I don't know if this has been discussed here before or not.

but on March/8 the wash post and the NYtimes both reported the findings of the IAEA that said the evidence being touted by the W.Bush admin were forged documents.

this would be the second incident of evidence pushed by pro-war that became not as asserted. the first was the grad student thesis paper touted as governmental evidence.

the (let's hope) innocent mistake on the part of the Bush admin (they continue to deny it is forged) is one thing. I am more disappointed that this story has NOT gotten more press/air time in light of its importance.

why has it not received more press? why has this story been shelved in the attic? why has it not been aired on CNN?

when asked about it on sundays "Meet The Press", why was Colin Powell allowed to merely respond, "that is still inconclusive.."

The fact that he didn't come out and say "we stand behind the veracity of our evidence" really says something.

wash post article

ny times article speculates on who would forge documents

[ March 10, 2003, 10:58 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

what about this dude?

http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,3000...2265723,00.html

Ung, when I mentioned the false aluminum-tube charge months ago on this board, several people dismissed me on the basis of my source, which was Joe Conason of Salon. He was, it appears, well ahead of the curve.

Once again, we are witnessing very high level lying and dissimulation by this administration, on an INTERNATIONAL LEVEL, as opposed to the personal whoredom that Clinton was involved in. The international deceit, however, has us on the brink of a terrible war and has caused severe ruptures in our links with longstanding allies.

When are we as American people going to say to this administration that it must cease treating us like idiots and lay bare its cards? Tell us what you knew before 9/11. Tell us why our intelligence failed so badly then. Tell us why you really want this war against Iraq. Tell us why our intelligence is so gullible that it's verifying forged documents! For a change, STOP THE PATHOLOGICAL LYING AND TELL US THE TRUTH!

Any use of so-called WMD's such as chemical or biological weapons by the Iraqis would give the US all the excuse it needs to use devastating fire-power to combat Iraqi soldiers who almost certainly will be dispersed among non combatant civilians. Noboby wins this war.

There has been much talk in the news about the increase in precision of US military technolgy since the Vietnam war. I don't think we could be any more precise than the Israelis have been in the Israel-Palestine confrontation - probably less so as our young soldiers are less battle-hardened and disciplined. The only hope of a quick resolution is that the Iraqi people will not resist the invasion to protect a corrupt dictator and system.

That is most likely what the US leaders and military are assuming will occur. If they are wrong the consequences will be awful.

Phillyfan, with all due respect. the articles I bring up are with respect to the administrations "horrifying discovery" of an active nuclear program in Iraq. Remember when they were saying "we can't let Saddam have nukes!"

well... Like I said, it seems all that was a lie.

you respond by saying well... "what about this dude?" and give me an article about Iraq's CHEMICAL WEAPONS . well... I wasn't talking about the chemical weapons. was I?


No one dounts Hussein has chemical and nuclear weapons. and no one would know that better than our govt since we were the ones who sent them over to Baghdad.

(have you seen the pic of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Hussein in the 80s? That would be when Iraq was fighting our enemy (Iran) and it was totally cool for us to ship anthrax direct from the CDC, nerve gas etc for them to use against the iranians.)

so again.... can you please address the topic at hand about why the administration is using forged documents to scream "Saddam has nukes and must be stopped!" (that means in plain english.... "why are they lying?")

Team Chimp keeps up the lying -

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/GMA/2020/GM...s_evidence.html

we have a dialogue with North Korea? That should be news to Bush since he was the one who adamantly has opposed engaging North Korea in a dialogue.
seems Chambliss is not getting the same briefings about admin policy.


I think that would come as news also... Didn't Bush say \"I loathe Kim Jong-Il\" and name him as the 2002 winner of the \"Axies\" the prize given to the year's winners of \"the axis of Evil\"?

again..... North Korea is the ONLY country so far to admit to having a nuclear program AND they were caught shipping a hidden supply of missiles to Yemen just a few months ago that spanish forces intercepted.

who are they listening to? what are they reading? and what are they talking about?

I worked on The Hill in Washington. I know for a fact that the LA's and the staffers give them briefs with more and better infon than that.

