Nathaniel wrote:Quote:
So yeah... anyways... back to my question and the post... they're saying that the information was manipulated just to make Bush look good?
no, the information was manipulated in the administrative branch to convince the congress and american people that there was an absolute need for a war with iraq. when indeed there wasnt a need for it at the time.
i need to restate. the memo is preliminary evidence to spur a further investigation to SEE if there was manipulating of intelligence to sway the congress/american people into thinking there was cause for war when there may not have been
:::
Creative Draft Image Manipulation Forum:::
The downing street memos PROOVE that Bush was fixing the intelligence and facts around the policy.
"On June 13, 2005 London's Sunday Times published the text of another SECRET UK EYES ONLY briefing document prepared for senior British officials. This one was dated July 21, 2002, two days before British intelligence chief Richard Dearlove gave Prime Minister Tony Blair and his top national security advisers a briefing based on discussions with American counterparts in Washington. The minutes recording the discussion at the July 23, 2002, meeting, published by the Rupert Murdoch's Sunday Times on May 1, 2005, included Dearlove's matter-of-fact report that President George W. Bush had decided to bring about "regime change" in Iraq by military action; that the attack would be "justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD" (weapons of mass destruction); and that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.""
Here is a link to the official downing street documents that they are talking about:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/leakedmemos.html
<img src=http://channels.netscape.com/fotosrch/3/20050616DCPM103.jpg>
Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., center, ranking Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, is helped by Rep. Maxine Waters, D-Calif., front row 2nd left, and Rep. Shelia Jackson Lee, left, to hand-deliver petitions to the White House, outside the Northwest Appointment gate of the White House, Thursday, June 16, 2005 in Washington. The petitions are signed by 105 members of Congress and more than 540,000 Americans demanding that President Bush provide a detailed response to the evidence in the "Downing Street Memo". The so-called "Downing Street memo" says the Bush administration believed that war was inevitable and was determined to use intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to justify the ouster of Saddam (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais)
other items of interest:
http://toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050609/NEWS09/506090443
From article: "I think the George Bush campaign raised a lot of illegal money in Ohio," Mr. Brown said. "That puts the election in some question. I know these people stop at nothing and I know their incompetence kept a significant number of people from getting to vote."
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2005/061505X.shtml
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050616/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_vs_bush;_ylt=AlV22iNF8ZJgy2pUzHJY33is0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2bW85OXIzBHNlYwNwbA--
http://antiwar.com/mcgovern/
And we didn't land on the moon either
I think we should start up the draft, and take all the anti-american little kiddies first
If you want a REAL scandal.. why don't you look at the 'oil for food' program. Then notice there was a deal about WMD's involved. And that the U.N. protected certain member states (france and russia)
http://www.washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20040321-101405-2593r.htm
Quote:
But the mounting evidence of scandal that has been uncovered in the U.N. Oil For Food program suggests that there was never a serious possibility of getting Security Council support for military action because influential people in Russia and France were getting paid off by Saddam. After the fall of Baghdad last spring, France and Russia tried to delay the lifting of sanctions against Iraq and continue the Oil for Food program. That's because France and Russia profited from it: The Times of London calculated that French and Russian companies received $11 billion worth of business from Oil for Food between 1996 and 2003.
Quote:
Oil For Food Confrontations connect Saddam to Al Queda attacks and more....
Saddam's Ties to Al Queda ^ | 052605 | Sam Pender
The following stems from my book, Saddam's Ties to Al Queda. The book is a monster-sized info source for Al Queda, and the ties to Saddam's Iraq, but it also has a massive section based on the oil-for-food scandal on which Saddam's ties seem to have revolved. This is not a Bush Admin theory, but my theory, and it's proven in the book. This post lists a summary of the various oil-for-food confrontations, but the book details each one even further. Each confrontation summarized in this post, can be viewed in detail in the book, or in the hyperlink used as the source for this post. There's a LOT of information here, and it took some time, so I hope you find it informative and perhaps even useful. -Sam Pender
*****
Oil-For-Food Program Confrontations
1 January 1, 1996 May 4, 1996 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor oil sales deal with Turkey and US tactical win for Iraq
2 June 1, 1996 June 25, 1996 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor oil sales deal with France + pressure from Arab Summit ended with Khobar Towers attack decisive win for Iraq
3 July 4, 1996 September 3, 1996 Caught smuggling oil with Iran + invaded Kurdish areas = increase in No-Fly-Zones loss for Iraq
4 December 9, 1996 December 31, 1996 UN appeased + Arab Summit putting pressure on Iraq resolved with Iraq terrorist attack at Summit on 12/31/96 decisive win
5 January 1, 1997 February 12, 1997 smuggling fails/intercepted = increase in terror prep and rhetoric loss for Iraq
6 January 29, 1997 September 1, 1997 smuggling increases to Sudan + terror support for Sudan increases = new outside base of ops for AQ and Iraq at the same time draw
7 March 4, 1997 April 4, 1997 smuggling increases + backdoor deal with Russia tactical win for Iraq
8 May 4, 1997 May 4, 1997 backdoor deal with Turkey tactical win for Iraq
9 June 1, 1997 August 1, 1997 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor deal with Syria =UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
