Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Alighieri who wrote (170786)	6/7/2003 2:05:16 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1583391

The U.S. government is not the only one capable of embellishing reality. Mr. Bush's ally, British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who may prove to be a distant relative of Jayson Blair, put out a report saying that Iraq could use its weapons on 45 minutes' notice. But an anonymous British intelligence official told the BBC that claim was added at the insistence of the prime minister and "wasn't reliable." LOL. I did notice that Jayson had a faint accent. <g> ted

To: Alighieri who wrote (170786)	6/7/2003 2:09:13 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1583391

Republican Sen. Richard G. Lugar of Indiana, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, complained that "the administration has not sufficiently involved Congress and the American people in its plans regarding the costs, methods and goals of reconstructing Iraq." No, it hasn't, and it isn't about to. Doesn't the above say it all......."let them eat cake"! ted

To: Alighieri who wrote (170786)	6/7/2003 2:21:28 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1583391

Published on Saturday, June 7, 2003 by the Guardian/UK I Was Shocked by Poor Weapons Intelligence - Blix by Ewen MacAskill, Richard Norton-Taylor, and Suzanne Goldenberg in Washington The UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, expressed his disappointment yesterday at the quality of the intelligence given to him by the US and Britain before the war with Iraq. Mr Blix, who retires at the end of the month, told the BBC: "We went to a great many sites that were given to us by intelligence, and only in three cases did we find anything - and they did not relate to weapons of mass destruction. That shook me a bit, I must say." He added: "I thought 'My God, if this is the best intelligence they had and we find nothing, what about the rest?'" As he was speaking the credibility of the White House claim that Saddam Hussein posed an imminent threat to the world took a further blow when it emerged that the Pentagon's intelligence branch had doubts about Iraq's capabilities. The report by the Pentagon defense intelligence agency said there was no reliable information that Iraq had battlefield-ready chemical and biological weapons. It was produced in September just as President Bush was embarking on a campaign to convince the UN that Saddam Hussein and his arsenal were a threat to the international community and should be removed, by force if necessary. It was leaked to US news organizations at the end of a week in which Mr Bush, the secretary of state, Colin Powell, and the defense secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, have had to defend the decision to go to war by quashing suggestions that White House ideologues overrode intelligence officials to suit their political agenda. A summary obtained by CNN says: "There is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons or where Iraq has or will establish its chemical warfare agent production facilities." It adds that while Iraq appeared to have stocks of mustard gas the agency had detected no clear indications of other deadly agents. A British government source, defending the intelligence services, said his recollection was that there had been frustration in London that Mr Blix had not moved fast enough after being given the intelligence. British intelligence claims credit for providing the information which led to the seizure of hundreds of documents at the home of an Iraqi scientist. Mr Blix led the hunt for biological and chemical weapons in Iraq and Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), led the search for nuclear weapons. The US and Britain have failed to find any weapons of mass destruction. A team from the IAEA returned to Iraq yesterday to check whether there has been any contamination from the postwar looting of Iraq's main nuclear site at Tuwaitha, south-east of Baghdad. Its spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said: "We are going there to find out what's missing, to see if we can repackage and secure the material so that we can account for every gram of it." The Verification, Research, Training and Information Center in London says the inspectors were making good progress before they were withdrawn from Iraq on the eve of the war, but would have needed at least three more months to complete the job. © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003

To: Alighieri who wrote (170786)	6/7/2003 7:42:20 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1583391

Al, he finally admits who he is. Its all about spin. No wonder he's been fairly quiet the past couple of weeks. He's waiting for the upset over "the spin" aka Bush lies to abate and then he will be back in force condemning the liberals. Stupid is as stupid does. I can only hope they are all so arrogant. ted I don't think there is evidence anyone "lied". I have no problem, if as a strong leader, Bush needed to spin the available information a particular way to accomplish his objectives, that's fine. Because the objectives were totally sensible. This is the thing. If Bill Clinton had done this, I would likely have been complaining just as you are. Why? Because Clinton was known to be an incompetent leader and had no backbone to take on the total reorganization of the Middle East. But Bush obviously knows what he is doing, has a great staff, and is a strong leader. Bottom line: I find it acceptable for Bush to spin this information to bring the public along, even though I would have objected had Clinton done the same thing. Not for political reasons, but for the reasons I've mentioned. I have a feeling a lot of people see it the same way.