Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

BernardR wrote:

THE Direct Quote from the Butler Report--

a. It is accepted by all parties that Iraqi officials visited Niger in 1999.

b. The British government had intelligence from several different sources indicating that this visit was for the purpose of acquiring uranium. Since uranium constitutes almost three-quarters of Niger's exports, the intelligence was credible.

c. The evidence was not conclusive that Iraq actually purchased, as opposed to having sought, uranium, and the British government did not claim this.

I know Mr. Parados can't read well and I am starting to worry about Mr. Kuvasz.

I'LL SPELL IT OUT FOR YOU KINDERGARTEN STYLE, MR. PARADOS.

The nice mans in the Butler Place wrote- that the Iraqi bad mans really and truly looked for the icky stuff--Uranium.

Stinky Britches, are you a complete fukking mongoloid idiot? You are casting the Butler Report as if it is the Ten Commandments delivered on Mt. Sinai and that there are no other documents from that government that refute the conclusions of it. Other British documents written earlier, before any political pressure was placed on the Parliment showed that the Butler report ignored evidence. The Butler Report has been examined against an earlier one, the Taylor Report that admitted what the Butler report did not, vcz., that the evidence the Brits used (and Bush cited) to conclude that Iraq was seeking uranimum was false.

You don't even know, or worse, willfully deny that the Butler Report was contradicted by earlier reports that admitted that the British Government used unreliable evidence to support the uranium claims.

That you would stoop so low as to lie once again and cast the details of my earlier post on this as coming from the Leftcoast.com is hilarious and completely wrong. What are you, blind or just stupid? Had you taken the time to read and think instead of open your ignorant mouth you would have seen that the citation was from Josh Marshall's website and I linked to it. Didn't you know that?

If you dismiss facts because of where they reside you are an ignorant man. Any adult with a lick of intellectual integrity would be ashamed to post the nonsense you do. You don't seek the truth, all you do is grasp for any convenient factoid to support you untenable positions. And you call such antics your way of attaining a "State of Grace?" Attaining a state of sheer lunacy would be a better description.

All you had to do was go to the links and read the background story on the Butler report and unfolded right before your eyes was the real deal on it, and why it glossed over and misrepresented the earlier work of the Taylor report. The Leftcoast.com articles run several pages of detailed analysis with links to prove their positions but too dense obvious for you to understand. You ought to be ashamed to criticize work you have not read simply because you don't like the name of the web site.

That is the typical ploy of one who has something to hide, and in this case it is the the truth you wish to hide, unfortunately, from yourself this time.

That I respect the site and those who post on it and do not spam it as you do almost each day with your posts prevents me from posting each page, paragraph, and sentence that refutes your bizarre opinions that a deluded mind like yours thinks are objective facts.

0 Replies

You know, Mr. Kuvasz, it is possible that you are correct. On the other hand it is possible that you are not correct.

I read your well written( and you do write well, in my estimation) screed above but I find no evidence or documentation or link in it.

May I respectfully request that you provide one. I read enough fiction on these threads. I need not read any more like the post you have just written.

Do you have a link, evidence or documentation?

I do agree with you,I must tell you, that the Butler Report is not the be all and end all, but I must go with it since it is the only authortitative source( Other than the US Congressional Committee's Intelligence Report) that I have.

Please, Mr Kuvasz, I know enough about sources and links to know that any source that calls itself the LEFT COAST must be biased. No source which would purport to be unbiased would EVER take a name like that!

But, dispute is the name of the game. There are few hard and fast conclusions that stand up for ever and ever. Among them, of course, is the conclusion made by some of the Goreistas that the cities of the East Coast would be flooded by 2010 because of Global Warming.

I can tell you ONE CONCLUSION THAT STOOD UP. Despite repeated lying by William Jefferson Clinton to the effect that he did not any sexual interaction with Monica Lewinsky, his DNA was found on the little blue dress. That is one of the incontrovertibles.

