"20 Lies About the War"

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=424008
20 Lies About the War
Falsehoods ranging from exaggeration to plain untruth were used to make the case for war. More lies are being used in the aftermath. By Glen Rangwala and Raymond Whitaker
13 July 2003


1 Iraq was responsible for the 11 September attacks

A supposed meeting in Prague between Mohammed Atta, leader of the 11 September hijackers, and an Iraqi intelligence official was the main basis for this claim, but Czech intelligence later conceded that the Iraqi's contact could not have been Atta. This did not stop the constant stream of assertions that Iraq was involved in 9/11, which was so successful that at one stage opinion polls showed that two-thirds of Americans believed the hand of Saddam Hussein was behind the attacks. Almost as many believed Iraqi hijackers were aboard the crashed airliners; in fact there were none.

2 Iraq and al-Qa'ida were working together

Persistent claims by US and British leaders that Saddam and Osama bin Laden were in league with each other were contradicted by a leaked British Defence Intelligence Staff report, which said there were no current links between them. Mr Bin Laden's "aims are in ideological conflict with present-day Iraq", it added.

Another strand to the claims was that al-Qa'ida members were being sheltered in Iraq, and had set up a poisons training camp. When US troops reached the camp, they found no chemical or biological traces.

3 Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa for a "reconstituted" nuclear weapons programme

The head of the CIA has now admitted that documents purporting to show that Iraq tried to import uranium from Niger in west Africa were forged, and that the claim should never have been in President Bush's State of the Union address. Britain sticks by the claim, insisting it has "separate intelligence". The Foreign Office conceded last week that this information is now "under review".

4 Iraq was trying to import aluminium tubes to develop nuclear weapons

The US persistently alleged that Baghdad tried to buy high-strength aluminum tubes whose only use could be in gas centrifuges, needed to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons. Equally persistently, the International Atomic Energy Agency said the tubes were being used for artillery rockets. The head of the IAEA, Mohamed El Baradei, told the UN Security Council in January that the tubes were not even suitable for centrifuges.

5 Iraq still had vast stocks of chemical and biological weapons from the first Gulf War

Iraq possessed enough dangerous substances to kill the whole world, it was alleged more than once. It had pilotless aircraft which could be smuggled into the US and used to spray chemical and biological toxins. Experts pointed out that apart from mustard gas, Iraq never had the technology to produce materials with a shelf-life of 12 years, the time between the two wars. All such agents would have deteriorated to the point of uselessness years ago.

6 Iraq retained up to 20 missiles which could carry chemical or biological warheads, with a range which would threaten British forces in Cyprus

Apart from the fact that there has been no sign of these missiles since the invasion, Britain downplayed the risk of there being any such weapons in Iraq once the fighting began. It was also revealed that chemical protection equipment was removed from British bases in Cyprus last year, indicating that the Government did not take its own claims seriously.

7 Saddam Hussein had the wherewithal to develop smallpox

This allegation was made by the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, in his address to the UN Security Council in February. The following month the UN said there was nothing to support it.

8 US and British claims were supported by the inspectors

According to Jack Straw, chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix "pointed out" that Iraq had 10,000 litres of anthrax. Tony Blair said Iraq's chemical, biological and "indeed the nuclear weapons programme" had been well documented by the UN. Mr Blix's reply? "This is not the same as saying there are weapons of mass destruction," he said last September. "If I had solid evidence that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction or were constructing such weapons, I would take it to the Security Council." In May this year he added: "I am obviously very interested in the question of whether or not there were weapons of mass destruction, and I am beginning to suspect there possibly were not."

9 Previous weapons inspections had failed

Tony Blair told this newspaper in March that the UN had "tried unsuccessfully for 12 years to get Saddam to disarm peacefully". But in 1999 a Security Council panel concluded: "Although important elements still have to be resolved, the bulk of Iraq's proscribed weapons programmes has been eliminated." Mr Blair also claimed UN inspectors "found no trace at all of Saddam's offensive biological weapons programme" until his son-in-law defected. In fact the UN got the regime to admit to its biological weapons programme more than a month before the defection.

10 Iraq was obstructing the inspectors

Britain's February "dodgy dossier" claimed inspectors' escorts were "trained to start long arguments" with other Iraqi officials while evidence was being hidden, and inspectors' journeys were monitored and notified ahead to remove surprise. Dr Blix said in February that the UN had conducted more than 400 inspections, all without notice, covering more than 300 sites. "We note that access to sites has so far been without problems," he said. : "In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew that the inspectors were coming."

