The UN, US and Iraq IV

This is the part of Timber's article that's interesting to me. Also the "unnamed security source" (singlular), the fact that it was a pro-government daily reporting a success story of the Kuwaiti security forces foiling the smuggling of WMD and the fact that no details about the suspects, possible accomplices, where the weapons came from in Iraq and how they were acquired were disclosed, all leave plenty of room for doubt until more evidence of a concrete nature is obtained.

Lola wrote:

Thank you Lola, well said. You should know that in today's NY Post Mr. Novak claims "the CIA never told him that revealing the name might endanger anyone else", and "that it wasn't such a big secret anyhow." What a pissant.

Joe

Yes, Kara, Timber and BillW both sing.......and it's a delight too. As are Gel's funnies above.

But, what I want to know is if I can liken the content of the over the top posting to bird poop. Like crap descending from the sky.

Novak's 'outing' article


Mission to Niger
Robert Novak (archive)

July 14, 2003 | Print | Send

Editor's Note: Robert Novak wrote a column on Oct. 1, 2003 in response to the story that began to unfold three months after this column originally ran.

WASHINGTON -- The CIA's decision to send retired diplomat Joseph C. Wilson to Africa in February 2002 to investigate possible Iraqi purchases of uranium was made routinely at a low level without Director George Tenet's knowledge. Remarkably, this produced a political firestorm that has not yet subsided.

Wilson's report that an Iraqi purchase of uranium yellowcake from Niger was highly unlikely was regarded by the CIA as less than definitive, and it is doubtful Tenet ever saw it. Certainly, President Bush did not, prior to his 2003 State of the Union address, when he attributed reports of attempted uranium purchases to the British government. That the British relied on forged documents made Wilson's mission, nearly a year earlier, the basis of furious Democratic accusations of burying intelligence though the report was forgotten by the time the president spoke.

Reluctance at the White House to admit a mistake has led Democrats ever closer to saying the president lied the country into war. Even after a belated admission of error last Monday, finger-pointing between Bush administration agencies continued. Messages between Washington and the presidential entourage traveling in Africa hashed over the mission to Niger.

Wilson's mission was created after an early 2002 report by the Italian intelligence service about attempted uranium purchases from Niger, derived from forged documents prepared by what the CIA calls a "con man." This misinformation, peddled by Italian journalists, spread through the U.S. government. The White House, State Department and Pentagon, and not just Vice President Dick Cheney, asked the CIA to look into it.

That's where Joe Wilson came in. His first public notice had come in 1991 after 15 years as a Foreign Service officer when, as U.S. charge in Baghdad, he risked his life to shelter in the embassy some 800 Americans from Saddam Hussein's wrath. My partner Rowland Evans reported from the Iraqi capital in our column that Wilson showed "the stuff of heroism." President George H.W. Bush the next year named him ambassador to Gabon, and President Bill Clinton put him in charge of African affairs at the National Security Council until his retirement in 1998.

Wilson never worked for the CIA, but his wife, Valerie Plame, is an Agency operative on weapons of mass destruction. Two senior administration officials told me Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger to investigate the Italian report. The CIA says its counter-proliferation officials selected Wilson and asked his wife to contact him. "I will not answer any question about my wife," Wilson told me.

After eight days in the Niger capital of Niamey (where he once served), Wilson made an oral report in Langley that an Iraqi uranium purchase was "highly unlikely," though he also mentioned in passing that a 1988 Iraqi delegation tried to establish commercial contacts. CIA officials did not regard Wilson's intelligence as definitive, being based primarily on what the Niger officials told him and probably would have claimed under any circumstances. The CIA report of Wilson's briefing remains classified.

All this was forgotten until reporter Walter Pincus revealed in the Washington Post June 12 that an unnamed retired diplomat had given the CIA a negative report. Not until Wilson went public on July 6, however, did his finding ignite the firestorm.

During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, Wilson had taken a measured public position -- viewing weapons of mass destruction as a danger but considering military action as a last resort. He has seemed much more critical of the administration since revealing his role in Niger. In the Washington Post July 6, he talked about the Bush team "misrepresenting the facts," asking: "What else are they lying about?"

After the White House admitted error, Wilson declined all television and radio interviews. "The story was never me," he told me, "it was always the statement in (Bush's) speech." The story, actually, is whether the administration deliberately ignored Wilson's advice, and that requires scrutinizing the CIA summary of what their envoy reported. The Agency never before has declassified that kind of information, but the White House would like it to do just that now -- in its and in the public's interest.

©2003 Creators Syndicate, Inc.

Every rose needs a little fertilizer. With as much fertilizer as some spread around here, there's plenty of opportunity for flowers to flourish. Remember, the fertilizer is well below the blooms and blossoms, and is not the focus of the garden.

If Timber is forced to come up with one more analogy, I'll scream.

I like Timber's analogies

Yeah, it's like his posts, it needs a whole lot of fertilizer before it blooms.

I don't so much dislike the analogies. I dislike the need for the analogies. Its like a freakin' soap opera around here.

