2
   

Bush wanted to bomb Al-Jazeera

 
 
username
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 10:51 am
It's our government, Fedral. George Bush is our employee. We pay his salary. We have the right to know what he's doing. That's simplistic, to be sure, but it's also true. There's too much that gets done in dark corners. The more leakers, the more transparency, the better. Looking at what's been leaked over the years, it's been the sewage that our leaders have done that they didn't want us to know about. And that's exactly the stuff it's most important we know about.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 10:53 am
nimh wrote:
I dont agree with FreeDuck that the argument of "taking out media as a strategic move in a war" even comes into play. Its not like it's Saddam's state TV whose targeting Bush was apparently resolved to; it's an independent news provider in a US-friendly state.


That point was made (and I stand by it) with regard to the actual bombings, not the planned but aborted one.
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 10:54 am
CR, it bothers me that he would float a ludicrous idea. what if Blair thought he was kidding, and went along with it. Then what? Bombs away?
0 Replies
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:09 am
Don't forget that we blew up the AJ offices in Afghanistan.

And the ones in Baghdad.

Both times it was an 'accident.'

Yeah, freedom is really on the march now

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:09 am
Well, if it had happened, then both Bush and Blair would have to face the outrage that would follow.

I look at it like this. I am director for a local puppet team. When we have a performance to plan, all kinds of crazy ideas get thrown out there. A member may really think his idea is great, but I often have to talk to him and explain why the idea is not something we will use. Does this mean the person is crazy? Does it bother me that the idea was floated? Not at all.

So it does not bother me that he thought about this idea. It actually gives me comfort to know that Bush is not putting into action any idea that pops into his head, but is open to getting imput from others.
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:13 am
username wrote:
It's our government, Fedral. George Bush is our employee. We pay his salary. We have the right to know what he's doing. That's simplistic, to be sure, but it's also true. There's too much that gets done in dark corners. The more leakers, the more transparency, the better. Looking at what's been leaked over the years, it's been the sewage that our leaders have done that they didn't want us to know about. And that's exactly the stuff it's most important we know about.


Thats absolutely ridiculous and if you can't see that , you need to be locked away in a padded cell where you can't hurt yourself or anyone.

More leaks will mean more transparency ?

If people leak information about things that were done that violate the law, at least they may have the salve to the consciences that they were doing 'The right thing'

But to leak items that were discussed and discarded as not in the best interests of those involved.

It would be like you and your colleagues having a 'brainstorming' session to come up with ideas for increasing revenue at your company where, in a moment of mirth, you suggest taking out insurance policies on some 'expendable' employees and having them whacked to bring some fresh cash into the company...
Everyone chuckles and goes back to trading ideas.

The next day, the company newsletter publishes an article on how you decided to kill employees for the insurance.

The decision was never made...
No crime was committed, but now both you and the company look bad.

In your world, no one would be allowed to bounce possible ideas or even offer advice for fear of being taken out of context and leaked to the press.

That would leave leaders making decisions without input from a staff terrified of being misquoted.
0 Replies
 
CoastalRat
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:14 am
I like your example better than mine Fedral.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:16 am
Fedral wrote:
But to leak items that were discussed and discarded as not in the best interests of those involved.

It would be like you and your colleagues having a 'brainstorming' session to come up with ideas for increasing revenue at your company where, in a moment of mirth, you suggest taking out insurance policies on some 'expendable' employees and having them whacked to bring some fresh cash into the company...
Everyone chuckles and goes back to trading ideas.

The next day, the company newsletter publishes an article on how you decided to kill employees for the insurance.

The decision was never made...
No crime was committed, but now both you and the company look bad.


I suppose, you certainly will advocate that all those who are in US jails just for talking about crimes will be freed as soon as poassible!
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:51 am
Walter Hinteler wrote:

I suppose, you certainly will advocate that all those who are in US jails just for talking about crimes will be freed as soon as poassible!


Examples por favor ?
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:52 am
Fedral's analogy of the company taking out life insurance on expendable employees isn't quite apt. if an employee had accidentally died a year ago, and happened to be insured by the company, then the analogy fits, since the alleged discussion of bombing Al-Jazeera took place about one year after an Al-Jazeera journalist was accidentally killed in Baghdad.
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:53 am
I found a better article Shocked

Quote:
22 November 2005
EXCLUSIVE: BUSH PLOT TO BOMB HIS ARAB ALLY
Madness of war memo
By Kevin Maguire And Andy Lines



PRESIDENT Bush planned to bomb Arab TV station al-Jazeera in friendly Qatar, a "Top Secret" No 10 memo reveals.