11 Iraq could deploy its weapons of mass destruction in 45 minutes

This now-notorious claim was based on a single source, said to be a serving Iraqi military officer. This individual has not been produced since the war, but in any case Tony Blair contradicted the claim in April. He said Iraq had begun to conceal its weapons in May 2002, which meant that they could not have been used within 45 minutes.

12 The "dodgy dossier"

Mr Blair told the Commons in February, when the dossier was issued: "We issued further intelligence over the weekend about the infrastructure of concealment. It is obviously difficult when we publish intelligence reports." It soon emerged that most of it was cribbed without attribution from three articles on the internet. Last month Alastair Campbell took responsibility for the plagiarism committed by his staff, but stood by the dossier's accuracy, even though it confused two Iraqi intelligence organisations, and said one moved to new headquarters in 1990, two years before it was created.

13 War would be easy

Public fears of war in the US and Britain were assuaged by assurances that oppressed Iraqis would welcome the invading forces; that "demolishing Saddam Hussein's military power and liberating Iraq would be a cakewalk", in the words of Kenneth Adelman, a senior Pentagon official in two previous Republican administrations. Resistance was patchy, but stiffer than expected, mainly from irregular forces fighting in civilian clothes. "This wasn't the enemy we war-gamed against," one general complained.

14 Umm Qasr

The fall of Iraq's southernmost city and only port was announced several times before Anglo-American forces gained full control - by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, among others, and by Admiral Michael Boyce, chief of Britain's defence staff. "Umm Qasr has been overwhelmed by the US Marines and is now in coalition hands," the Admiral announced, somewhat prematurely.

15 Basra rebellion

Claims that the Shia Muslim population of Basra, Iraq's second city, had risen against their oppressors were repeated for days, long after it became clear to those there that this was little more than wishful thinking. The defeat of a supposed breakout by Iraqi armour was also announced by military spokesman in no position to know the truth.

16 The "rescue" of Private Jessica Lynch

Private Jessica Lynch's "rescue" from a hospital in Nasiriya by American special forces was presented as the major "feel-good" story of the war. She was said to have fired back at Iraqi troops until her ammunition ran out, and was taken to hospital suffering bullet and stáb wounds. It has since emerged that all her injuries were sustained in a vehicle crash, which left her incapable of firing any shot. Local medical staff had tried to return her to the Americans after Iraqi forces pulled out of the hospital, but the doctors had to turn back when US troops opened fire on them. The special forces encountered no resistance, but made sure the whole episode was filmed.

17 Troops would face chemical and biological weapons

As US forces approached Baghdad, there was a rash of reports that they would cross a "red line", within which Republican Guard units were authorised to use chemical weapons. But Lieutenant General James Conway, the leading US marine general in Iraq, conceded afterwards that intelligence reports that chemical weapons had been deployed around Baghdad before the war were wrong.

"It was a surprise to me ... that we have not uncovered weapons ... in some of the forward dispersal sites," he said. "We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there. We were simply wrong. Whether or not we're wrong at the national level, I think still very much remains to be seen."

18 Interrogation of scientists would yield the location of WMD

"I have got absolutely no doubt that those weapons are there ... once we have the co-operation of the scientists and the experts, I have got no doubt that we will find them," Tony Blair said in April. Numerous similar assurances were issued by other leading figures, who said interrogations would provide the WMD discoveries that searches had failed to supply. But almost all Iraq's leading scientists are in custody, and claims that lingering fears of Saddam Hussein are stilling their tongues are beginning to wear thin.

19 Iraq's oil money would go to Iraqis

Tony Blair complained in Parliament that "people falsely claim that we want to seize" Iraq's oil revenues, adding that they should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people administered through the UN. Britain should seek a Security Council resolution that would affirm "the use of all oil revenues for the benefit of the Iraqi people".

Instead Britain co-sponsored a Security Council resolution that gave the US and UK control over Iraq's oil revenues. There is no UN-administered trust fund.

Far from "all oil revenues" being used for the Iraqi people, the resolution continues to make deductions from Iraq's oil earnings to pay in compensation for the invasion of Kuwait in 1990.