10 September 1, 1997 October 8, 1997 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor deal with Turkey =UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
11 October 23, 1997 November 3, 1997 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor deal with Russia = UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
12 November 12, 1997 November 28, 1997 Refusal to work with UNSCOM fails to lead to UN appeasement loss for Iraq
13 December 4, 1997 January 4, 1998 Refusal to work with UNSCOM + backdoor deal with France, Italy, China, and Russia tactical win for Iraq
14 January 4, 1998 February 1, 1998 Refusal to work with UNSCOM = UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
15 January 27, 1998 February 20, 1998 Threats from US lead to threats from UBL and closer ops between Iraq and AQ. Then Iraq makes demands of UN (!), smuggling is intercepted. Ends with UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
16 February 21, 1998 March 26, 1998 Iraq appeases UN re WMD inspections, then immediately begins to work with Bin Laden in depth. Backdoor deal with France reopens inspections, but only in action, nor in substance. draw
17 April 4, 1998 June 19, 1998 Pressure from UN, US, and human rights groups against Iraq leads to closer ties between Iraq and AQ. UBL declares war on US, Iraq threatens US within hours of each other. Embassy bombers are set in motion a few days later. UN, US, and human rights groups appease Iraq's demands. tactical win for Iraq
18 July 4, 1998 July 4, 1998 backdoor deals made with Libya, Syria, Jordan, Iran, and Turkey=UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
19 July 4, 1998 August 20, 1998 UN threatens OFF pricing, and immediately after Iraq and AQ high level meetings occur. Iraqi govt threatens "dire consequences", refuses to work with UNSCOM, and embassy bombings occur the next day. US attacks Sudan and Afghanistan to no effect. Backdoor deal with Iran and Syria=UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
20 August 25, 1998 August 27, 1998 Iraq makes demands of UNSCOM and UN appeases tactical win for Iraq
21 September 3, 1998 December 15, 1998 UNSCOM makes demands of Iraq. Iraq makes demands of UN. US threatens war, but calls back the planes in mid-air to abort mission when Iraq appeases UNSCOM. Iraq ignores agreement, US makes 4 day impotent attack, and inspectors are removed. Desert Fox leads to 911 plot being set in motion 12/16-12/21 decisive win
22 January 4, 1999 January 4, 1999 backdoor deal with Jordan + Iraqi demands of UN = UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
23 January 11, 1999 April 4, 1999 Massive UN appeasement + backdoor deals with Turkey and Syria =even more UN appeasement decisive win for Iraq
24 April 4, 1999 October 4, 1999 US diplomatic pressure falls on deaf ears + backdoor deals with US companies, Jordan, Syria, and Turkey = massive UN appeasement decisive win for Iraq
25 November 20, 1999 January 27, 2000 Iraq makes demands of UN, UN agrees to end game for sanctions via UN1284 and UNMOVIC. Millenium plot intercepted. Malaysia meeting takes place where USS Cole and 911 attacks are planned. Facilitators to those attacks attend meeting with Iraqi embassy help. Backdoor deal and smuggling with Jordan increases = UN appeasement tactical win for Iraq
26 January 3, 2000 January 15, 2000 Millenium plot failed, Malaysia meeting where USS Cole and 911 attacks are planned has the facilitators for those attacks attend with help from Iraqi embassy. Iraq gets very close to terrorist leaders (including Nidal). Iraq encourages Palestinian terror and intifadah begins. end game to use terror as tool for driving UN and US from region is put in play successfully. tactical win for Iraq
27 February 3, 2000 March 31, 2000 Russian tanker smuggling oil intercepted, but instead of retribution, UN appeases Iraq further tactical win for Iraq
28 April 4, 2000 August 10, 2000 Iraq makes demands of all its oil buyers, and the entire world appeases tactical win for Iraq
29 August 29, 2000 October 23, 2000 Iraq makes demands of UN re WMD inspectors and sanctions. USS Cole attacked, but distracted by US election…there is no will for a response. UN appeases Iraq's demands decisive win for Iraq
30 November 16, 2000 November 21, 2000 Iraq makes demands of UN, but is rebuffed so instead smuggles oil via Syria without UN intervention tactical win for Iraq
31 November 30, 2000 December 13, 2000 Iraq refuses to discuss inspectors with UN, makes demands of UN, halts oil, and later reopens sales of oil after UN appeases tactical win for Iraq
32 March 2, 2001 July 21, 2001 UN complains about OFF not being used for humanitarian purposes, but does nothing. Later, UN appeases Iraq further and further. Incident(s) end with what many see as veiled threat from Iraq predicting 911 attacks on NYC in a threat against NYC ("Frank Sinatra's town") decisive win for Iraq
33 August 13, 2001 November 27, 2001 Iraq increases open smuggling with Syria, but UN does nothing. In the wake of the 911 attacks, Saddam is the only world leader to praise UBL, and as Afghanistan is attacked, Saddam makes the demand of UN to remove sanctions in exchange for return of inspectors. UN does nothing. draw
January 20, 2002 President Bush puts Iraq on notice that it is part of the Axis of Evil, must allow inspectors to return (they will a year later), and the time to comply with the UN is coming soon. 8 months later, he will begin making the case for war with Iraq. 15 months after the SOTU speech the US will invade Iraq over its failure to comply with the UN, failure to resolve WMD disarmament issues, and close ties to Al Queda+other terror groups. loss for Iraq
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1410894/posts
Quote:
"U.S suspects Iraqi WMD in Lebanon's Bekaa Valley"
"U.S. intelligence suspects Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have finally been located. Unfortunately, getting to them will be nearly impossible for the United States and its allies, because the containers with the strategic materials are not in Iraq. Instead they are located in Lebanon's heavily-fortified Bekaa Valley, swarming with Iranian and Syrian forces, and Hizbullah and ex-Iraqi agents…. U.S. intelligence first identified a stream of tractor-trailer trucks moving from Iraq to Syria to Lebanon in January 2003. The significance of this sighting did not register on the CIA at the time. U.S. intelligence sources believe the area contains extended-range Scud-based missiles and parts for chemical and biological warheads.
