1
   

War against Iraq is based on lies, lies and more lies

 
 
frolic
 
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 03:11 am
The documents produced by the US and UK governments alleging a contact between the Nigerien and the Iraqi governments with the aim of exporting uranium are considered fabrications. The Nigerien government thus comes clean on US-UK claims.

US officials in December publicly claimed that Niger signed an agreement in year 2000 to sell Iraq 500 metric tons of a concentrated form of uranium known as yellowcake. The British government also presented the IAEA with "Nigerian state documents" that were to prove Nigerien-Iraqi attempts to trade in uranium after the UN embargo on Iraq strictly forbade this. This "documentation" has been a key element in the US-UK quest to prove Iraq is still trying to develop nuclear arms.

Niger supplied Iraq with yellowcake for its nuclear program in the 1980s, which at that time was legal. During the last months, the British and American governments have tried to prove that Niger recently agreed to resume those shipments, illegal since 1991. US officials claim that Iraq imported uranium from Niger even after 1998 and that more shipments were planned in 2000.

Officials from Niger have however strongly denied these claims. Niger's former Minister of Mining and Energy told the press these charges were "lies". He added that Niger always had cleared their uranium sales with the IAEA, complying with their so-called "red list" that bans certain countries from buying uranium. Also, uranium sales could not be made without the knowledge of the French-owned company Cogema, which operates uranium mining in Niger, the ex-Minister said.

Nigerien officials have also denied there have been made uranium shipments to Iraq in the 1980s. The UN weapon inspectors in Iraq however have confirmed that Niger sold concentrated uranium to Iraq on two occasions; one shipment in 1981 and a second shipment in 1982.

If Niger is found to have sold uranium to Iraq after the 1991 embargo, the Niamey government would be found guilty of the most serious violation of the sanction imposed on Iraq. This would further question Niger's reliability when it comes to sell uranium to dubious recipients, such as terrorists. Niger thus easily could be placed in the US category of "rough states".

IAEA-leader Mohamed ElBaradei now however totally cleans Niger's name and reputation, regarding the US-UK initiative to put the country in connection with Baghdad's alleged ongoing programmes of developing weapons of mass destruction. Mr ElBaradei concluded the documentation presented was not authentic. "We have therefore concluded that these specific allegations were unfounded," he said.

The case made against Iraq regarding a nuclear weapons programme more and more seems to have been fabricated in London and Washington. The allegations first surfaced in London, in a British government dossier of 24 September 2002. Without naming a source country, the British document claimed Iraq had recently bought uranium to renew its nuclear weapons programme.

On 19 December, Niger for the first time was launched as the source of new Iraqi uranium purchases. A US State Department paper, elaborating on the British claims, focused on Niger, the world's third largest uranium producer after Canada and Australia, and the foremost Muslim state producing uranium.

According to IAEA officials, Western intelligence agencies had provided them with documents consisting of correspondence between Iraqi and Nigerien government officials. After comparing the letters with official documents of the Niger government, however, IAEA discovered the "documents" were falsifications produced in London and Washington. The forgery obviously had been made in a dilettante way, with signatures, names and letterheads not corresponding with official Nigerien state documents.

Still, the dismissal of the claims against Niger will leave an uneasy calm in Niamey government offices. The government will ask itself why Niger's name and reputation was being sacrificed to build a case against Iraq.

The new stories circulating about how the forged papers came into being should sound comforting; they had been sold to an Italian intelligence agent by a con man some time ago, with the simple aim of making easy money. The US and UK intelligence services had of course not been involved, anonymous sources now say. This seems a very convenient version to all parties implied.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 1 • Views: 9,829 • Replies: 139
No top replies

 
frolic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 03:35 am
0 Replies
 
frolic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 03:46 am
CIA and FBI sources denied that they have found a connection between Iraq and al Qaida, even though George W. Bush insisted such a connection exists. In brief, quoting an FBI source, "We've been looking at this hard for more than a year and you know what, we just don't think it's there"

In his annual state of the union address, the president set out the case against Iraq. He said that US intelligence had discovered extensive links between Iraq and terrorist organisations including al-Qaida.

Those are Flagrant Lies. What case do the US have againts Iraq? No case at all.