20 WMD were found

After repeated false sightings, both Tony Blair and George Bush proclaimed on 30 May that two trailers found in Iraq were mobile biological laboratories. "We have already found two trailers, both of which we believe were used for the production of biological weapons," said Mr Blair. Mr Bush went further: "Those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons - they're wrong. We found them." It is now almost certain that the vehicles were for the production of hydrogen for weather balloons, just as the Iraqis claimed - and that they were exported by Britain.
 

Lucky

Lifer
Nov 26, 2000
13,126
1
0
It would be more credible if it took the time to link to the instances where the administration officially claimed some of these things. Furthermore many of the points are simply mistakes we have made. No, we did not encounter chemical weapons. But does anyone really believe we would further endager the lives of our troops and waste billions just to create an image they were in immiment danger of being attacked...and then not find anything? Surely if there was this vast conspiracy we'd at least find some WMD planted by the CIA or something. Many of the "lies" are simply media hype, and to call others "lies" simply discredits the whole piece.
 

Tab

Lifer
Sep 15, 2002
12,145
0
71
Woot! 20 more stupid anti-war threads! Great job! Your so smart! Its not like no else doesnt know about this already!
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Lucky
It would be more credible if it took the time to link to the instances where the administration officially claimed some of these things.
true
 

MonstaThrilla

Golden Member
Sep 16, 2000
1,652
0
0
A Better Report With Specific Quotes


"The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons."
? George Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in a speech in Cincinnati.

There is a small somber box that appears in the New York Times every day. Titled simply "Killed in Iraq," it lists the names and military affiliations of those who most recently died on tour of duty. Wednesday's edition listed just one name: Orenthial J. Smith, age 21, of Allendale, South Carolina.

The young, late O.J. Smith was almost certainly named after the legendary running back, Orenthal J. Simpson, before that dashing American hero was charged for a double-murder. Now his namesake has died in far-off Mesopotamia in a noble mission to, as our president put it on March 19, "disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger."

Today, more than three months after Bush's stirring declaration of war and nearly two months since he declared victory, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons have been found, nor any documentation of their existence, nor any sign they were deployed in the field.

The mainstream press, after an astonishing two years of cowardice, is belatedly drawing attention to the unconscionable level of administrative deception. They seem surprised to find that when it comes to Iraq, the Bush administration isn't prone to the occasional lie of expediency but, in fact, almost never told the truth.

What follows are just the most outrageous and significant of the dozens of outright lies uttered by Bush and his top officials over the past year in what amounts to a systematic campaign to scare the bejeezus out of everybody:

LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." ? President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."

LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." ? President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.

FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."

LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." ? Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."

FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." ? CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.

FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." ? President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." ? President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?

LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." ? President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." ? Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks ? if they existed ? were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." ? Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." ? President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts ? including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week ? have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

So, months after the war, we are once again where we started ? with plenty of rhetoric and absolutely no proof of this "grave danger" for which O.J. Smith died. The Bush administration is now scrambling to place the blame for its lies on faulty intelligence, when in fact the intelligence was fine; it was their abuse of it that was "faulty."

Rather than apologize for leading us to a preemptive war based on impossibly faulty or shamelessly distorted "intelligence" or offering his resignation, our sly madman in the White House is starting to sound more like that other O.J. Like the man who cheerfully played golf while promising to pursue "the real killers," Bush is now vowing to search for "the true extent of Saddam Hussein's weapons programs, no matter how long it takes."

On the terrible day of the 9/11 attacks, five hours after a hijacked plane slammed into the Pentagon, retired Gen. Wesley Clark received a strange call from someone (he didn't name names) representing the White House position: "I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein,'" Clark told Meet the Press anchor Tim Russert. "I said, 'But ? I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence.'"

And neither did we.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: MonstaThrilla
A Better Report With Specific Quotes


"The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons."
? George Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in a speech in Cincinnati.

There is a small somber box that appears in the New York Times every day. Titled simply "Killed in Iraq," it lists the names and military affiliations of those who most recently died on tour of duty. Wednesday's edition listed just one name: Orenthial J. Smith, age 21, of Allendale, South Carolina.

The young, late O.J. Smith was almost certainly named after the legendary running back, Orenthal J. Simpson, before that dashing American hero was charged for a double-murder. Now his namesake has died in far-off Mesopotamia in a noble mission to, as our president put it on March 19, "disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger."