Oh, and as far as the Kuwait/WMD article goes, it certainly raises far more questions than it answers. It seems also to have little energy; the English-Language online editions of various Gulf Region newspapers, including Kuwait News Agency, reference only the original AP wire. I suspect this is a non-story. Even Drudge isn't giving it play anymore ... his big feature right now is the Rush, Drugs, and Racism non-story.

True?
False?

Your pick ...




Monday, September 29, 2003
A TALE OF TWO INVASIONS
On August 2, 1990, Iraqi troops crossed the border of Kuwait, a country that had stolen $14 billion of Iraqi oil during the years 1987-1990. The pilferage began during the Iran-Iraq War. At the time, the Iraqis let it slide and then confronted Kuwait after the cease-fire of 1988. In addition to stealing the oil from Iraq by the use of slant-drilling, the Kuwaitis then, against the wishes of OPEC, drastically cut the price of their oil. Each dollar less that a barrel sold for, represented a loss of about a billion dollars for Iraq.
For the entire eight-year Iran-Iraq War, the Iraqis defended Kuwait against any Iranian advances. After all, they were Arab brothers. Kuwait decided to take a different stance during and after the war for its own greed.
The world condemned Iraq's actions and collectively told Iraq to withdraw. Iraq tried to negotiate, but was stopped by the U.S. We all know what followed -- the destruction of Iraq at the hands of the U.S.
Iraq may have miscalculated in its occupation of Kuwait, but the occupation was far from as brutal as the U.S. suggested. About 200 Kuwaitis died during the occupation, most during the military actions of August 2 and 3. Iraq changed Kuwaiti laws to reflect their own secular regulations. For the first time, women were allowed to drive in Kuwait. After a few weeks, most Kuwaitis accepted the occupation. A few went underground. To their credit, they were fighting for what they thought was right.
After the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait, the U.S. implemented reparations and pushed a resolution through the U.N. in which Iraq had to pay Kuwait $50 billion in damages. The irony is that it was U.S. bombs that damaged the Kuwaiti infrastructure, not the Iraqis.
Twelve years later, the U.S. invaded Iraq without the support of most of the world. It created billions of dollars in damage and killed over 100,000 people. It killed the president of Iraq's two sons and publicly showed their bodies. It has created chaos in Iraq. Over 60% of the public is unemployed. Before March of this year, 55% of the Iraqi work force was female. Today, that figure is about 5%. The Shiite lackies have been allowed to implement their form of Islam and keep women from an equal place in Iraqi society.
There are many similarities of the invasions, but there are a few differences. The U.S. killed many more people than Iraq; the U.S. has degraded Iraqi society, not enhanced it; and the U.S. is trying not to pay for the reconstruction of the country it has twiced destroyed.
The main difference is in perception. Iraq is and was a third world country that had to adhere to the wishes of the international community, even though Iraq thought it was right in its actions. The U.S., on the other hand, is the most militarily powerful country the world has ever seen. No one will attempt to put the U.S. in its place.
After about 10,000 years of existence, modern humans still have not risen from the philosophy that "might makes right." We will not last another 10,000 years if this thought process is not halted.
5:08 pm pdt



Blog

Hmmm...How are they smuggling these out if they weren't there

Kuwait foils smuggling of chemicals, bio warheads from Iraq
Associated Press
Kuwait City, October 2

Kuwaiti security authorities have foiled an attempt to smuggle $60 million worth of chemical weapons and biological warheads from Iraq to an unnamed European country, a Kuwaiti newspaper said on Wednesday.
The pro-Government Al-Siyassah, quoting an unnamed security source, said the suspects had been watched by security since they arrived in Kuwait and were arrested "in due time." It did not say when or how the smugglers entered Kuwait or when they were arrested.

The paper said the smugglers might have had accomplices inside Kuwait. It said Interior Minister Sheik Nawwaf Al Ahmed Al Sabah would hand over the smuggled weapons to an FBI agent at a news conference, but did not say when.

Government officials could not be immediately reached for comment.

Iraqi Interior Minister Nouri Al-Badran met on Tuesday with Sheik Nawwaf and discussed cooperation between the two countries in security matters. His visit is the first by an Iraqi interior minister to Kuwait since 1990.

Looks like the Smoking Gun.

Interesting POV, Ge.

Morning B.

Yes .... it raises new question and answers .....
Was Saddams invasion of Kuwait provoked and if so by whom and why.

That was an historical view that I have not heard before, and I want to learn more about it.

I like the way you think

Start here

http://www.indepthinfo.com/iraq/iraq.shtml

Somewhile back I said what annoys me more than anything else about the war is that having gone to war, the war aims have not been achieved, from capturing Saddam to making the oil flow. Sofia (think it was you!) put a ? by the oil comment. This is Robert Fisk in the Seattlepi today:-

from http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/142115_fiskoil02.html

steve, my fav football hooligan

Yes, few beetroot-producing countries have been subjected to American moral indignation on human rights issues.

Sorry, ignore the 1st url

http://www.academicinfo.net/iraqgulfwar.html