Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-01-2004, 01:56 PM   #1
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Default The Lying Game

The lying game
An A-Z of the Iraq war and its aftermath, focusing on misrepresentation, manipulation, and mistakes
01 June 2004


A Mohammed Atta. The Bush administration claimed that a meeting between the lead hijacker of the 11 September attacks and a senior Iraqi intelligence officer proved a connection between al-Qa'ida and Saddam Hussein. But there is no evidence such a meeting took place.

B Bush and Blair: The two leaders have reacted strongly to all suggestions they misled their respective electorates over the war, and maintain time will prove they were right to go to war. Both, though, are suffering poll difficulties, as problems in Iraq become worse, and each needs speedy improvement to shore up his position.

C Ahmed Chalabi. The leader of the Iraq National Congress, who is a member of the Iraq Governing Council, is now accused of having duped the Bush administration, as well as the media, into believing that Saddam Hussein represented a direct threat to US and British security.

D Dollars. Between 1992 and the US raid on Ahmed Chalabi's home last week, the US government channelled more than $100m (£55m) to his Iraqi National Congress. The money may have been a motivating factor for defectors to say what they thought the Americans wanted to hear. That funding has now been stopped.

E Mohamed ElBaradei, the Egyptian head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, exposed as unfounded many of the claims put into the public domain by the US administration. The head of the UN weapons inspectors, Hans Blix, also challenged the White House claims.

F The claim that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction could be deployed within forty-five minutes of an order was a key plank of the Government's pro-war argument and appeared in its September dossier of 2002. We now know that the discredited claim - which applied only to battlefield munitions in any case - came from the party of the caretaker prime minister of Iraq: Iyad Allawi.

G Andrew Gilligan, defence correspondent on the BBC's Today programme, reported that the Government had "sexed-up'' Iraq's weapons capabilities. On one occasion, he suggested that it had done so deliberately. Events since suggest that case for war was exaggerated. Gilligan lost his job in the fall-out.

H Khidir Hamza. The man known as Saddam's bombmaker is now acknowledged to have tricked the administration into believing he had more knowledge of Saddam's nuclear programme than he actually did.

IWas Ahmed Chalabi an agent for Iran, which used him as part of a plan to manipulate the US government into overthrowing Saddam Hussein? Washington is holding an urgent investigation into the claim.

J The Joint Intelligence Committee was accused of allowing itself to be manipulated by Downing Street in the run-up to the war, and of firming up conditional language in the key September dossier on weapons of mass destruction.

K David Kelly, the MoD weapons specialist at the heart of last year's controversy, committed suicide three days after he denied to the Foreign Affairs Committee that he was Gilligan's source.

L Langley. The CIA headquarters, which was regularly visited by the US Vice-President Dick Cheney as he sought to pressure the intelligence services into exaggerating the Iraqi threat for political reasons.

M Mobile biological labs. The alleged discovery of biological mobile labs for the production of biological weapons was held up after the war as proof that Iraq continued its illegal weapons programme. But the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said there was no proof of their use.

N The Iraqi scientist Hamdi Shukuir Ubaydi buried documents related to Iraq's nuclear programme in his garden, and they were found last June in the search for WMD after the war last June. However there was no confirmation of the US claim that they were the "smoking gun" the Americans were looking for.

O Oil-for-food scandal. The recent accusations that Saddam diverted billions of dollars from a UN humanitarian programme, and paid countries for political support, came from documents distributed by aides of Ahmed Chalabi. US and UN investigations will attempt to uncover the truth.

P The Pentagon hawks, Donald Rumsfeld, his deputy Paul Wolfowitz and senior adviser Richard Perle took their country to war on a false prospectus.

Q The Daily Mirror published photographs which it claimed showed members of the Queen's Lancashire Regiment abusing one of its Iraqi prisoners. The photos have now been dismissed as fakes. But the regiment remains under investigation over the death of Baha Mousa, who died in custody.