Today, more than three months after Bush's stirring declaration of war and nearly two months since he declared victory, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons have been found, nor any documentation of their existence, nor any sign they were deployed in the field.

The mainstream press, after an astonishing two years of cowardice, is belatedly drawing attention to the unconscionable level of administrative deception. They seem surprised to find that when it comes to Iraq, the Bush administration isn't prone to the occasional lie of expediency but, in fact, almost never told the truth.

What follows are just the most outrageous and significant of the dozens of outright lies uttered by Bush and his top officials over the past year in what amounts to a systematic campaign to scare the bejeezus out of everybody:

LIE #1: "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program ... Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons." ? President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: "You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that's just a lie."

LIE #2: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." ? President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.

FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: "They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie," he told the New Republic, anonymously. "They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly."

LIE #3: "We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons." ? Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the Press."

FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: "[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." ? CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening's speech by President Bush.

FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: "We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints." ? President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq's control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: "We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States." ? President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: Said drones can't fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq's drone-building program wasn't much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn't a "manned aerial vehicle" just a scary way to say "plane"?

LIE #7: "We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established." ? President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." ? Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States' own intelligence reports show that these stocks ? if they existed ? were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: "We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." ? Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: "Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited." ? President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts ? including the State Department's intelligence wing in a report released this week ? have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair's embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

So, months after the war, we are once again where we started ? with plenty of rhetoric and absolutely no proof of this "grave danger" for which O.J. Smith died. The Bush administration is now scrambling to place the blame for its lies on faulty intelligence, when in fact the intelligence was fine; it was their abuse of it that was "faulty."

Rather than apologize for leading us to a preemptive war based on impossibly faulty or shamelessly distorted "intelligence" or offering his resignation, our sly madman in the White House is starting to sound more like that other O.J. Like the man who cheerfully played golf while promising to pursue "the real killers," Bush is now vowing to search for "the true extent of Saddam Hussein's weapons programs, no matter how long it takes."

On the terrible day of the 9/11 attacks, five hours after a hijacked plane slammed into the Pentagon, retired Gen. Wesley Clark received a strange call from someone (he didn't name names) representing the White House position: "I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein,'" Clark told Meet the Press anchor Tim Russert. "I said, 'But ? I'm willing to say it, but what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence.'"

And neither did we.

I'll start off easy and only do the first couple ;)

1. They had purchased tubes - what did they use them for? Nobody is saying - only speculating. Bush said "the evidence" and he was correct at the time. The "evidence" was later called into question but it still doesn't mean he lied because he didn't directly make the claim.
2. Read the other 2 threads on this. This dog won't hunt. His statement was accurate, the British stand by their intel. Only ONE piece of data was shown to be false and Bush did not specify that it was the intel he was refering to.
3. Read the transcripts of what Cheney said. He probably meant to say "programs" like he did the other 5-6 times he said that. A mis-statement at best.
4. So there weren't high level meetings? Again the statement was accurate - the only thing in question is the continuing connection but that wasn't stated in the speeches. In other words YOU people spun it to mean more than what was actually stated.

OK, so that's all the time I have for now. Better hope your 60% holds up;)

CkG
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The 'Aluminum Tubes' that we have all come to know and love were for rocket artillary - Mortar Launchers,
and had been signed off on for approval by the U.N. as they were conventional ewuipment.
Hi there, I'm your friendly neighborhood aluminum tube

:p Did you look at the chart? It is possible ;)

CkG

so the unlikely explination is actually more likely in your opinion?
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Knowing what I know, yes, anything is theoretically possible,
but then with what it takes of assemble and control a gas centrifuge it's not probable.
There whould have been massive banks just to spin up and separate the Uranium in the gaseous state,
and it would have taken thousands of the tubes in hunderds of the banks many years to accumulate
enough refined material to manufacture sufficient critical mass to do anything with it.
(They were using yellow cake which was left laying around since 1990)
The Care and feeding of Uranuim Hexafloride (Yellow Cake)
Do the slide show.
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The 'Aluminum Tubes' that we have all come to know and love were for rocket artillary - Mortar Launchers,
and had been signed off on for approval by the U.N. as they were conventional ewuipment.
Hi there, I'm your friendly neighborhood aluminum tube

:p Did you look at the chart? It is possible ;)

CkG

so the unlikely explination is actually more likely in your opinion?