[ March 11, 2003, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

Saxby Chambliss is a FREAKING IDIOT!!! A "dialogue" with North Korea? Their leader is not a "terrorist"? The country doesn't have "weapons of mass destruction"?

He ought to put down the crack pipe and look at North Korea's RECENT history.

Just yesterday the country fired another "test" missile into the Sea of Japan. This is an outright military provocation. A year ago (or so) NK SENT A MISSILE OVER Japanese territory. Had it been armed and targeted to hit one of Japan's major population centers, it could have killed hundreds of thousands of people. It has made vague threats more than once against Japan and its sister country, as well as open threats against the U.S.A. I mean, didn't NK say a month ago that it had missiles that could reach the U.S.'s Pacific coast??? Not even IRAN or LIBYA or SYRIA is talking to the U.S. so brazenly! What more does anyone need to know or hear?

North Korea has admitted to kidnapping Japanese and Korea citizens. It has acknowledged possessing chemical and biological weapons, and has at least two nuclear warheads. It tortures and kills dissidents. Its policies have starved hundreds of thousands of its children. It has a large and well-trained standing army (they are the only people in the country other than the apparatchiks in the government who eat on a daily basis), and its troops have repeated breached the DMZ line and entered South Korea.

Neither Russia nor China, two military superpowers, wants to provoke this small, but extremely dangerous nation. It is like a hypervenonous asp--but this idiot coward chickenhawk Chambliss, who defeated a real war hero, is too stupid to see this. Ah well...we get the politicians we deserve....

[ March 11, 2003, 10:09 AM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

I agree with what you sday about Chambliss and his uummmmm... intelligence. However, he is a senator and when he speaks, you better believe that people assume his words to be the Gospel.

also, the message above by Chambliss was also given by U.S. Rep. Phil Gingrey (R-Ga.)

I'm not even gonna touch the \"we can have peace between Israel and the palestinians if we take out Saddam\" .... I mean... pretty soon they're gonna say, \"Your toilet won't get unclogged if we don't take out Saddam\"

But back to the Iraqi nukes thang. The news is out there and no one is denying its veracity. Yet.... it's not being widely reported. why?

.

I'm not one of these conspiracy theorists. But it's very odd. I have voiced this concern with some of the brass I know at some media outlets. and have received nothing satisfactory

[ March 11, 2003, 10:44 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

as the days drag on with this knowledge floating out there and continuing to be ignored..... I grow more and more concerned as to why this has not gotten bigger notice.

I have had some discussions with some people in the media and they will get back to me. more as becomes available.

one thing Fanthomas.... I know that you said this thing about the tubes previously, based on The Salon.com. But really, salon.com is such a liberally biased source that it has to be taken with a grain of salt, just like what comes out of the Bush whitehouse about the war.

Ung, look, say what you will about Salon. Joe Conason loathes Bush, but one thing I will say about him as a writer is that he backs up his sources. You and others can criticize Conason, Krugman, Dowd and other critics of this administration, but 99% of their arguments have held up. Krugman recently pointed out Bush's threats against Mexico, which have gotten zero play here. I spoke with a friend who said that yes, in Mexico people across the political spectrum are up on arms at the steady coercive rhetoric coming from Washington. But do we hear about this? No. Do the right-wing or even "liberal" media organs report it? No. So yes, while Salon is biased (and has increasingly gutted its content to focus on pop culture), I still buy Joe Conason's arguments. He backs them up, and when he's wrong, unlike most conservatives, he will apologize and rectify his statements. (He also gives credit where it's due.)

fanthomas,

as you say yourself.... he has been wrong before (how can he admit to being wrong without being wrong?) and the fact that he "loathes bush" doesn't make for the most objective reporting. does it?

that's what I meant about "taking it with a grain of salt"

I think we're on the same wavelength here on this issue. let's not get our panties in a wad. so to speak.

Bush is wrong and he has lied about many key points. let's keep it at that.