R Karl Rove, president Bush's political adviser, is accused of "outing" the CIA undercover agent Valerie Plame amid the furore over the Niger uranium claim. A grand jury is investigating the leak.

S Bush and Blair insist there will be a transfer of "full sovereignty" to a caretaker government. But the appointment of Iyad Allawi, who has close US and British links, as Prime Minister raises questions over its independence.

T The New York Times last week issued a mea culpa for failing to question a Bush administration leak relating to aluminium tubes reportedly being used in Iraq's nuclear weapons programme. The IAEA demolished the claim, a key prop of the White House case for war.

U Iraq's alleged attempt to smuggle uranium from Niger was used by the allies as proof that Iraq was still attempting to build a nuclear weapon. While the Bush administration now admits the relevant documents were forged, the Blair government is still sticking to the claim.

V Iraq was said to hold stocks of VX gas, the deadliest chemical agent known to man. Not a single millilitre has been found.

W World Trade Centre. According to opinion polls, a majority of Americans still believe Saddam Hussein played a role in the 11 September attacks, a view long propagated by the Bush administration, particularly Dick Cheney.

X Camp X-Ray, now Camp Delta, is the US prison at Guantanamo where prisoners from Afghanistan were flown. But its practices were adopted at Abu Ghraib jail in Baghdad. The ensuing scandal has tarnished Bush's presidency.

Y Yesterday, denials by Dick Cheney that he no longer had any association with the Halliburton oil services company, where he was formerly CEO, were under new scrutiny.

Z Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, accused of beheading the American Nick Berg , was said to be the link between Saddam and Bin Laden. No such link has been proved.

Independent.co.uk
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 02:31 PM   #2
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Now I know my A-B-C's.
Next time won't you sing with me?
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 03:37 PM   #3
LairdRagna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: New York
Posts: 1,308
I love a paper that calls itself the Independent yet never does anything but Bash conservatives... doesn't show much independence of thought. Kind of makes you long for the good old days of Stalinist Mother Russia with Pravda... Truth...
LairdRagna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 03:48 PM   #4
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Perhaps you are looking for something more "fair and balanced"?
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 03:49 PM   #5
Xanthaar
Toon Army
 
Xanthaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington, United Kingdom
Posts: 234
I love a paper that calls itself the Independent yet never does anything but Bash conservatives
I'm sorry, but that's absolute rubbish.

I've read that newspaper for years and have found it equally liable to report issues that put more 'liberal' agenda in a less than flattering light also.

I'd personally rate it as one of the more unbiased publications out there.

Incidentally, are you implying that any of the points raised are fabrication?
Xanthaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 03:54 PM   #6
Vireil
Disturbing the force
 
Vireil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Emerald City
Posts: 2,711
I think the implication is that any criticism of the Bush administration is un-American, misguided, unpatriotic and in some cases can be classified as terrorist activity leading to one's incarceration without representation as an enemy combatant.


__________________
Vireil
Coercer
<Recovering>
Vireil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 03:57 PM   #7
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Xan, I suspect Laird would state that if not all of the statements in the original post are fabrications, then most of them are.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 04:23 PM   #8
Xanthaar
Toon Army
 
Xanthaar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Washington, United Kingdom
Posts: 234
I love a paper that calls itself the Independent yet never does anything but Bash conservatives
By the way; if the article is nothing more than mere 'conservative bashing' as you seem to be implying, I have to ask you when did Tony Blair switch parties?

As a labour voter, I need to know!!!
Xanthaar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 05:38 PM   #9
Usna
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 226
Of all the national papers in the UK, I would have thought the Independant the least biased. Also, even if they are having a crack at the incumbent it is far from Conservative bashing as Xantharr pinted out.
Usna is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 05:48 PM   #10
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Dear Anglicans, please forgive the conservative lot over here in America. They believe any Bush bashing is liberal lies. They forget that the Labour party is a left party. This poses a real problem for them when the American "left" press uses the same stories as the English "right" press. What they do is label the press and forget that the press actually is non-partisan in their coverage of stories. Ya see, over here when you ain't got a leg of truth to stand on, you blame the press for creating lies. However, nary a soul sues for slander because they haven't a leg to stand on.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-01-2004, 10:18 PM   #11
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
What they do is label the press and forget that the press actually is non-partisan in their coverage of stories.
Pardon me while I laugh my ass off, thanks.