Didn't say that. All I said is that it is possible and the real use wasn't proven. So for people to claim it is a lie is wrong. IT IS POSSIBLE. And actually if you think about it, how would you secretly make Nuclear weapons if you were under surveilance like Saddam supposedly was? Would you go looking to buy Nuclear specific parts or would you buy things that could be used for things other than just nuclear? Granted it isn't an absolute but neither is the claim it is a lie.

CkG
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Condi said the it was the only possible use. That makes it a lie by your own reasoning. I don't know why I'm even bothering though, go ahead and keep defending them.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Czar
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The 'Aluminum Tubes' that we have all come to know and love were for rocket artillary - Mortar Launchers,
and had been signed off on for approval by the U.N. as they were conventional ewuipment.
Hi there, I'm your friendly neighborhood aluminum tube

:p Did you look at the chart? It is possible ;)

CkG

so the unlikely explination is actually more likely in your opinion?

Didn't say that. All I said is that it is possible and the real use wasn't proven. So for people to claim it is a lie is wrong. IT IS POSSIBLE. And actually if you think about it, how would you secretly make Nuclear weapons if you were under surveilance like Saddam supposedly was? Would you go looking to buy Nuclear specific parts or would you buy things that could be used for things other than just nuclear? Granted it isn't an absolute but neither is the claim it is a lie.

CkG
So it is not a lie because there is only a small chance of it being true? So basicly if my neighbor buys sugar I can go to the press and state he has a brewery. Then I can go into his home, find out he isnt there at the moment and neither is the brewery, hmmmmm must be hidden somewhere. I realy wasnt lying and because he isnt there to explain it. It must be possible that I was right even though nothing supports my claim and who would belive my neighbor, he is a liar after all.

 

dirtcheapII

Member
Jul 4, 2003
39
0
0
I like this one
19 Iraq's oil money would go to Iraqi
the fact right now is each iraqi policeman only got pay 25 to 30 dollar per month
 

CADsortaGUY

Lifer
Oct 19, 2001
25,162
1
76
www.ShawCAD.com
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Condi said the it was the only possible use. That makes it a lie by your own reasoning. I don't know why I'm even bothering though, go ahead and keep defending them.

Her statement was wrong - yes. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have been though.

CkG
 
Oct 16, 1999
10,490
4
0
Her statement was a lie. Many others at the same time she was saying this were saying that the tubes had other possible and more likely uses. She never said (at least when I saw her on Tim Russett) 'we believe these tubes were to be used as...' or 'it is the position of this admin that these tubes are...' She presented it as an absolute fact and scoffed at those who disagreed. It was a lie, as bold-faced as the word is here. Knowingly presenting an non-absolute as absolute is a lie.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
I'll start off easy and only do the first couple ;)

1. They had purchased tubes - what did they use them for? Nobody is saying - only speculating. Bush said "the evidence" and he was correct at the time. The "evidence" was later called into question but it still doesn't mean he lied because he didn't directly make the claim.
2. Read the other 2 threads on this. This dog won't hunt. His statement was accurate, the British stand by their intel. Only ONE piece of data was shown to be false and Bush did not specify that it was the intel he was refering to.
3. Read the transcripts of what Cheney said. He probably meant to say "programs" like he did the other 5-6 times he said that. A mis-statement at best.
4. So there weren't high level meetings? Again the statement was accurate - the only thing in question is the continuing connection but that wasn't stated in the speeches. In other words YOU people spun it to mean more than what was actually stated.

OK, so that's all the time I have for now. Better hope your 60% holds up;)

CkG
To save time, I'm going to quote myself. Charrison made pretty much the same claims in another thread. Here was my reply:
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
This has been hashed through many times. All three claims have been refuted.

Originally posted by: charrison
1. Forged document show there was a false attempt to get uranium from nigeria. British intel is still standing by it the Iraq tried on multiple occasions to by Uranium from various countries. The CIA also still stands by it report that Iraq was trying to rebuild its nuke program.
No, all of the intel re. Iraq and uranium leads back to the same forged Niger paper. So far, the British has refused to turn over their "additional evidence" to either the CIA or the IAEA, stating that it is not their own intelligence, but information they got from other countries' intel agencies. In every case researched so far, this intelligence has tracked back to the same forged document. In short, all the countries are reporting the same lie.

