn't they?
***I do wonder why they left Armitage out of it, and didn't really discuss the Vanity Fair article.*** That's easy…it diminishes the films propaganda value. ***I also remember her neighbors saying that they knew she worked for the CIA as she had brought it up at dinner parties*** Yeah…an undercover CIA agent who got into her car every morning and drove up to the front gate at CIA headquarters Monday through Friday. Plame was a regular James Bond.
Do we see an actor performing the part of real life Sean Penn visiting Saddam to wish his comrade good luck?
Another Liberal fantasy movie that will bomb at the box office. Does Green Zone ring a bell?
Who is Richard Armitage, you sure won't fing out watching this garbage.
I'm just a movie fan (and a democrat), but one thing I don't understand is if Plame's husband, Wilson, went to Niger to find out if someone is trying to get uranium, isn't that spy stuff? Isn't he doing spy stuff and shouldn't that be top secret? If so, why did he tell all in the New York Times? I have never seen anyone, Democrat or Republican, even address this issue. Also, I thought that you had to go through a lot of secret spy training to get to go on intelligence gathering missions. Apparently all you need is to have a spouse in the agency. But maybe I watch too much James Bond.
No, it wasn't a clandestine visit.
Plame's husband had been an ambassador in many countries and the visit wasn't secret. Bush Jnr's state of the Union address seemed completely at odds with what Wilson found in Niger and he felt that the country was on a path to war based on false evidence. That is why he wrote in the New York Times. And if there is any doubt about this man being a true patriot, he was personally thanked by President Bush Snr. for risking his own life to help Americans fleeing from Iraq during the first Gulf War.
Plame and Wilson had their lives turned upside down, because Wilson dared to voice his belief that the Bush Administration were using faulty intelligence to justify going into a war that would cost untold lives. Really sad thing is that it looks like Wilson was right all along, but the war happened anyway.
Colin,
You still ignore the FACTS.
1. Bush, in his State of the Union address, said that "British Intelligence" had a position that Iraq had SOUGHT NOT BOUGHT uranium.
2. British intelligence TO THIS DAY confirms that they believed and still believe that.
This makes everything you say about "Bush lied", and the "bogus" statement in the State of the Union Address, simply untrue. It is so obvious. Some folks simply cannot give up a good talking point, can they? After all, they have repeated it for 7 or more years, so they have a lot invested in it.
Simple honesty should prevent someone from repeating this canard. If I say to you that Bob said that he thinks Shirley is ugly, you say, "he does not!", and then we get Bob in the room and he tells you that he thinks Shirley is ugly, you would have to conclude that "Bob thinks that Shirley is ugly". No? It is really that simple.
Again, there wasn't any evidence that they were capable of getting it, and the last administratio has admitted, if you could do the research yourself that is, that those words should have been removed from the predients speech because of the inacurracy. This is getting to be redundant at this point. Iraq's foreign minister Naji Sabri who was working for the french government said that he saw no evidence of them stockpiling weapons. The only uraniium that has been found was from the first gulf war. The Butler review has been criticized because it does not offer enough evidence to support its claims
The reason we repeat it, like it or not, is because people are dead as a result of it. Apparently the fact that this administration admitted that they were wrong, Colin Powell admitted that they were wrong, is not simple enough honesty to you is it? I guess not.
Richard Armitage? Who is that?
Colin,
You are apparently obfuscating the issue. What I said was that Bush stated that BRITISH INTELLIGENCE BELIEVED that Iraq was SEEKING uranium. I used caps so you would see the important words. "British intelligence believed" doesn't mean that it would ultimately be proved to be correct. It means what it says. And British intelligence has confirmed that, at that time, THEY DID BELIEVE EXACTLY THAT. Why is this difficult for you?
And "seeking" is not the same thing as "obtaining". You (and other leftists) keep trying to make it seem like the Brits said that he OBTAINED uranium in the effort they were describing. I am amazed that you cannot see the difference. Bush's statement was very simple. British intelligence believed something. They confirm that. What has come to light in the last nine years is irrelevant. Whether there were WMDs found is irrelevant.