But he was talked out of it at a White House summit by Tony Blair, who said it would provoke a worldwide backlash.

A source said: "There's no doubt what Bush wanted, and no doubt Blair didn't want him to do it." Al-Jazeera is accused by the US of fuelling the Iraqi insurgency.

The attack would have led to a massacre of innocents on the territory of a key ally, enraged the Middle East and almost certainly have sparked bloody retaliation.

A source said last night: "The memo is explosive and hugely damaging to Bush.

"He made clear he wanted to bomb al-Jazeera in Qatar and elsewhere. Blair replied that would cause a big problem.

"There's no doubt what Bush wanted to do - and no doubt Blair didn't want him to do it."

A Government official suggested that the Bush threat had been "humorous, not serious".

But another source declared: "Bush was deadly serious, as was Blair. That much is absolutely clear from the language used by both men."

Yesterday former Labour Defence Minister Peter Kilfoyle challenged Downing Street to publish the five-page transcript of the two leaders' conversation. He said: "It's frightening to think that such a powerful man as Bush can propose such cavalier actions.

"I hope the Prime Minister insists this memo be published. It gives an insight into the mindset of those who were the architects of war."

Bush disclosed his plan to target al-Jazeera, a civilian station with a huge Mid-East following, at a White House face-to-face with Mr Blair on April 16 last year.

At the time, the US was launching an all-out assault on insurgents in the Iraqi town of Fallujah.

Al-Jazeera infuriated Washington and London by reporting from behind rebel lines and broadcasting pictures of dead soldiers, private contractors and Iraqi victims.

The station, watched by millions, has also been used by bin Laden and al-Qaeda to broadcast atrocities and to threaten the West.

Al-Jazeera's HQ is in the business district of Qatar's capital, Doha.

Its single-storey buildings would have made an easy target for bombers. As it is sited away from residential areas, and more than 10 miles from the US's desert base in Qatar, there would have been no danger of "collateral damage".

Dozens of al-Jazeera staff at the HQ are not, as many believe, Islamic fanatics. Instead, most are respected and highly trained technicians and journalists.

To have wiped them out would have been equivalent to bombing the BBC in London and the most spectacular foreign policy disaster since the Iraq War itself.

The No 10 memo now raises fresh doubts over US claims that previous attacks against al-Jazeera staff were military errors.

In 2001 the station's Kabul office was knocked out by two "smart" bombs. In 2003, al-Jazeera reporter Tareq Ayyoub was killed in a US missile strike on the station's Baghdad centre.

The memo, which also included details of troop deployments, turned up in May last year at the Northampton constituency office of then Labour MP Tony Clarke.

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh, 49, is accused under the Official Secrets Act of passing it to Leo O'Connor, 42, who used to work for Mr Clarke. Both are bailed to appear at Bow Street court next week.

Mr Clarke, who lost at the election, returned the memo to No 10.

He said Mr O'Connor had behaved "perfectly correctly".

Mirror
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 11:57 am
Any article from the Daily Mirror would by definition not be a "better article"; it's like quoting from The Sun or any such topless-girl-on-page-three tabloid red-top.

I mean ... this is what that article looks like ... nuff said.

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/m2/nov2005/0/8/000CCF70-C894-1382-AB730C01AC1BF814.jpg
0 Replies
 
freedom4free
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:00 pm
nimh wrote:
Any article from the Daily Mirror would by definition not be a "better article"; it's like quoting from The Sun or any such topless-girl-on-page-three tabloid red-top.

I mean ... this is what that article looks like ... nuff said.

http://images.icnetwork.co.uk/upl/m2/nov2005/0/8/000CCF70-C894-1382-AB730C01AC1BF814.jpg


That doesnt let Bush of the hook. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:00 pm
Quote:
Tuesday, 22 November 2005, 17:21 GMT

Bush al-Jazeera 'plot' dismissed

The White House has dismissed claims George Bush was talked out of bombing Arab television station al-Jazeera by UK Prime Minister Tony Blair.
The allegations were made by an unnamed source in the Daily Mirror newspaper.


A White House official said: "We are not going to dignify something so outlandish with a response."

Ex-UK minister Peter Kilfoyle, who opposed the Iraq war, had called for a transcript of the alleged conversation to be published.

Launched in 1996, al-Jazeera is best known outside of the Arab world for carrying exclusive al-Qaeda messages.

The station is based in Qatar, a close ally of Washington's and the location of US military headquarters during the Iraq war.