The CIA did not believe Iraq had reconstituted its nuclear weapons program, but they fudged it a bit under pressure from the White House. From an interview with senior CIA Analyst, Ray McGovern: "I have done a good bit of research here, and one of the conclusions I have come to is that Vice President Cheney was not only interested in ?helping out? with the analysis, let us say, that CIA was producing on Iraq. He was interested also in fashioning evidence that he could use as proof that, as he said, ?The Iraqis had reconstituted their nuclear program,? which demonstrably they had not."

And: "Cheney knew, and Cheney was way out in front of everybody, starting on the 26th of August, talking about Iraq seeking nuclear weapons. As recently as the 16th of March, three days before the war, he was again at it. This time he said Iraq has reconstituted its nuclear weapons program. It hadn?t. It demonstrably hadn?t. There has been nothing like that uncovered in Iraq."


2. IT is currently unknown what those imported tubes were used for. The UN nuke inspector admits they still could be used for a nuke program with modification. To this day no one knows what the illegal imported tubes were used for.
The tubes were NOT suitable for use in uranium-enrichment centrifuges. They were made of the wrong material -- anodized aluminum -- and they were of the wrong dimensions. Everyone except the Bush administration agreed that this was the case. These tubes WERE suited for use in conventional rockets, and were, in fact, the same type of tube Iraq had purchased in the past for this purpose.

The IAEA reported that "extensive field investigation and document analysis" had failed to turn up any evidence that Iraq intended the aluminum tubes for nuclear weapons and that they apparently were intended for use in rockets. The agency said it could find "no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq."

CIA Analyst McGovern said, "The aluminum tubes, you will remember, were something that came out in late September, the 24th of September. The British and we front-paged it. These were aluminum tubes that were said by Condoleezza Rice as soon as the report came out to be only suitable for use in a nuclear application. This is hardware that they had the dimensions of. So they got that report, and the British played it up, and we played it up. It was front page in the New York Times. Condoleezza Rice said, 'Ah ha! These aluminum tubes are suitable only for uranium-enrichment centrifuges.'

"Then they gave the tubes to the Department of Energy labs, and to a person, each one of those nuclear scientists and engineers said, 'Well, if Iraq thinks it can use these dimensions and these specifications of aluminum tubes to build a nuclear program, let ?em do it! Let ?em do it. It?ll never work, and we can?t believe they are so stupid. These must be for conventional rockets.'

"And, of course, that?s what they were for, and that?s what the UN determined they were for."



3. Several AL queda camps where removed from Iraq. At the very least Saddam provided safe harbor to al queda. Many members of Al queda have been picked up in Iraq.
This is simply false.

There was ONE training camp in Kurdish-controlled northern Iraq where we found evidence that some al Qaeda members received some training. It was NOT an al Qaeda camp. It was NOT hosted or supported by Iraq. While there is evidence of one or two contacts between al Qaeda and the Iraqi government, there is no evidence that Iraq supported al Qaeda or that it worked with al Qaeda.

On the other hand, there is solid evidence that Osama bin Laden scorned Iraq and its secular governement, and that he had no respect for Saddam Hussein. There is no evidence of any direct contact between ObL and Iraq -- ever. The CIA told the White House there was "scant" evidence of any connection between Iraq and al Qaeda. The al Qaeda leaders we captured in Afghanistan unanimously denied any connections with Iraq, saying they wanted nothing to do with Hussein.

There have been maybe three or four al Qaeda members picked up in Iraq. This is less than the number apprehended in many other states in the region. It is far less than the number picked up in the United States. The simple fact is that al Qaeda members are scattered all over the globe. That we found a handful in Iraq is irrelevant.

Again, from CIA Analyst McGovern, "They looked around after Labor Day and said, 'OK, if we?re going to have this war, we really need to persuade Congress to vote for it. How are we going to do that? Well, let?s do the al Qaeda-Iraq connection. That?s the traumatic one. 9/11 is still a traumatic thing for most Americans. Let?s do that.' But then they said, ?Oh damn, those folks at CIA don?t buy that, they say there?s no evidence."

From The Independent, February 9, 2003: "The BBC received a Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) document which showed that British intelligence believes there are no current links between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qa'ida network. The classified document, written last month, said there had been contact between the two in the past, but it assessed that any fledgling relationship foundered due to mistrust and incompatible ideologies."