Saddam is a mass murderer. I agree. Isn't Pinochet? Isn't Sharon and his govt? Isn't Putin? Isn't Kabilla and the warlords in Congo? What about them?

Saddam isn't complying with UN resolutions? Is Israel? Is North-Korea? Is Congo? and more other countries. What about them?

Why is Bush so eager to attack Iraq? No credible evidence has emerged to link Iraq with the terrorist attacks on the U.S., yet speculation on this subject has been a recurrent theme, prominently featured throughout the media's "crisis coverage" since September 11. WHY???
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 07:02 am
Frolic wrote:
Niger's former Minister of Mining and Energy told the press these charges were "lies".
................................................................................................
Nigerien officials have also denied there have been made uranium shipments to Iraq in the 1980s. The UN weapon inspectors in Iraq however have confirmed that Niger sold concentrated uranium to Iraq on two occasions; one shipment in 1981 and a second shipment in 1982.
.................................................................................................
If Niger is found to have sold uranium to Iraq after the 1991 embargo, the Niamey government would be found guilty of the most serious violation of the sanction imposed on Iraq. This would further question Niger's reliability when it comes to sell uranium to dubious recipients, such as terrorists. Niger thus easily could be placed in the US category of "rough states".
.................................................................................................
After comparing the letters with official documents of the Niger government, however, IAEA discovered the "documents" were falsifications produced in London and Washington.


After having difficulty in understanding what the Frolic's term "rough states" is all about (I have heard about "rogue states", however), I want to add something: Niger's officials tend to deny everything, including the proven facts. Granted, Niger is far from being a democratic country with strict standards of documentation archiving, official documents of this country, used by the IAEA for verification of the U.S.-UK intelligence sources, cannot be considered trustworthy. The relevant documentation may have been shredded or classified, and Niger, unlike Iraq, was not obliged to disclose its national secrets to the UN weapons inspectors.
About Congo (this with capital in Leopoldville (currently Kinshasa), and not in Brazzaville): IMO, Belgium played a very specific role in the history of this African nation, and this role not always was positive, especially in early '60s. Why the Belgian justice would not switch to investigating these war crimes instead of meddling in the affairs of the countries that have never been a part of the Brussels' colonial empire?
Messrs. Pinochet, Putin, Sharon and Kabilla may be and may not be involved in the mass murders, but their activities do not threaten national security of the USA; these of Saddam, on the contrary, do. Therefore, he gets a priority treatment.
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 07:15 am
But there is one thing that I can agree with Frolic: the war against Iraq is really besed on lies. On lies of the Saddam's regime that lasted 12 years since the first Gulf War.
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 07:40 am
Frolic wrote:
Niger's former Minister of Mining and Energy told the press these charges were "lies".
................................................................................................
Nigerien officials have also denied there have been made uranium shipments to Iraq in the 1980s. The UN weapon inspectors in Iraq however have confirmed that Niger sold concentrated uranium to Iraq on two occasions; one shipment in 1981 and a second shipment in 1982.
.................................................................................................
If Niger is found to have sold uranium to Iraq after the 1991 embargo, the Niamey government would be found guilty of the most serious violation of the sanction imposed on Iraq. This would further question Niger's reliability when it comes to sell uranium to dubious recipients, such as terrorists. Niger thus easily could be placed in the US category of "rough states".
.................................................................................................
After comparing the letters with official documents of the Niger government, however, IAEA discovered the "documents" were falsifications produced in London and Washington.