As for the validity of the original article - I'm sure there are shades of truth to it in places. Unfortunately, it doesn't actually prove anything. Rumors are teh win!
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 05:46 AM   #12
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Pardon me while I laugh my ass off, thanks.
Care to explain how you and your fellow conservatives attack the British press for being partisan and the American press for the same thing when the American gov't. is conservative and the British gov't. is liberal? The only plausible explanation I can think of is unbiased coverage.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 07:25 AM   #13
Trith
The lesser of two weevils
 
Trith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Shreveport, Louisiana
Posts: 3,490
Send a message via MSN to Trith
"L" is for Look! as in Look I have Learned to Link Op-Ed!!!


Lovely work Lurikeen
Trith is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 07:30 AM   #14
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
Care to explain how you and your fellow conservatives attack the British press for being partisan and the American press for the same thing when the American gov't. is conservative and the British gov't. is liberal? The only plausible explanation I can think of is unbiased coverage.
I'm going to make a wild assumption that this is directed at me, because you quoted me in your post.

On the other hand, not once have I said anything about the British press in any of my posts. I don't live in the UK, and I don't read British publications. I wouldn't ever be in the position to rightfully discuss them, would I?

So were you just confused when you made this accusation, or were ya talking out your ass?
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 07:53 AM   #15
Ariochx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 468
M Mobile biological labs. The alleged discovery of biological mobile labs for the production of biological weapons was held up after the war as proof that Iraq continued its illegal weapons programme. But the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said there was no proof of their use.

N The Iraqi scientist Hamdi Shukuir Ubaydi buried documents related to Iraq's nuclear programme in his garden, and they were found last June in the search for WMD after the war last June. However there was no confirmation of the US claim that they were the "smoking gun" the Americans were looking for.
-- from the A-Z list.

Correct me if I am wrong, but didn't Iraq sign the U.N. Resolutions to cease any Biological and Nuclear programs, and surrender any and all materials related to them post Gulf War 1?

Yes, yes they did.

The Mobile Lab, and Nuclear Program documentation were found AFTER 2001, and were hidden by the Iraqi's themselves instead of following through with their word to surrender it. They had over 2 years to dismantle and hide anything they wished attempt to keep or sell prior to GW2.

Can you really say with certainty there isn't more to be found???

Nice Opinion-Editorial though.

Why don't you hold it up to the same scrutiny as you do articles that don't support you political view points Lurikeen?

Regards,
Ario
Ariochx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 08:10 AM   #16
Ariochx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 468
Speaking of Lying

V Iraq was said to hold stocks of VX gas, the deadliest chemical agent known to man. Not a single millilitre has been found. --From the A-Z list
______________________________________

The primary remaining questions center on VX. By 1995, UNSCOM uncovered enough evidence that Iraq admitted producing about 4 tons of VX, but UNSCOM thought the country had imported enough material to actually produce 200 tons, according to CRS.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,70073,00.html

They made 4 tons of VX and ADMITED IT TO UNSCOM...and actually imported the raw materials needed to produce 200tons of it.


Good reading there...I wonder where the produced VX and the raw material is now??? Don't you Lurikeen?

Regards,
Ario
Ariochx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 08:33 AM   #17
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Ariochx
Why don't you hold it up to the same scrutiny as you do articles that don't support you political view points Lurikeen?
Have I made any claims about the article? Did I purport any of it is factual? You should lose the bit in your mouth that you regular chomp at.

However, I do think that the article makes some very valid points; eventhough it is obviously op-ed.