I am making a simple point, a limited point. I don't intend to debate this entire, tired issue with you. I would simply like you to admit that, on this point, you are and were wrong. ON THIS POINT, Bush stated what was the truth, whatever you believe about the rest. British intelligence DID believe that, at the time. Case closed.
And it would be nice if you could admit that "seeking" is not the same thing as "obtaining".
What has come to light is irrelevant? Are you fucking kidding me! The entire September dossier and other documents haven't been proven to be complete bullshit. They went off of what they believed was true. What they believed, not what they were certain of. Engaging with that kind of doubt, that is just the kind of incompitence that lead to this war. I wasn't trying to make the difference between seeking and obtaining, I appologize for that. I was pointing out that they were wrong and they had been proven time and time again to have used inaccurate information to justify there actions.
"What has come to light in the last nine years is irrelevant. Whether there were WMDs found is irrelevant"
How dare you Oscar! I had friends that I was in the military with DIE over A LIE!
Colin,
Are you being deliberately obtuse? The issue I was talking about was simply whether Bush's statement about what British Intelligence believed was accurate at the time. The British STILL do not believe that their Iraqi uranium position is BS. (By the way, I think it is inappropriate to use your type of language in an open forum like this. I have treated you respectfully. You don't have to come back with poor language).
I was talking about this particular issue. You and your guys went off over this Bush statement, which gives your Wilson/Plame issue legs. If the statement isn't true, then your Wilson/Plame issue becomes silly.
And don't be silly. This statement wasn't THE THING that brought about the war. You also deliberately obfuscate all the Democrats who saw the intelligence and agreed with Bush. You deliberately obfuscate the fact that Clinton and his administration believed that Hussein needed to be replaced. You deliberately obfuscate the fact that Hussein was in constant violation of the terms of the cease-fire from Desert Storm war.
But that wasn't what I was discussing. You transparently attempt to make the point wider than it is. My point is that all that you are trying to say, about whether or not the Bush administration deliberately attempted to mislead us into war, or whether the Bush adminstration took action that was appropriate at the time, IS IRRELEVANT TO MY POINT. The point that you keep trying to avoid:
That Bush was correct when he said this.
That the Brits DID believe the uranium statement.
That Wilson didn't do anything to change that.
And that this movie (which is the subject of this thread) is bogus and misleading.
But I see that you are a true believer. As such, it appears that you will never admit anything about the obvious inaccuracy of your position. So rant on, my friend.
First off I appologize for using that kind of language if it offends you. I think we deserve more of an appology from other elected officials over what has happend over the course of the last decade. The British's inqueries into the matter in Iraq have been proven to be false no matter how many of them have tried to stick by there original report. The fact that there was any doubt should have been a good indication to them that it was not a good decision to use that piece of information within the presidents speech and for justification to invade another country, which was part of what Wilson took issue with. I'm not condoning the ignorance of other politicians who believed that memo to be true despite the uncertainity that had been presented by many other inviduals before the presidents state of teh union adress, and Clinton was not the one who went to war with Iraq after desert storm.
Well, it's official…"Fair Game" sucks:
http://www.politico.com/click/stories/1005/fair_game_misses_at_cannes.html
If it can't do better than that in front of a room full of leftists, Marxists, and Frenchmen, they should probably just release it straight-to-video. Maybe they could bundle it in a $19.99 two-pack with that other recent turd "Green Zone".
Great movie. It is a shame that we still see people defending the Bush propaganda machine even years after it was exposed. I love how the defenders gloss over the aluminum tube issue, or make light of the fact that Armitage was in fact an official in the Bush administration. They gloss over the fact that Armitage became aware of Plame after reading a "White House memo". And they, most unfortunate of all, dismiss the danger her outing posed to all the operations and assets she was involved with.
My favourite George W Bush quote:
"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." –interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006