After having difficulty in understanding what the Frolic's term "rough states" is all about (I have heard about "rogue states", however), I want to add something: Niger's officials tend to deny everything, including the proven facts. Granted, Niger is far from being a democratic country with strict standards of documentation archiving, official documents of this country, used by the IAEA for verification of the U.S.-UK intelligence sources, cannot be considered trustworthy. The relevant documentation may have been shredded or classified, and Niger, unlike Iraq, was not obliged to disclose its national secrets to the UN weapons inspectors.
About Congo (this with capital in Leopoldville (currently Kinshasa), and not in Brazzaville): IMO, Belgium played a very specific role in the history of this African nation, and this role not always was positive, especially in early '60s. Why the Belgian justice would not switch to investigating these war crimes instead of meddling in the affairs of the countries that have never been a part of the Brussels' colonial empire?
Some interesting information on the Belgian activities in Congo (this partially explains their animosity toward Mr. Kabilla) Lumumba Apologies: Congo's Mixed Feelings:
Quote:
On the busy Kinshasa street known as the "standing parliament" because people gather there to discuss the issues of the day, hundreds of Congolese milled around newspaper stalls, reading the news of Belgium's apology for the assassination of their former leader Patrice Lumumba.
Most of the people in the predominantly male crowd could not afford to buy the papers, but that did not stop them from reading the headlines - and voicing their opinions.
"Lumumba assassination - at least Brussels recognises its responsibility," said the Tempete des Tropiques on Wednesday morning.
And La Reference Plus, the only paper to run the apology as a top story, simply said "Belgium asks forgiveness".
Most Congolese have the feeling that Belgium should go even further.
"Up until now they have not given us any good reasons for the assassination. We must know the true reasons for the assassination," said 19-year-old Ben Kabeia.
An old man named Daniel Galamulume was also standing in the crowd.
Born in 1935 he remembers clearly when the country's first elected prime minister was killed in January 1961. [/i]
He said the affair was a "big disappointment" for him.
What he could not forgive his former colonisers for was their treatment of the the Congolese people.
"We needed special permits to stay in this district at night," he said.
"And the Belgians were very harsh with their workers. They used to whip us badly[/color]. The assassination of Lumumba was just another sad event on the list."
Most Congolese I spoke to have mixed feelings toward their former rulers. They still nickname Belgians "Noko", which means "uncle".

But at the same time, they blame Belgium ... not only for Lumumba's assassination, but also for the backing given for 32 years to the former dictator Mobutu Sese Seko, who succeeded Patrice Lumumba.
Since then Congo has been shaken between wars and dictatorships.
[/color]
As a result, even now, Congolese are too busy dealing with a difficult present to commemorate the past.
But if Belgium not only asked forgiveness but was successful in its attempts to help restore peace and democracy in the DRC, then a new relationship would probably start between Belgium and Congo.

Frolic, I anticipate your comment on good relationships between Israel and Mobutu's regime, but I have to notice that unlike Belgians, Israelis did not install this dictator in his office. They just dealt with the only available leader of this African country.
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 08:19 am
Atrocities of the Belgian "Peacekeepers" in Somalia
Quote:

A paratrooper force-fed pork and saltwater to a Muslim Somali child until the boy vomited - again, allegedly to discourage stealing.
Soldiers forced another boy accused of stealing into a closed container, where he languished in scorching heat without water for two days. He died.
A Belgian soldier urinating in the face of a Somali, who in a photograph of the incident appears either injured or dead.

Beasts In Blue Berets (excerpt);A photographic picture of the Belgian "peacekeepers" roasting the Black African kid alive is available at the link that leads to the full text of the article.

Quote:
Belgian paladins of the new world order giddily holding a Somali child over an open flame.One Belgian UN soldier testified that it was a regular practice to use metal boxes as prison cells, and that other Somalis probably died similarly gruesome deaths.[/color]

Village Voice reporter Jennifer Gould came across the accounts of the Belgian atrocitiesIn early July, Privates Claude Baert and Kurt Coelus, the two paratroopers photographed dangling the Somali child over a flame, were acquitted by a military court, which ruled that the incident ... was "a form of playing without violence,"[/color] according to prosecutor Luc Walleyn. And what of discipline from the UN, whose "Code of Personal Conduct for Blue Helmets" requires that peacekeepers "respect and regard the human rights of all"? Gould reports that a UN spokesman dismissed the acquittal of Baert and Coelus by insisting that "the UN is not in the habit of embarrassing governments that contribute peacekeeping troops."

For its diligence in reporting unwelcome news, Het Laatste Nieuws was rewarded with a bomb threat. Reporter Lieve Van Bastelaere informed The New American that the man arrested for making the threat owned a local bar that is frequented by many people in the military, including veterans of "peacekeeping" missions. "He apparently had been angered by what he had read," Bastelaere observed dryly. "We've enhanced our security here at the paper, and the police took the threat seriously, even though he may have been drunk when he made it. He claimed not to remember phoning in the threat when he was arrested."
In September, another military tribunal will be held to investigate[/color]

With such "peacekeepers" who needs SS-Einsatzkommando?
0 Replies
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 09:03 am
Frolic wrote:

War against Iraq is built on lies, lies, and more lies.