I want to thank all those who pointed out the article is op-ed for playing Captain Obvious.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 08:40 AM   #18
Ariochx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 468
Oh yeah, my bad somehow I had forgotten that you are just a parrot going about mindlessly squawking political propaganda.

I will make a note to remember that in the furtue.

Polly wannah Op-ed?

regards,
Ariochx
Ariochx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 08:43 AM   #19
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Originally Posted by Ariochx
Speaking of Lying

V Iraq was said to hold stocks of VX gas, the deadliest chemical agent known to man. Not a single millilitre has been found. --From the A-Z list
______________________________________

The primary remaining questions center on VX. By 1995, UNSCOM uncovered enough evidence that Iraq admitted producing about 4 tons of VX, but UNSCOM thought the country had imported enough material to actually produce 200 tons, according to CRS.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,70073,00.html

They made 4 tons of VX and ADMITED IT TO UNSCOM...and actually imported the raw materials needed to produce 200tons of it.


Good reading there...I wonder where the produced VX and the raw material is now??? Don't you Lurikeen?
Nice spin! You should go to work for FOX, but alas you wouldn't go far if you can't make up shit that is even close to the topic of the article you cite.

The article you cite is titled, "Iraq Seeks Nerve Gas Antidote Stockpile". The article is about what? Yes, seeking an antidote to nerve gas which was perfectly legal for them to do...

"Because of this legitimate civilian use, atropine was not placed on a U.N. list of "dual use" items that weapons inspectors must look for in shipments to Iraq. "

Finally, your out dated article states, "The fate of 31,600 chemical munitions, 550 mustard gas bombs and 4,000 tons of chemical precursors remain unknown, according to Congressional Research Services. "

However, we do know. We have had testimony since November 13, 2002 from senior administration officials that we were all wrong about Saddam having chemical weapons in 2002.

You really should learn to cite fresh sources if you're going to argue an outdated point. One that has been proven false over and over and over again.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 09:01 AM   #20
Ariochx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 468
Again you missed the point. If you would take the time to actually read the entire article you will see the quote I used from it you bungnugget.

THE POINT >>>> Iraq admitted to UNSCOM that they produced 4 tons of VX. <<<<

re-read the souce cited. It is in the 36th paragraph

You are telling me UNSCOM has testified to the contrary?? Go fetch the rebuttal birdboy.

regards,
Ario

Last edited by Ariochx; 06-02-2004 at 09:07 AM.
Ariochx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 09:09 AM   #21
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Ariochx, keep grasping for straws. I read the article in its entirety. It is OUTDATED. Do you understand what that means?

BTW, there is no doubt that Iraq had tons of VX at one time. Who do you think sold that shit to them? So of course the US knew what they had. Please take note of the tense.

Go fetch the rebuttal birdboy.
If you want to start name calling, I am game.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 09:22 AM   #22
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
I'm going to make a wild assumption that this is directed at me, because you quoted me in your post.
Well, gee aren't you the deductive sort today?

Your problem stems once again from your own ignorance. The same things are being said in English papers as are being said in American papers. Perhaps you ought to look up some links so that you can keep up with the news. You are not the first person to blame our press, but keep in mind that not all presses are American and many of them say the same things as our press. Hence, you are pretty much following some propagandists lead when admonishing the American mainstream press. (the propagandists have an admitted agenda). The press's agenda is not liberal, it is moderate. Everytime you call our press liberal you forget that other liberal governments are getting blasted by their press for the same things, thus making their press "conservative" by your reasoning. This makes your entire premise moot.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 09:37 AM   #23
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
LOL, Bumble, whatever. I'm not going 30 rounds with you on this. Liberals and conservatives alike can agree on the fact that not all media is unbiased all the time, which is basically what you claim. If you can't see it, that's your problem.
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 09:48 AM   #24
Ariochx
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 468
LURIKEEN READ and RE-READ THE POST....