Don't start Anglicizing my name, you French-Spanish basher you.
wink

Just being silly. But seriously, yes, we agree. I do believe, however, that presidential lying is FAR more serious. Ann Coulter, Joe Conason, Richard Brookhiser, Micky Kaus--name your pundit-commentator--can lie all they like, but they're not going to lead us into a war. Or destroy our economy. Or cement in all our wetlands. Etc. George W. Bush has that power. I do keep in mind that of all the people who have their fingers in this pie--Perle, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc.--only Bush and Cheney came close to being elected. Perle, for example, is a private citizen yet is wielding more power than our elected Senators and Congresspeople. Who elected Perle to ANYTHING? Why aren't more Americans, especially democracy-loving conservatives, speaking out about this? You did mention Wolfowitz's recent shameful, dismissive performance before Congress. Rumsfeld just yesterday insulted our chielf ally, Britain, and made things even more difficult for PM Tony Blair. Are these people just hateful morons or what???

There need to be more and vigorous critiques of these self-appointed grandstanders, from the Right.

[ July 06, 2003, 10:27 PM: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

we did! Don't you remember when we were speaking out about Hillary Clinton (as first lady) trying to be the "domestic policy Czarina"? at least now she is an elected senator.

I mean... I agree with you. But Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld etc have legitimate appointed positions to lead official governmental departments. (doesn't mean that I agree.... but...)Hillary didn't even have that. see. now you know how we felt when we were yelping about that.

this is a copy of the letter I sent to Rick Davis (I do not know him) at CNN about the non airing of this story.

my name and address have been deleted.

..............................................

Rick,

As Exec VP of Broadcast Standards, you are "the gatekeeper" so to speak, at The Row of what gets on the air and what does not, especially as it pertains to the Iraq front. Therefore I will assume that it has been your decision as to why a story covered by three of the most venerated News orgs did not get on air at the network calling itself, "The most trusted name in news".

above you will find links to items from The Washington Post, The New York Times and ABCNews detailing the presentation by our president of forged/fake documentation as proof for our going to war.

this story seems to be of fairly great import as the IAEA disavows the assertions of the Bush administration. Yet the only address of this issue vis-a-vis admin heads was a softball lobbed to Colin Powell during Meet The Press by Russert.

"Well, with respect to the aluminum tubes, we still believe the case is out," Powell told NBC's Meet the Press. "The CIA has done a great deal of analysis on those tubes. They are not persuaded that they're just for rockets."

"With respect to the uranium, it was the information that we had," Powell said. "We provided it. If that information is inaccurate, fine."

If that info is inaccurate...... FINE????? Is it just me or is there a disconnect here?

"I think the fact that these documents turn out to be false really is an embarrassment to the Bush administration," said Jon Wolfsthal, deputy director of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

this, as you know, would be the second case of misrepresentation of documents presented by war proponents. The first being a grad student thesis falsely presented as governmental evidence.



I am a republican (really!) who wants to believe the veracity of what comes out of the mouths of our leaders. I am also a conservative viewer who wants to believe that our media is fulfilling its obligation of reporting important developments and informing the public. I also believe that I would see and hear important developments such as this. I would be greatly disappointed in both the gov and your network should this story prove true.

Perhaps I am wrong. But as I stated, being the ExecVP of Broadcast Standards, you are the one singled out as responsible for making these decisions. Not Walton. Not Eason. You. Should I assume that in your zeal to overtake what you guys call "The Evil Empire" (Fox News) that you guys have now co-opted their editorial philosophy also? Or is there a simpler answer than that to explain why you did not let this story air?

[ March 12, 2003, 06:17 PM: Message edited by: ung ]

[img]http://members.aol.com/lcparker00/myhomepage/gb1.gif?mtbrand=AOL_US[/img]

Kim Jong-il with his elevated hair-do, elevated eyebrows and even more elevated, eccentric ego packs more devilry per ounce than the mustachioed Saddam. Even before, the North Korean leader was already driving Washington nuts. He had turned his back on a clutch of promises. He blithely renounced the Non-Proliferation Agreement. He was well on the way to manufacturing about six to eight intercontinental nuclear missiles that could slam into the US West Coast and kill millions of Americans before the year 2003 was out.

America and the world remember only too well that Kim il-sung, the father of Kim Jong-il, launched North Korea’s invasion of South Korea June 25, 1950. Was the father nuts? We don’t really know. Is the son nuttier? Signs so far are that he is. And he may soon decide to blow up the world if he can. North Korea is the strangest, eeriest country in the universe. It has long withdrawn from the world for decades, a hermit country abutting on the Chinese mainland like the devil’s hobbling leg. The last Stalinist holdout North Korea is.