COMMENT:

Yes it is -- although I would have added at least one more "lies" to the grouping -- and probably thrown in a "dastardly lies" also.

But I got your drift, Frolic, and we should all be grateful that the vast majority of humans on the planet seem to agree with us on that.

Unfortunately, George Dubya and his group of John Wayne wannabee handlers don't agree -- and they've got the final say at the moment.

This too shall pass!

My guess -- after the next election -- this group will be history.
0 Replies
 
frolic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 10:23 am
Steissd, i dont care about nationality. If Belgians commit atrocities they have to be punished. I followed the parlementary committee concerning the Lumumba murder with more than average interest. "You better read The Assassination of Lumumba" by Ludo De Witte. A full report of the last months of his life and the role our king played in this tragic history. But i dont see what all this has to do with the upcomming war against Iraq.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 10:41 am
http://www.home.earthlink.net/~booblehole/images/Blue_dumbya.gif
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 10:57 am
Frolic, my Prime-Minister has nothing to do with President Bush's plans either (the only things Israel wants is to be informed several days prior to onset of the operation, to have enough time to prepare the Civil Command to the probable missile attacks by Saddam), but you manage to refer to him even under such circumstances. If you did not mention too much Mr. Sharon, IDF and my country, I would not post the things I posted either.
Frolic wrote:
Saddam is a mass murderer. I agree. Isn't Pinochet? Isn't Sharon and his govt? Isn't Putin? Isn't Kabilla and the warlords in Congo? What about them?
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 01:15 pm
Hi all!
George Bush starts to fit very nicely in the Saddam Hussein basket though. WMD, trampling of democratic rights, invading a sovereign state, illegal torture and imprisonment, media control, coups, election fraud, police control, and lots and lots of executions. Mainly of non-Americans like blacks and hispanics.
Regime change for both seems warranted.
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 04:39 pm
The real reasons for the Bush policy - oil and military lobbies payback - are effectively outlined in this interesting video by an ex-CIA analyst, professor Stephen Pelletierre.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 05:11 pm
wolf

Quote:
lots and lots of executions. Mainly of non-Americans like blacks and hispanics.


Who and what the heck are you talking about Rolling Eyes Question
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 05:16 pm
Au, this is just a stereotype. Europeans sincerely believe that Israelis consume Palestinians at lunch. The same people accuse U.S. in torturing Blacks and Hispanics...
0 Replies
 
wolf
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 05:59 pm
I don't know the precise numbers, but I was referring to the dominant number of Blacks and other non-whites having been executed or waiting in the death row cells in the United States. Dubya personally sent thousands of them to death with a simple signature while reading his favorite cartoons. Not so different from S. Hussein you might think. You're wrong: much worse.

As for torture, what the hell do you think those poor souls at the Guantanamo Camp are enduring?

Bush is the last person on Earth who should lecture Hussein.
0 Replies
 
frolic
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 06:55 pm
Steissd, What Happened in Jenin? Nobody knows. You know why nobody knows? => Because Israel officials, backended by American Veto in the UN security council, didn't allow an independant investigation. thats why i call Sharon and his Govt massmurderers.
0 Replies
 
snood
 
  1  
Reply Fri 14 Mar, 2003 07:02 pm
wolf wrote:
I don't know the precise numbers, but I was referring to the dominant number of Blacks and other non-whites having been executed or waiting in the death row cells in the United States. Dubya personally sent thousands of them to death with a simple signature while reading his favorite cartoons. Not so different from S. Hussein you might think. You're wrong: much worse.

As for torture, what the hell do you think those poor souls at the Guantanamo Camp are enduring?

Bush is the last person on Earth who should lecture Hussein.


