SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: tejek who wrote (426826)7/14/2003 3:45:34 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
"Funny, you don't seem to have the same problem letting go of Mr. Bush's lies."

If I believed Bush lied about anything of significance, I'd
not be inclined to look the other way or discount it.
Regarding the Nigerian nuke material matter, the facts
overwhelmingly do not support that Bush lied or
intentionally mislead......

<font size=4>Administration officials insisted Sunday that President Bush’s disputed statement about Iraqi uranium shopping in Africa was accurate, even while conceding anew that his State of the Union address should not have included it.

Both Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Condoleezza Rice, Bush’s national security adviser, said the United States and Britain have intelligence that supports the contention that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein sought uranium in Africa for nuclear weapons.....

....The statement was and remains accurate; it was cleared for delivery by all necessary agencies; it was a minor part of Bush’s speech; it is supported by more evidence than documents revealed earlier but proved to have been forged.....

....Still, "The British stand by their statement," Rice said on Fox News Sunday. "They have told us that despite the fact that we had apparently some concerns about that report, that they had other sources, and that they stand by the statement." .....

....Speaking of the clamor that has arisen over the statement, Rice said, "It is ludicrous to suggest that the president of the United States went to war on the question of whether Saddam Hussein sought uranium from Africa. This was a part of a very broad case that the president laid out in the State of the Union and other places."

On CBS’ Face the Nation, she expanded on that: "The president took the nation to war to depose a bloody tyrant who had defied the world for 12 years, who was building a weapons of mass destruction program and had weapons of mass destruction."....<font size=3>

nwanews.com

I realize that in your zealous hatred of Bush & republicans
that you are willing to cling to any propaganda spewed by
your America hating peers on the left. That however, is not
the standard I apply to determine who is lying & who is
telling the truth. I let objective reporting of credible
factual evidence be my guide. And thus far, most credible
evidence indicates that Bush is honest & straightforward &
most Americans also feel this way.

That is an indisputable fact.

You & your American hating peers can spew lies, distort
facts & spin tall tales all you wish. It won't change
reality or the objectivity of most Americans.



To: tejek who wrote (426826)7/14/2003 4:10:33 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
This scenario makes FAR MORE SENSE. The French were in the greatest position to possess this kind of information, but it obviously must have been quite embarrassing to Chirac, since he was likely part of the deal, or would have had to know something about it:

<font size=4>Withheld Iraq report blamed on French<font size=3>

By Michael Smith
LONDON DAILY TELEGRAPH

LONDON —<font size=4> The French secret service is believed to have refused to allow Britain's MI6 to give the United States "credible" intelligence showing that Iraq was trying to buy uranium ore from Niger, U.S. intelligence sources said yesterday.

Britain's Secret Intelligence Service had more than one "different and credible" piece of intelligence to show that Iraq was attempting to buy the ore, known as yellowcake, British officials insisted. But it was given to them by at least one and possibly two intelligence services and, under the rules governing cooperation, it could not be shared with anyone else without the originator's permission.

U.S. intelligence sources believe the most likely source of the MI6 intelligence was the French secret service, the DGSE. Niger is a former French colony, and its uranium mines are run by a French company that comes under the control of the French Atomic Energy Commission.<font size=3>

A factor in the refusal to hand over the information might have been concern that the U.S. administration's willingness to publicize intelligence would lead to sources being inadvertently disclosed.

<font size=4>U.S. sources also point out that the French government was vehemently opposed to the war with Iraq and suggest that it would have been instinctively against the idea of passing on the intelligence. <font size=3>

British sources yesterday dismissed suggestions of a dispute between MI6 and the CIA on the issue. But they acknowledged to being surprised that George J. Tenet, the CIA director, had apologized to President Bush for allowing him to cite the British government and its claim that Saddam had sought to acquire uranium from Africa in his State of the Union speech in January.

The apology follows the International Atomic Energy Agency's dismissal of documents given to it by the CIA, which purported to prove the link, as forgeries.
Those documents have been widely identified with September's British dossier on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which said Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was trying to buy uranium ore from an unnamed country in Africa.

<font size=4>British officials acknowledged that the country was Niger, but insisted that the intelligence behind it was genuine and had nothing to do with the fake documents. It was convincing and they were sticking with it, the officials said.

They dismissed a report from a former U.S. diplomat who was sent to Niger to investigate the claims and rejected them.
"He seems to have asked a few people if it was true, and when they said 'no' he accepted it all," one official said. "We see no reason at all to change our assessment."
The fake documents were not behind that assessment and were not seen by MI6 until after they were denounced by the IAEA. If MI6 had seen them earlier, it would have immediately advised the Americans that they were fakes, these officials said.

There had been a number of reports, in the United States in particular, suggesting that the fake documents — which came from another intelligence source — were passed on via MI6, the officials said. But this was not true.

"What they can't accuse MI6 of doing is passing anything on this to the CIA because it didn't have the fake documents and it was not allowed to pass on the intelligence it did have to anyone else."
<font size=3>
washingtontimes.com



To: tejek who wrote (426826)7/14/2003 4:34:53 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
The Al Qaeda Connection, cont.