The North Korean leadership now fears America has plans to invade their country. If not, 24 B-2 bomber aircraft based in Guam are ready at a moment’s notice to obliterate Yongbyon where the "nuclear arsenal" is building up. The reaction was swift. North Korea threatened "total war", and now warns any US attack would trigger "horrifying nuclear disasters". Saddam Hussein somehow knew his limits. And he did, because Iraq has no nuclear weapons. But Kim Jong-il, held up to the light, is possibly the blackest of black spiders with a nuclear missile in his claw and ready to fling it at America.

Let’s listen to Rodong Sinmum, official organ of the Workers’ Party that speaks for the government" "If the US imperialists ignite a war on the Korean peninsula, the war will turn into a nuclear war. As a consequence, the Koreans in the North and South and the people in Asia and the rest of the world will suffer horrifying nuclear disasters."

Armaggedon?

[ March 13, 2003, 12:53 AM: Message edited by: Andre29 ]

I don't think N. Korea has enough nuclear bombs to actually destroy the entire planet - but likely enough to render a good portion of Asia uninhabitible for a few hundred years.

How exactly is N. Korea, as a country, not a terrorist nation, or terrorist-supporting nation? Maybe because their terrorism has not (yet) spread to American shores. This is a country that has admitted to kidnapping the citizens of other countries and keeping them prisoner for decades. That alone could be considered an act of war. I guess because they weren't American citizens, it just isn't that big a deal.

You guys dont worry about North Korea, its a "regional" problem.

No oil.

with all due respect to our president....... the reason N.Korea is not yet an official "terrorist nation" is that N.Korea (being an asian, non-muslim nation) has not been connected to 9/11 in the mind of W.Bush.

Bush named (rightly so) 9/11 to be "an act of war and terror". ok. and since Iraq is muslim and mid-eastern ....... well.... there you go.

simple minded? well.... no one (republican or democrat) credits him with deep thoughts.

the best line was the unintentionally backhanded compliment of the warhawks who said, "his strength is that he can take all these complex ideas and distill them down to a simple vision through prayer."
(uummmm.... I think that;s called "simplistic thinking")

as far as the topic of this thread (the forged documenmts) I corresponded with Conason about this issue and he and I agree that whether one is conservative or liberal, the idea of truth is very important. However in my opinion, the idea of honesty is especially important to conservatives like me. That's why I'm horrified.

If we must go to war, so be it. But let that decision be made and supported based on truth not lies.

Sorry to dredge up an old topic (it's amazingly current), but ung was on top of this three months ago and IMHO, this story still doesn't have the legs it should have under it. (I'll definitely pay even more attention to what ung has to say from now on.)

hornfan,

just to let you know about the media coverage angle. I had dinner this weekend with one of the heads of one of the major networks and told him that his network had literally "dropped the ball" on this story and related matter before the war and was continuing to do so after the war.

ung, you may totally change my mind about Gay Republicans if you keep this up! wink At least you call 'em like you see 'em instead of spin control or topic deflection. Thanks for the update.

As always, great posts guys. A few quick thoughts:
1) I disagree with the Hillary was not elected, she was part and parcel of Bill.
2) On the free ride The admin is getting. I think this has been a pattern. Each time an issue comes up, the seems to be very little zeal in getting the story out.
3) This is not an Democrat vs Republican issue. This effect all of us equally, and the very foundation of our standing on the world stage.
4)North Korea is a bigger issue, but one that we can not act on with out China, Russia, Japan and South Korea. If there is no large scale WMD programs or stockpiles in Iraq, the job of dealing with north Korea is much more difficult.

Now the great liar has taken a new tack, which is to viciously attack his critics as revisionists, even though he, his VP, his national security advisor, the Secretary of Defense and the Secretary of State, are all on record as having claimed we were under immediate WMD threat! The shamelessness of lying W. and his cronies knows no bottom....

Yahoo!: Bush blasts \"revisionist\" historians

Another analysis:
http://truthout.org/docs_03/061303A.shtml

B Man,

I enjoyed that link and wanted to print out an excerpt for those who don't wanna read the whole thing.