In the meantime, the question of Niger and Iraq and Uranium must be thrashed out by intensive study of THE DOCUMENTS WE HAVE AVAILABLE.

I am sure that you noted my links and specific notations as to page numbers where such quotes can be found. Mr. Parados, sad to say, probably never took a course in HIstoriography so he does not know that it is vital to quote primary sources and to give the EXACT LOCATION OF THOSE SECTIONS IN THOSE SOURCES WHICH PROVE A CASE.

Thank you, Mr> Kuvasz. I hope that your beautiful dog is well( I do remember a past illness)

PS do you have links to the "Taylor Report" and others you mention. I know nothing about them and would be happy to look at them, but since, as usual, you give no links, that is not possible.

Don't get so angry, Mr' Kuvasz. It is not good for your blood pressure!!!

0 Replies

The big difference is that Clinton's lies didn't kill anyone. What married man wouldn't lie about a bj in his office? Bush's lies have caused massive harm to this country and Iraq.

Kuv, don't waste a lot of time with Bernie. He is a long, long record of lying and misquoting. He is a pedantic moron of the worst type.

0 Replies

Do you have a link for that, Advocate? You never give evidence. Do you need a tutorial on how to research?

Your material is never sourced. Mine is. When I post anyone can go to my sources to see if I have reported correctly.

Your sources? They are non-existant except that they stem from ignorance- Your own!!!

0 Replies

Beanie, give me a source for your statement that Krugman said that we are going to have a huge depression in 2006? This is one of your lies.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

The big difference is that Clinton's lies didn't kill anyone. What married man wouldn't lie about a bj in his office? Bush's lies have caused massive harm to this country and Iraq.

Kuv, don't waste a lot of time with Bernie. He is a long, long record of lying and misquoting. He is a pedantic moron of the worst type.

A married man with any honor would not get a bj from someone other then his wife at all.

A "man" keeps his promises and his word.
He doesnt cheat on his wife.

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

Do you have a link for that, Advocate? You never give evidence. Do you need a tutorial on how to research?

Your material is never sourced. Mine is. When I post anyone can go to my sources to see if I have reported correctly.

Your sources? They are non-existant except that they stem from ignorance- Your own!!!

Falsus in omnia Bernard..

You still haven't provided a source for your numbers here..

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2182287#2182287

I have asked several times.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

Advocate wrote:
The big difference is that Clinton's lies didn't kill anyone. What married man wouldn't lie about a bj in his office? Bush's lies have caused massive harm to this country and Iraq.

Kuv, don't waste a lot of time with Bernie. He is a long, long record of lying and misquoting. He is a pedantic moron of the worst type.

A married man with any honor would not get a bj from someone other then his wife at all.

A "man" keeps his promises and his word.
He doesnt cheat on his wife.

It's nice that you should mention a man of honor keeps his promises. Bernard promised to answer my question but hasn't. I see you agree with me about honor.

BernardR wrote:

After you reply to Mr. Samuelson's article, Mr. Parados, I will reply to yours.

I can wait for your answer and, of course, replicate it the Samuelson post if you need me to do so.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2177808#2177808

I replied here
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2180363#2180363
and here
http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=2182541#2182541

Bernard has yet to answer my question. Thanks for agreeing with me about honor MM.

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

You know, Mr. Kuvasz, it is possible that you are correct. On the other hand it is possible that you are not correct.

I read your well written( and you do write well, in my estimation) screed above but I find no evidence or documentation or link in it.

That is because you did not read my remarks carefully. The links to which I referred were posted at 9:55 am 8/2. Going to the Leftcoast web site would reveal that scores of links are provided from the detailed analyses of the SSCI report, the Taylor Report, the Butler Report, the international atomic energy agencies, and government papers assessing the validity of the trucated reports from the Italian intelligence report concerning the uranium allegedly "sought" by the Iraqis as well as other documents concerning the uranium claims.

The issue is complcated and not subject to slogans or 30 second sound-bits. But it is understandable if one follows the data.