THEY ( IRAQ ) bought and produce domesticly VX. THEY ADMITTED IT TO UNSCOM.

The raw material was NOT provided or sold by any U.S. source.

Damm Dude... who is grasping here??

Check the link...and then find any scrap of evidence that UNSCOM said that Iraq did NOT have or produce VX on its own accord.

regards,
Ario
Ariochx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2004, 10:02 AM   #25
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Ariochx, here is a little reading for you...

David Kay Testifies Before Senate Committee

January 28, 2004 - 11:06 ET
CNN LIVE EVENT/SPECIAL



MCCAIN: Good. But it's important to emphasize this point when we look at what has obviously been an intelligence failure.

KAY: I agree.

MCCAIN: When you answered a question from Reuters, "What happened to the stockpiles of chemical and bioweapons that everyone expected to be there?," your answer was simple: quote, "I don't think they existed."

So what needs to be established here is that when we -- at least, I believe is your view and certainly mine -- as you just stated, America, the world and Iraq is a far better and safer place with Saddam Hussein gone from power. And the sacrifice made by American citizens, and that are serving and sacrificing today was not only worth it, but very important to the future of the Middle East and to the world. Do you share that?

KAY: That's certainly true, Senator. I probably learned not to speak to wire reporters and even to watch out for senators who want one-word answers.

MCCAIN: Yes.

KAY: It tends to compress complex issues.

MCCAIN: But you agree with the fundamental principle here that what we did was justified and enhance the security of the United States and the world by removing Saddam Hussein from power?

KAY: Absolutely.

MCCAIN: OK. That's important to establish, because now in this political season, those are attempting to be mixed that because we didn't find the weapons of mass destruction, therefore the conflict was not justified. That's why I think it's important to establish those salient facts.

Now, but obviously, we were wrong, as you said. Now, why were we wrong?

KAY: Senator, I wouldn't pretend that I know all the answers or even know all the questions to get at that.

KAY: I am convinced that that is the important forefront of the inquiry that, quite frankly, you must undertake.

I've got hypotheses of where I think things generically have occurred. I think we became almost addicted to the incredible amount of effort that UNSCOM and U.N. inspectors could produce on the scene and that flow of information...

MCCAIN: Including intelligence gained by the previous administration.

KAY: That's correct. And did not develop our own HUMINT sources there. Now, this really goes back, quite frankly -- the change took place if you look at it goes back to the Carter administration, when, as a result of things that had occurred in the Vietnam area, essentially our HUMINT capability was spun down and we got in the habit of relying on intelligence collected by liaison services.

If a liaison -- an individual from another country, gets caught as a spy it doesn't make the front page of The Washington Post or New York Times, it's not politically embarrassing and, quite frankly, you don't have a dead American. So there are good reasons to do it.

More importantly, and things that I think you've got to worry about, we have all stressed, why didn't the intelligence community connect the dots prior to 9/11? It all looks very clear in retrospect.

Quite frankly, the most common problem you have with analysts is you do not want them to overanalyze the data. If there are only a few dots connected, maybe they don't belong connected.

I'm convinced in this area, partly because of Iraqi behavior -- to a large extent because of Iraqi behavior -- they cheated, they lied, we knew it, UNSCOM, the U.N. had caught them -- we got in the habit of new pieces of information accreted to this overall consensus view without challenging that consensus.

MCCAIN: Do you believe that those that provided false intelligence estimates ought to be held accountable?

KAY: Absolutely.
The full transcript can be found here along with some interesting commentary.

Please take note of what Kay had to say concerning UNSCOM. Take specail care to note Kay's repsonse to MCCain's statements,

MCCAIN: When you answered a question from Reuters, "What happened to the stockpiles of chemical and bioweapons that everyone expected to be there?," your answer was simple: quote, "I don't think they existed." .

We know that the stock piles didn't exist and that Saddam was disarming long before the war.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." óMonty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:09 AM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.