Oh come on, Ung, all that "sarin" is obviously being hidden in bunkers in Syria and under Khamanei's turban in Iran!

Just so people know how EXTREMELY dangerous Sarin Nerve Gas is, here goes:

"0.4 milligram for an adult...26 times more deadly than cyanide gas...A PINPRICK SIZED DROPLET WILL KILL A HUMAN." And Saddam spirited away 500 TONS before the US invaded? ARE PEOPLE TOTALLY OUT OF THEIR MINDS WITH IDIOCY??? The unelected LIAR probably doesn't even realize what an immense lie he or our intelligence services concocted. Who do YOU think is to blame?

[ June 17, 2003, 09:42 PM: Message edited by: fantomas ]

Here's how this scenario is playing out in other corners of the world.

The link is from "le nouvel observateur". Sort of France's "Time" or "Newsweek".

My apologies to the non-francophones here. But the gist of the article is summed up by the title. "L'axe du mensonge" translates as "The axis of liars"

Once again, I ask: just given the obvious untruthfulness of W's statements on sarin alone, why should we believe anything this man has said about Iraq?

Also, why is Showtime making a movie that is going to clean up and heroize W's performance on 9/11? Isn't he the same president who would not stop reading that book to the schoolchildren after he'd been told about the attacks underway until Andrew Card finally MADE him? Have we ever gotten the truth about the supposed attempt on Air Force One, which even then sounded so improbable it was ludicrous?

Finally, as far as Jessica Lynch's story goes, will the truth come out about that?

Why are GOP supporters who emphasize honesty putting up with the steady diet of lies? Wouldn't W be popular without them? At least he'd be living up to the moral standard he talked about in 2000, wouldn't he?

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,89916,00.html

Critics of the administration want answers from the administration, but it's funny how some of them didn't demand nearly as much from the United Nations (search). Back then it was OK to wait to find those weapons, for as long as it takes, whatever it takes.

It's amazing what critics forget. They forget that the U.N. never got a full accounting of those weapons. Saddam never gave an itemized list. He never mentioned anything about a bonfire that destroyed them, or a pit he buried them in.


You guys are really amazing. EVERYONE from the 80's till now, NEVER doubted he had these things. If he didnt why would clinton missle his ass? Kerry has even said he had them in 97... clinton in his entire terms said they had them. If he didnt have them, why was the UN there inspecting? Dash-shell said they were an immediate threat.... both sides of the fence.

We are now to believe that the ENTIRE worlds itel programs are wrong? please....

Iraq has already tried to gain nuke capabilities... but the Jews took care of that.

Ashcroft came out today with the guy who had plans to blow up the bridge in NYC... i'm SURE that was a lie too...

Come on, this WMD is just not sticking and people are not mad, except a minority of them.

One of the main reasons Clinton missiled Hussein's ass was because of Hussein's attempted assassination of the elder President Bush.

and yes, Iraw had tried to get nuke capability. and yes. as you say the jews (meaning Israel) took care of that. But the israelis bombed Iraq 20 years ago.

What we have never disputed was that Saddam DID at once (years ago)have weapons. again.. that's not what's being disputed with regards to the WMD and Iraqi nukes.
what IS being discussed is W.Bush's claim about iraq having nukes LAST YEAR and the documents used as evidence being declared fakes.

What IS being discussed is W.Bush's assertion that Saddam was an "imminent threat" to the US with millions of pounds of WMD **THIS YEAR**.

We hear ya Philly. and agree that Saddam was a scumbag and did possess weapons. That's not what we're discussing. What we're discussing is "Did our president lie?"

[ June 19, 2003, 06:04 PM: Message edited by: ung ]

here is a minority that might feel it is a big deal
http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/Primetim...Casualties.html

To put that in perspective, a modern large diesel locomotive weighs 250 tons, so 500 tons is the size of two diesel locomotives.

These are not my pictures.

[ July 06, 2003, 10:28 PM: Message edited by: Tarkus ]

the latest wrinkle in the "Weapons of Mass Destruction:We got 'em!" saga is this.

The State department's own intelligence office is disputing the CIA's conclusion about the trailers found in Iraq.