Finally, from Today's Toronto Star:
Al Qaeda claims exaggerated: analysts
A new firestorm of controversy threatens to engulf U.S. President George W. Bush after senior American intelligence analysts accused the administration of trying to justify the war against Iraq by overplaying links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda. The charge comes just as Bush finds himself under increasing fire for overplaying another assertion ? that the Iraqi leader was attempting to buy uranium in Africa as part of a program to develop nuclear weapons.

On Friday, Bush retreated from his uranium claim and blamed the Central Intelligence Agency for misinforming him; hours later, CIA Director George Tenet stepped forward to shoulder the blame.

However, the Washington Post reported today that Tenet successfully intervened with White House officials to remove a reference to Niger in a speech.

Before Tenet's intervention, a presidential speech last October said Iraq was seeking nuclear materials from Niger. This was three month's prior to Bush's State of the Union address.

But, just as the administration was hoping to put that fiasco behind it, it now finds itself engulfed in a new firestorm over claims that Saddam was harbouring top Al Qaeda operatives and able to slip chemical, biological or even nuclear weapons to the terrorist network.

George Thielman, a former State Department official, said intelligence agencies told the administration well before this spring's war about the "lack of a meaningful connection" to Al Qaeda.

"There was no significant pattern of co-operation between Iraq and the Al Qaeda terrorist operation," said Thielman, who left the State Department's bureau of intelligence last year.

His assertions were backed up by another former Bush administration intelligence official, who said any contact between Iraq and Al Qaeda was occasional, at best.

Those statements were backed up by a United Nations terrorism committee that said it has no evidence ? other than U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell's insistence in a U.N. speech Feb. 5 ? of any ties between Al Qaeda and Iraq.

[ ... ]
Bottom line, most of the evidence used to sell this war to Congress and the American public was phony. Bush and his minions lied to invade Iraq. We can only speculate about their real motives, but they were not the same as their stated motives.



 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,406
6,079
126
I'm with Caddy on this. There is a one in three hundred trillion chance that Bush wasn't lying.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: Gonad the Barbarian
Condi said the it was the only possible use. That makes it a lie by your own reasoning. I don't know why I'm even bothering though, go ahead and keep defending them.

Her statement was wrong - yes. That doesn't mean that they couldn't have been though.

CkG

Bill Clinton would be so proud of you. Look at how you twist and turn and nitpick the precise definitions of one or two words, thus evading the plain and simple intention of the statement. You can define 'is' with the best of them.

Here's to you. :beer:
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
The 'Aluminum Tubes' that we have all come to know and love were for rocket artillary - Mortar Launchers,
and had been signed off on for approval by the U.N. as they were conventional ewuipment.
Hi there, I'm your friendly neighborhood aluminum tube

:p Did you look at the chart? It is possible ;)

CkG
Well it's also possible I'm Santa Claus, but I wouldn't be reckless enough to kill thousands of people based on a long shot like that. One would hope our standards for war are a little higher.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,406
6,079
126
Iraq was the target long before 9/11. That only made it possible. Everything was just an excuse. We have a new kind of American in control of America now. The government's been taken over by a pack of cowardly fools.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Iraq was the target long before 9/11. That only made it possible. Everything was just an excuse. We have a new kind of American in control of America now. The government's been taken over by a pack of cowardly fools.

that is true, just look at the group a big part of the administartion belongs to, new american century, should have been a big warning
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,053
0
71
Santa-Bow,

I've been a good boy since I last gassed the Kurds.
Can I have an Aluminum Tube and a nice Yellow Cake please.

Your friend, Saddi

P.S. Cookies, Milk and WMD on the table by the chimney for you.
 

Bowfinger

Lifer
Nov 17, 2002
15,776
392
126
Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Santa-Bow,

I've been a good boy since I last gassed the Kurds.
Can I have an Aluminum Tube and a nice Yellow Cake please.

Your friend, Saddi

P.S. Cookies, Milk and WMD on the table by the chimney for you.
Ho, ho, ho!

T'was the night for invasion
And all through the (White) House
Not a lie was too blatant
Not even a two-bit forgery (sorry)
. . .
On Dicky, on Donny, on Wolfie-o-witzen
On Condi and Colin and missiles a blitzen'
To the top of the polls, to the land of the oil,
Now bombs away, bombs away, we keep the spoil.

(My apologies to whoever wrote The Night Before Christmas, and to everyone who loves it.)