Mutually-lucrative Iraqi-Syrian arms transactions are nothing new. Firas Tlas, son of Syrian Defense Minister Mustafa Tlas, has been the key to Syria's rogue alliance with Iraq. He and Assad made hundreds of millions of dollars selling weapons, oil and drugs to and from Iraq, according to the May 13, 2003 edition of Geostrategy-Direct.com. The CIA now believes a multi-million dollar deal between Iraq and Syria provided for the hiding and safekeeping of Saddam's strategic weapons…."
And the Saddam/Syria mutual shipment society also went INTO Iraq:
"Western intelligence reports allege that several Syrian officials or their adult children were involved in shipments of tank engines, treads for armored personnel carriers, fuel pumps for missiles and other military equipment to Iraq.
One Syrian named in an intelligence report as a "key player" is Firas Tlass, head of MAS Economic Group, a business conglomerate based in Damascus...."
Beauty is in the eye of the beer holder.
listen, george bush doesnt do a damn thing except what his staff tells him, hes a moron, like he could construct a web of lies.
-Borsty
EastCoastBeast II wrote:Quote:
I think we should start up the draft, and take all the anti-american little kiddies first
amen...
Here's an idea: Send the Kids of Senators and Congresspersons over first. Maybe that'll sober the power drunks up a little.
Transeat In Exemplum: Let this stand as the example.
^^^awomen to that
Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Quote:
Here's an idea: Send the Kids of Senators and Congresspersons over first. Maybe that'll sober the power drunks up a little.
No...Send the senators, congressmen, and house of reps over there...put them on the front lines....
^^^I agree with that even more
Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
Some have already been there....some have family members there...some of their parents were senators and admrials when they were on the front lines.
You people act like it doesn't effect them when they hear of soldiers dying...you'd be dead wrong.
During WWII what do you think would have happend to US moral had the media of today reported of the Battan Death March?
Sometimes the greater good is more important than the individual.
I would ask all of you to read this article. It has a perspective I am sure not many of us have ever thought of. Very interesting read.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/17/AR2005061701217_pf.html
Reading that article--it's all conjecture--but what of this debate isn't?
While historians debate, sometimes the here and now is what matters most. In WWI and WWII, if you notice, there was a direct attack, a direct reason, a direct tangible threat: in the simplest terms, the Lucitania and Pearl Harbor. Since then the reasons for war became muddy--to stop the spread of communism (despite the fact that communism is a neureal form of govenrnment--capitolism can and monarcy can be just as evil), or for other reasons. In this weak american society it's feeding on the illusion of security: 9/11 shattered that illusion, however, and the policy makers have tried to shift the focus on cause and effect from UBL to Iraq.
But the question remains--how bad would it have got on the global scale if we did nothing, and would it be worse considering. Persoanlly, i think we should have waited for definitive proof or a call for help. I think that if there was to be a war, it would ahve been better from a near-fully unified front, rather than a near-total split in this country in opinion and a large portion of the world against it.
It could be argued that had the Civil War not happened, would African Americans be as far as they are today? It could be argued that had we not gotten involved with WWI it would have ran right into WWII, and had we gotten involved earlier, dissent and public opinion would have waned for that war, and we'd have lost, moreover, had we waited longer, Hitler could have consolidated and won.
Tiem will tell on Iraq. This could be as bad as Napolean, or it could work out. We can leave conjecture in the future, but the events that will happen wil be the true litimus.
Goodbye Callisto & Skaði, Hello Ishara:
2022 Kia Stinger GT2 AWD
The only thing every single person from every single walk of life on earth can truly say
they have in common is that their country is run by a bunch of fargin iceholes.
