WTF Is It Now?!?

Bushies say they never warned of "imminent" Iraq threat
'Smarting from the failure so far to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, the White House denied it had ever warned that Saddam posed an "imminent" threat to the United States.'

So there! Nyah! Phththththth!

White House spokes-hamster Scott McClellan reiterated: "I think some in the media have chosen to use the word 'imminent.' Those were not words we used. We used 'grave and gathering' threat," he insisted.

Whoa, yeah, that's much different.

'But if Bush never called Saddam's Iraq an "imminent threat" in so many words, he said it was "urgent," Dick Cheney called it "mortal" and it was "immediate" to Donald Rumsfeld.'

"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq," Rumsfeld lied in September 2002.

It's funny, but they're all starting to sound a bit Clintonian, aren't they?

Then there was worthless national insecurity advisor Condi 'fried' Rice's whole "smoking mushroom cloud" thing...

Others in the WH didn't say the word outright, but continued to j*rk off their presstitutes in the whore media:

On January 26, 2003, CNN asked White House communications director Dan Bartlett "is he (Saddam) an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?"

"Well, of course he is," Bartlett replied.

On May 7, 2003, a reporter asked then WH spokes-tool Ari 'the liar' Fleischer: "We went to war, didn't we, to find these - because we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn't that true?"

"Absolutely," he replied.

Well, there you are.