May I respectfully request that you provide one. I read enough fiction on these threads. I need not read any more like the post you have just written.

Do you have a link, evidence or documentation?

I do agree with you,I must tell you, that the Butler Report is not the be all and end all, but I must go with it since it is the only authortitative source( Other than the US Congressional Committee's Intelligence Report) that I have.

Please, Mr Kuvasz, I know enough about sources and links to know that any source that calls itself the LEFT COAST must be biased. No source which would purport to be unbiased would EVER take a name like that!

But, dispute is the name of the game. There are few hard and fast conclusions that stand up for ever and ever. Among them, of course, is the conclusion made by some of the Goreistas that the cities of the East Coast would be flooded by 2010 because of Global Warming.

I can tell you ONE CONCLUSION THAT STOOD UP. Despite repeated lying by William Jefferson Clinton to the effect that he did not any sexual interaction with Monica Lewinsky, his DNA was found on the little blue dress. That is one of the incontrovertibles.

In the meantime, the question of Niger and Iraq and Uranium must be thrashed out by intensive study of THE DOCUMENTS WE HAVE AVAILABLE.

um that is exactly what the two web sites I linked, the leftcoast.com website and Josh Marshall's have done.

I am sure that you noted my links and specific notations as to page numbers where such quotes can be found. Mr. Parados, sad to say, probably never took a course in HIstoriography so he does not know that it is vital to quote primary sources and to give the EXACT LOCATION OF THOSE SECTIONS IN THOSE SOURCES WHICH PROVE A CASE.

Thank you, Mr> Kuvasz. I hope that your beautiful dog is well( I do remember a past illness)

She is dead.

PS do you have links to the "Taylor Report" and others you mention. I know nothing about them and would be happy to look at them, but since, as usual, you give no links, that is not possible.

See above reference to links. The report can be found in the detailed analysis found at leftcoast.com. if you do a search under Butler report, and/ or Taylor Report a multi-part investigative report-essay list appears detailing the reports and comparing their validity with other public documents. The documents, with scores of citations run thousands of words, and citations are presented each time a claim is made. If you want to learn, procede there and spend an hour or so learning what I already know. If not, remain in the dark, it is your choice.

Don't get so angry, Mr' Kuvasz. It is not good for your blood pressure!!!

0 Replies

Mr.Parados> I am very sorry but if your pusillanimity leads to to hide behind the tired excuse that you cannot respond to my post unless I respond to yours, I am just going to have to list the number of posts which you have either ignored or been unable to answer.

That game won't work with me, sir!!

0 Replies

I am very sorry <Mr. Kuvasz. I do not think it is at all profitable to go to secondary sources when Primary sources are available. Please note---

From Understanding History --A primer on Historical Method- Louis Gottschalk University of Chicago- Alfred Knopf--1971

quote

"Probably the most credible type of document is the primary source. Such documents are the product of official commissions such as Congressional Committees. They are to be distinguished from commentary by reporters or commentators who, for a wide variety of reasons, often oversimplify."
end of quote
I will continue to insist that reports like the Butler Report and the Senate Intelligence Committee are far superior to any propaganda cobbled together by Josh Marshall( a Senate Aide or a Zonked out leftist) or Left Coast blogs.

Try it,Mr. Kuvasz. Read the entire Butler Report or the Senate Intelligence Committee Report. You may learn something.

0 Replies

I am not certain but Mr. Parados either has a vision problem or a memory problem. He says he has rebutted all of the Samuelson evidence.

He is incorrect. He may think that he has. He has not. If he has, it will be a simple thing for him to reproduce( not invent since he says he has ALREADY DONE IT0 the rebuttal word for word.

I will now proceed to divide the Samuelson Column into sections. The Mr. Parados can show what he said about that section--how he rebutted the section. He has, as is he usual wont, left many points unrebutted.

0 Replies

mysteryman wrote:

Advocate wrote:
The big difference is that Clinton's lies didn't kill anyone. What married man wouldn't lie about a bj in his office? Bush's lies have caused massive harm to this country and Iraq.