'Top Secret'

According to the Mirror's source, the transcript records a conversation during Mr Blair's visit to the White House on 16 April 2004, in the wake of an attempt to root out insurgents in the Iraqi city of Falluja, in which 30 US Marines died.


The memo, which the Mirror says is stamped "Top Secret", allegedly details how Mr Blair argued against what the paper calls a "plot" to attack the station's buildings in the business district of Doha, the capital city of Qatar.

A Downing Street spokesman said: "We have got nothing to say about this story. We don't comment on leaked documents."

But Mr Kilfoyle - a former defence minister and leading Labour opponent of the Iraq war - has called for the full text to be published.

"I believe that Downing Street ought to publish this memo in the interests of transparency, given that much of the detail appears to be in the public domain.

"I think they ought to clarify what exactly happened on this occasion.

"If it was the case that President Bush wanted to bomb al-Jazeera in what is after all a friendly country, it speaks volumes and it raises questions about subsequent attacks that took place on the press that wasn't embedded with coalition forces."

'Joke'

Mr Kilfoyle said he had not seen the memo, but had learnt of its alleged contents at the time of the original leak and believed it tallied with the Mirror's report.

Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Sir Menzies Campbell said: "If true, then this underlines the desperation of the Bush administration as events in Iraq began to spiral out of control.

"On this occasion, the prime minister may have been successful in averting political disaster, but it shows how dangerous his relationship with President Bush has been."

BBC News website world affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds said: "An attack on al-Jazeera would also have been an attack on Qatar, where the US military has its Middle East headquarters. So the possibility has to be considered that Mr Bush was in fact making some kind of joke and that this was not a serious proposition."

According to The Mirror, the transcript is the document which allegedly turned up in the constituency office of former Labour MP Tony Clarke in May 2004.

Mr Clarke - who voted against the Iraq War and lost his Northampton South seat in this May's election - said he returned the document to the government because of fears British troops' lives could be put at risk if it became public.

Cabinet Office civil servant David Keogh has been charged under the Official Secrets Act of passing it to Mr Clarke's former researcher Leo O'Connor.

Both men are bailed to appear at Bow Street Magistrates Court next week.

Mr Clarke refused to discuss the contents of the document which he received, telling the Press Association his priority was supporting Mr O'Connor, who he said did "exactly the right thing" in bringing it to his attention.
Source
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:04 pm
Even more 'a source said' and 'A Government official suggested'


Listen, if I find out that a guy stabbed my child and I get pissed off and vocalize that I am gonna KILL that Son of a Bi#$h. (No crime has been committed even though I REALLY want to kill that person)

If my friend Tony comes over my house and hears what I'm saying, whether or not I am serious, sits me down and has a long talk with me to calm me down. (STILL no crime has been committed.)

If Tony goes home and tells his wife what happened and SHE goes to the press with the story that I was going to kill someone, thats not news, its gossip.


How Tony ever think he can talk to me in a position of trust and be able to talk me out of bad decisions?

How will I ever trust him again and will I even listen to him when he gives me good advice?

Things like this stifle free communication between people who should be helping each other.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:13 pm
Fedral wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:

I suppose, you certainly will advocate that all those who are in US jails just for talking about crimes will be freed as soon as poassible!


Examples por favor ?


You aren't holding your breath, are you Fedral?
0 Replies
 
Fedral
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:19 pm
Ticomaya wrote:
Fedral wrote:
Walter Hinteler wrote:

I suppose, you certainly will advocate that all those who are in US jails just for talking about crimes will be freed as soon as poassible!


Examples por favor ?


You aren't holding your breath, are you Fedral?


I never do when I ask the Lefties to 'put uup or shut up'

I just roll along with my life and enjoy the sunshine.

How you been, by the way, Tico?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:20 pm
You don't have conspiracy laws then?
0 Replies
 
yitwail
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:20 pm
A White House official said: "We are not going to dignify something so outlandish with a response."

what, another leak? or can we take this no-comment at face value? and what damage would be done by simply denying that Bush suggested bombing Al-Jazeera? refusing to comment fuels speculation that there's something to hide. this may be shrugged off by the White House, but it feeds distrust of US motives.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Tue 22 Nov, 2005 12:26 pm
Looking at what the Mirror usually published, I have my sincere doubts that the story really is true - there have been too many hoaxes before.

However, if this story really is untrue and White House (and Downing Street) come out now to comment that will do little to convince many in the Middle East.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2024 at 10:56:11