Wolf - Nobody would like more to have dirt on George Bush than I, but you simply have got to be more careful when you throw around words like "executed thousands". That kind of , uh - exaggeration(?) doesn't help anything.
http://www.tdcj.state.tx.us/stat/annual.htm
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Mar, 2003 07:05 am
Frolic wrote:
Steissd, What Happened in Jenin? Nobody knows. You know why nobody knows? => Because Israel officials, backended by American Veto in the UN security council, didn't allow an independant investigation. thats why i call Sharon and his Govt massmurderers.

The independent commission checked Jenin case. There were 52 people killed, the absolute majority of them being armed militants. Collateral damage counted very small number of casualties, but it was unavoidable under conditions of war in the urban area. The main damage was inflicted to property.
Quote:
And it charges Palestinian militants with deliberately putting its fighters and equipment in civilian areas in violation of international law, according to the diplomats.[/i][/color]

The violence in Jenin came during an Israeli offensive launched on March 29 in response to a homicide bombing that killed 29 Israelis. The heaviest fighting during the period was in the Jenin camp, where the Palestinians said Israeli attacks killed 500 people.

On April 19, Israel approved a U.N. fact-finding mission to probe its military assault on Jenin but later objected to the team's makeup and mandate. The team was disbanded and the U.N. General Assembly then asked Secretary-General Kofi Annan to compile a report on what happened in the camp.

The report was also to look into attacks on other Palestinian cities assaulted by the Israeli army in what Israel called a campaign to destroy terrorist networks.

The long-awaited report, scheduled to be released on Thursday, said that between March 1 and the beginning of May, 497 Palestinians were killed during Israel's Operation Defensive Shield in the West Bank, according to diplomats who got advance copies and spoke on condition of anonymity.

That figure was almost double the death toll of 262 reported by the Red Crescent Society in the Palestinian territories for the same period.

But it said that in Jenin, 52 Palestinian deaths had been confirmed by April 18, and that up to half may have been civilians. It called the Palestinian allegation that some 500 were killed "a figure that has not been substantiated in the light of evidence that has emerged," the diplomats said. [/i]

Israel maintained that it fought fierce battles against Palestinian terrorists in which 52 Palestinians were killed -- the vast majority gunmen -- along with 23 Israeli soldiers. Human rights groups have said 22 civilians were killed in Jenin.

The U.N. findings mirrored those of Human Rights Watch, which said its experts had found nothing to back allegations of an Israeli army massacre. [/i][/color]

The report was based on information from U.N. officials, the Palestinians, five U.N. member states, private relief organizations and documents in the public domain, the diplomats said. Annan wrote to the Israeli government asking for help in preparing the report but U.N. officials said Israel did not make a submission or respond to the letter.

Israel and the Palestinians received copies of the report late Wednesday but refused to comment until its release.

Israel has maintained that its army took all measures possible not to hurt civilians.

The report stresses the difficulty of authenticating information, noting that first hand accounts are partial and often anonymous, the diplomats said.

In criticizing the Palestinians, the report noted that much of the fighting took place in heavily populated civilian areas partly because the Palestinians put their fighters in those areas in breach of international law, the diplomats said.[/i][/color]

Source:U.N. Report: Jenin Not Massacre
Are you disappointed, Frolic: neither UN, nor the Human Rights Watch approved the arrogant lies of Palestinians?
0 Replies
 
steissd
 
  1  
Reply Sat 15 Mar, 2003 07:20 am
I was a participant of the "Defense Shield" operation (my outfit was deployed in the Nablus area), and I can testify: when it was impossible to permit access of the Red Crescent ambulances to the Palestinian casualties, they were brought to the medical facilities of the Israeli military, and they got the necessary medical aid there. In serious cases, injured civilians were transferred for the follow-up and improved medical care to the Beylinson and Hillel Yaffe civil hospitals on the sovereign Israeli territory. The less serious cases were later brought to the Palestinian hospital in Nablus by the military armored ambulances.
Being a medic in the reserve service of the IDF, I personally took part in providing medical aid to the injured Palestinians[/i] (there were very few Israeli casualties in the Nablus area, so majority of patients of my MASH were Palestinians), and they got the same medical treatment the injured IDF soldiers got.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » War against Iraq is based on lies, lies and more lies
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.05 seconds on 05/17/2024 at 04:30:35