Kuv, don't waste a lot of time with Bernie. He is a long, long record of lying and misquoting. He is a pedantic moron of the worst type.

A married man with any honor would not get a bj from someone other then his wife at all.

A "man" keeps his promises and his word.
He doesnt cheat on his wife.

ever cheat on your wife? ever been tempted? Would you if you could? Ever lusted after a woman in your heart? You do know what the Bible says 'bout it, its agin' it. And you'll go straight to hell. What about masturbation? Spilling your seed like Onan is agin' God's rule too, or do you go agin' the command of God when you diddle yourself in the shower?

I dont know what your attempt at holier than thou gets you considering the GOP whose ass you kiss appear to be inhabited by a lot more adulterous men than Democrats are, and more sexually perverted too if that nutbag ex-Republican Senator Ryan from Illinois was. The guy was so sick he demanded sex from his wife in public. Hell, even John Bolton the UN ambassador from the US used to swing with his wife and multiple sex partners down at Players Retreat in NYC in the late 1970's.

Adulterers? Gingrich, Hyde, Livingston, Crane, the list goes on.

I'll remind you when you quote Newt Gingrich that you declared him as without honor, and his was coitus-cheating, not oral sex-cheating, either. I agree with you, Gingrich is a man without honor, and I did not arrive at that positon because he lied to his wife about extra-marital sex either. He is just a degenerate liar.

You know, Jesus had it right about worrying about the beam in your own eye before the mote in another's.

0 Replies

+Clinton? please Mr.Kuvasz. I am sure that you know more about Bill( the fastest zipper in the West) Clinton.

Here are some questions for you.

l. Did the notorious Bill Clinton actually have an aide in the White House in charge of watching for "Bimbo eruptions"?

2. Was Clinton recorded on tape saying to his paramour, Gennifer Flowers, that "I just think that if everybody's on record denying it you've got no problem... if everybody hangs tough, they're just not going to do anything. They can't?

3. Did Clinton say in his deposition in 1992 in answer to the question--Did you ever have sexual relations with Gennifer Flowers--

that "The answer to your question is yes"?

4. Did Clinton, on 60 Minutes affirm that he was, as the questioner put it, "categorically denying that he ever had an affair with Gennifer Flowers?

5. Did Clinton state in a legal proceeding, during his deposition in the Jones case, underoath, that "I have never had sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky"?

Those are my beginning five questions, I have at least two more sets of five to show that Clinton was a lying person who could not control his adolescent urges.

Indeed, the Presidential Historian, Dr. Fred Greenstein put it this way in his book-"The Presidential Difference"--P. 188

"The politically gifted, emotionally challenged William Jefferson Clinton provides yet another indication of the fundamental importance of emotional intelligence in the modern presidency... he is likely to be remembered as a politically talented underachiever whose White House experience provides a reminder that in the absence of EMOTIONAL SOUNDNESS, the American Presidency is a problematic instrument of democratic governance."

0 Replies

BernardR wrote:

I am very sorry <Mr. Kuvasz. I do not think it is at all profitable to go to secondary sources when Primary sources are available. Please note---

From Understanding History --A primer on Historical Method- Louis Gottschalk University of Chicago- Alfred Knopf--1971

quote

"Probably the most credible type of document is the primary source. Such documents are the product of official commissions such as Congressional Committees. They are to be distinguished from commentary by reporters or commentators who, for a wide variety of reasons, often oversimplify."
end of quote
I will continue to insist that reports like the Butler Report and the Senate Intelligence Committee are far superior to any propaganda cobbled together by Josh Marshall( a Senate Aide or a Zonked out leftist) or Left Coast blogs.

Try it,Mr. Kuvasz. Read the entire Butler Report or the Senate Intelligence Committee Report. You may learn something.

Naturally, I give you the links you ask for, than you deny their validity, and get this, even before you even check them out. How is that for intellectual integrity? Only a doctrinaire Marxist has that level of pre-ordained wisdom.