To recap, the trailers were what G.W.Bush cited as "proof that we had found WMDs in Iraq" while in Poland.

link to State Dept dissent article

[ June 26, 2003, 02:08 PM: Message edited by: ung ]

A British company sold those trailers to Iraq and stated weeks ago that they were used for "hydrogen production." The CIA has blown its credibility so completely that if W doesn't fire Tenet, he should be impeached for grossly endangering the safety of the American people.

Don't freak and please remain calm, but it seems they found some castor beans....yes, castor beans. eek!

well you know Hornfan. Those beans, If ingested, could produce some dangerous gases!

THAT! My friend, is your Weapon of Mass Destruction!
eek!

[ June 27, 2003, 08:21 AM: Message edited by: ung ]

My Dad grew Castor Beans in our backyard when I was a kid...who knew he was a terrorist with WOMD?

John Ashcroft - phone your office.

a recent Wash post (or was it NY Times?) article described the meeting where W.Bush became angered that none of his top deputies had been expressly assigned the duty of finding the weapons.

Despite official denials to the contrary, many in and out of the administration are worrying about th eimplications of the non-discovery.

This is priceless, Bush is even a bigger idiot than I thought.
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/...-461781,00.html
________________________________________________

Meeting last month at a sweltering U.S. base outside Doha, Qatar, with his top Iraq commanders, President Bush skipped quickly past the niceties and went straight to his chief political obsession: Where are the weapons of mass destruction? Turning to his Baghdad proconsul, Paul Bremer, Bush asked, "Are you in charge of finding WMD?" Bremer said no, he was not. Bush then put the same question to his military commander, General Tommy Franks. But Franks said it wasn't his job either. A little exasperated, Bush asked, So who is in charge of finding WMD? After aides conferred for a moment, someone volunteered the name of Stephen Cambone, a little-known deputy to Donald Rumsfeld, back in Washington. Pause. "Who?" Bush asked.

Hey Raze -- I think the sign on W's desk reads "The buck stops where?"

It doesn't stop where it should, that is for sure.

Bush - "We cant find the sign, who is responsible for finding the sign?"

W: "Who's in charge of reading the sign?"

DUImbya blathers on:

"You've also got to measure in order to begin to effect change that's just more—when there's more than talk, there's just actual—a paradigm shift."—Washington, D.C., July 1, 2003

"Iran would be dangerous if they have a nuclear weapon."—Washington, D.C., June 18, 2003

"Now, there are some who would like to rewrite history—revisionist historians is what I like to call them."—Elizabeth, N.J., June 16, 2003

"I'm also not very analytical. You know I don't spend a lot of time thinking about myself, about why I do things."— Aboard Air Force One, June 4, 2003

"I've got very good relations with President Mubarak and Crown Prince Abdallah and the King of Jordan, Gulf Coast countries."— Washington, D.C., May 29, 2003

"We ended the rule of one of history's worst tyrants, and in so doing, we not only freed the American people, we made our own people more secure."—Crawford, Texas, May 3, 2003

"We've got hundreds of sites to exploit, looking for the chemical and biological weapons that we know Saddam Hussein had prior to our entrance into Iraq."—Santa Clara, Calif., May 2, 2003

"I think war is a dangerous place."—Washington, D.C., May 7, 2003

The Onion, as usual, nails one on the head! Bush Asks Congress for $30 Billion to Help Fight War on Criticism.

"We've become too complacent," Attorney General John Ashcroft said. "We've grown accustomed to thinking of criticism as something that only happens to people in other political parties. But this administration needs this funding to counter a very real threat to its reputation."

Ashcroft said the Justice Department, working closely with the CIA and FBI, has identified more than 300 potential targets, ranging from the Bush Administration's inability to produce the weapons of mass destruction used to justify the war with Iraq to its deficit-ballooning fiscal policies.

"I doubt I could protect my ongoing Halliburton cronyism from critical strikes with just a few million dollars—especially if it was not accompanied by powerful preemptive legislation," Vice-President Dick Cheney said. "We need to build stronger anti-criticism defense shields in this country. And the time to act is now, before the media say something negative about us."

[ July 02, 2003, 06:12 AM: Message edited by: DCBucky ]

Obviously.