<font size=4>More reason to suspect that bin Laden and Saddam may have been in league. <font size=3>

by Stephen F. Hayes
07/11/2003 5:45:00 PM
Stephen F. Hayes, staff writer

THE INDISPENSABLE Glenn Reynolds has linked to an article in the Nashville Tennessean written by <font size=4>a Tennessee judge who believes he is in possession of documents linking Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden.

The judge is Gilbert S. Merritt, a federal appeals court judge invited to help Iraqis construct a legal system in postwar Iraq. He is, according to Reynolds, "a lifelong Democrat and a man of unimpeachable integrity."

Here is an excerpt of his account:

The document shows that an Iraqi intelligence officer, Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, assigned to the Iraq embassy in Pakistan, is ''responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group.''

The document shows that it was written over the signature of Uday Saddam Hussein, the son of Saddam Hussein. The story of how the document came about is as follows. <font size=3>

Saddam gave Uday authority to control all press and media outlets in Iraq. Uday was the publisher of the Babylon Daily Political Newspaper.

On the front page of the paper's four-page edition for Nov. 14, 2002, there was a picture of Osama bin Laden speaking, next to which was a picture of Saddam and his ''Revolutionary Council,'' together with stories about Israeli tanks attacking a group of Palestinians.

On the back page was a story headlined ''List of Honor.'' In a box below the headline was ''A list of men we publish for the public.'' The lead sentence refers to a list of ''regime persons'' with their names and positions.

The list has 600 names and titles in three columns. It contains, for example, the names of the important officials who are members of Saddam's family, such as Uday, and then other high officials, including the 55 American ''deck of cards'' Iraqi officials, some of whom have been apprehended.

<font size=4>Halfway down the middle column is written: ''Abid Al-Karim Muhamed Aswod, intelligence officer responsible for the coordination of activities with the Osama bin Laden group at the Iraqi embassy in Pakistan.''

The story Judge Merritt relates is similar to an account reported in The Weekly Standard last May. Splashed across the front page of the November 16, 2002, edition of Uday Hussein's Babil newspaper were two "honor" lists, one of which included Aswod (spelled "Aswad") and identified him as the "official in charge of regime's contacts with Osama bin Laden's group and currently the regime's representative in Pakistan."

I stumbled upon this passage doing research for another piece. So I brought the article to the attention of administration officials, who hadn't yet seen it, and asked for comment. Intelligence analysts were perplexed, particularly because of a passage in the text preceding the list. It read: "We publish this list of great men for the sons of our great people to see." And below that: "This is a list of the henchmen of the regime. Our hands will reach them sooner or later. Woe unto them. A list of the leaders of Saddam's regime, as well as their present and previous posts."

The second description was clearly hostile in tone--"henchmen of the regime" and "woe unto them." Analysts weren't sure what to make of the introduction or the list, but suggested Uday Hussein may have simply republished a list of "henchmen" distributed by an Iraqi opposition group without realizing he was publicly linking his father to Osama bin Laden. <font size=3>

That still seems like the most plausible explanation to me. (Although Judge Merritt's report that the front page of the four-page newspaper carried side-by-side photographs of bin Laden and Saddam is interesting.) Still, some intelligence officials believe that Aswad--who publicly raised doubts after September 11 about whether Osama bin Laden is a terrorist--was an important link between Iraq and al Qaeda.

<font size=4>If the newspaper reports are interesting but inconclusive, two other recent reports are more compelling. Jessica Stern, a Harvard professor and Clinton administration national security official, discusses the links in a fascinating and sober analysis of the Al Qaeda threat in the current issue of Foreign Affairs.

Under the subheading, "Friends of Convenience," she writes:

Meanwhile, the Bush administration's claims that al Qaeda was cooperating with the "infidel" (read: secular) Saddam Hussein while he was still in office are now also gaining support, and from a surprising source. Hamid Mir, bin Laden's "official biographer" and an analyst for al Jazeera, spent two weeks filming in Iraq during the war. Unlike most reporters, Mir wandered the country freely and was not embedded with U.S. troops. He reports that he has "personal knowledge" that one of Saddam's intelligence operatives, Farooq Hijazi, tried to contact bin Laden in Afghanistan as early as 1998. At that time, bin Laden was publicly still quite critical of the Iraqi leader, but he had become far more circumspect by November 2001, when Mir interviewed him for the third time.

Hijazi has acknowledged meeting with al Qaeda representatives, perhaps with bin Laden himself, even before the outreach in 1998. According to news reports and interviews with intelligence officials, Hijazi met with al Qaeda leaders in Sudan in 1994.

Former Navy Secretary John Lehman, a member of the congressional commission investigating the September 11 attacks, added to the intrigue this week when he flatly declared, "there is evidence" of Iraq-al Qaeda links. Lehman has access to classified intelligence as a member of the commission, intelligence that has convinced him the links may have been even greater than the public pronouncements of the Bush administration might suggest. "There is no doubt in my mind that [Iraq] trained them in how to prepare and deliver anthrax and to use terror weapons." <font size=3>

Stephen F. Hayes is a staff writer at The Weekly Standard.

weeklystandard.com.