I see that you are choosing a coward's way out again and obfusticating the truth for your insane purposes. That is so old. A real man would take up the challenge, but not you, revealing to say the least. Chicken.... bauck, bauck, bauck!

You asked for the links to the Taylor Report, I gave the link where it could be found, as well as an analysis on how it contradicts the Butler Report, also linked and now you are too afraid to seek out the truth? and you have the arrogance to call what you asked for a "secondary source too?

man that isn't even a ropa-dopa defense, and not anywhere near your standard chewbacca defense.

Btw, in keeping with your own insane style to quantize adjectives, please tell us what percentage of times is meant with your quote using the term "probably." Does the penumbra of that adjective also mean might be, or even might not be the most credible?

Because when the dust settled, the Butler report was found not to be credible, not credible at all in relation to the remarks on what the British intelligence community knew and with what level of believability.

And of course you would know that by reading the links you asked me to post for you.

0 Replies

Butler Report: Error Did It
by Paul Craig Roberts

Key intelligence used to justify war with Iraq has now been shown to be unreliable, concludes Lord Butler in the British government's report about the misinformation that caused a pointless war.

Nevertheless says Lord Butler, there is no one to blame for the thousands of deaths, the massive destruction, and subsequent creation of a new generation of terrorists but mere error itself. "No one lied," not even Prime Minister Blair when he made the unbelievable assertion that Iraq could launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.

No one need resign, says Lord Butler, despite the massive "intelligence failure" that caused a gratuitous act of naked aggression. John Scarlett, who drew up the dossier containing the intelligence misinformation, has already been promoted to head the Secret Intelligence Service.

"Weak sourcing" is used to explain away the disinformation used to start a war. A new and untested "source" was used as the basis for the scary claims. In short, British intelligence "did not generally have agents with first hand, inside knowledge" of Iraq's capabilities.

What they didn't know, they pretended to know, but Lord Butler says he can find no "culpable negligence."

The British conclusion is a war based on utter incompetence, but no one was negligent or to blame. Just those damn errors. If it hadn't been for happenstance errors, Saddam Hussein would have been guilty as charged.

The US Senate's Select Committee blamed "the process." The Brits blame "error." The US and the UK are supposed to be the two greatest democracies, but there is no sign of political accountability in either.

Lord Butler's whitewash was a bit too much for Field Marshall Lord Inge who told reporters, "Intelligence and public relations should be kept apart."

It looks like the "Great Democracies" are going to get away with starting a war without a single valid reason, a war that has killed and maimed tens of thousands of people and created a higher level of instability in the Middle East.

And Americans think we are fit to lead the world.

July 15, 2004

Dr. Roberts [send him mail] is John M. Olin Fellow at the Institute for Political Economy and Research Fellow at the Independent Institute. He is a former associate editor of the Wall Street Journal and a former assistant secretary of the U.S. Treasury. He is the co-author of The Tyranny of Good Intentions

0 Replies

I referenced the "Taylor Report" Mr. Kuvasz, and all I found was the following:

The ULTRASENSITIVE Bay of Pigs: Newly Released Portions of Taylor Commission Report Provide Critical New Details on
Operation Zapata
Edited by Peter Kornbluh
May 3, 2000

I do hope that this is not what you are talking about. Please be so good as to give a link to the alleged "Taylor Report"

.

0 Replies

Scientists are increasingly recognizing that short- and long-term climate variability and climate change are intrinsically linked. CCSP-supported research has made significant advances in understanding the causes of climate variations. Substantial progress has also been made in incorporating this new knowledge into frameworks for predicting future climate variability on seasonal-to- interannual time scales and for investigating the effects of human activities on climate. A new generation of climate models incorporates improved representations of physical processes, as well as increased resolution, putting them at the forefront of international research. Despite these improvements, there are still significant uncertainties associated with certain aspects of climate models.

0 Replies

Fitzgerald Investigation of Leak of Identity of CIA Agent

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know