Author Topic: Downing Street Memos  (Read 1333 times)

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #30 on: June 22, 2005, 11:51:35 AM »
The reason conservatives say this is not a smoking gun is because it isn't and then they use the fact that its not to say its utterly worthless then, which it's not. It's just another peice of the puzzle showing that Bush Purposely misled the public when it came to the threat that Saddam posed. That's all it is. Another peice. But because it's not a "smoking gun" Conservs dismiss it as nothing.

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

That speaks volumes. Sorry if it's not a signed document by Bush, or cheney or rumsfield but it is still does and should generate suspicion of a leadership who is coming under more and more fire for "questionable" activities. That is why it is important and that is why there is so much talk about. Not because its the "smoking gun". Like someone else said Conservs already used the Rather technique now its the "well its not the smoking gun so lets dismiss it as irrelevant" defense. Well played.

Offline Yeager

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 10167
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #31 on: June 22, 2005, 01:14:38 PM »
Bush Purposely misled the public when it came to the threat that Saddam posed.
====
I keep hearing people say this but I do not know if it is true or not.
"If someone flips you the bird and you don't know it, does it still count?" - SLIMpkns

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #32 on: June 22, 2005, 02:11:23 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Yeager
Bush Purposely misled the public when it came to the threat that Saddam posed.
====
I keep hearing people say this but I do not know if it is true or not.



http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

State of the Union Speech 2 months before invasion. 8 months after downing memo.

Twelve years ago, Saddam Hussein faced the prospect of being the last casualty in a war he had started and lost. To spare himself, he agreed to disarm of all weapons of mass destruction. For the next 12 years, he systematically violated that agreement. He pursued chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons, even while inspectors were in his country. Nothing to date has restrained him from his pursuit of these weapons -- not economic sanctions, not isolation from the civilized world, not even cruise missile strikes on his military facilities.

Almost three months ago, the United Nations Security Council gave Saddam Hussein his final chance to disarm. He has shown instead utter contempt for the United Nations, and for the opinion of the world. The 108 U.N. inspectors were sent to conduct -- were not sent to conduct a scavenger hunt for hidden materials across a country the size of California. The job of the inspectors is to verify that Iraq's regime is disarming. It is up to Iraq to show exactly where it is hiding its banned weapons, lay those weapons out for the world to see, and destroy them as directed. Nothing like this has happened.

The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

The dictator of Iraq is not disarming. To the contrary; he is deceiving. From intelligence sources we know, for instance, that thousands of Iraqi security personnel are at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors, sanitizing inspection sites and monitoring the inspectors themselves. Iraqi officials accompany the inspectors in order to intimidate witnesses.

Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. Intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with U.N. inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.

Year after year, Saddam Hussein has gone to elaborate lengths, spent enormous sums, taken great risks to build and keep weapons of mass destruction. But why? The only possible explanation, the only possible use he could have for those weapons, is to dominate, intimidate, or attack.

With nuclear arms or a full arsenal of chemical and biological weapons, Saddam Hussein could resume his ambitions of conquest in the Middle East and create deadly havoc in that region. And this Congress and the America people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans -- this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known. We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

The dictator who is assembling the world's most dangerous weapons has already used them on whole villages -- leaving thousands of his own citizens dead, blind, or disfigured. Iraqi refugees tell us how forced confessions are obtained -- by torturing children while their parents are made to watch. International human rights groups have catalogued other methods used in the torture chambers of Iraq: electric shock, burning with hot irons, dripping acid on the skin, mutilation with electric drills, cutting out tongues, and rape. If this is not evil, then evil has no meaning. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council to convene on February the 5th to consider the facts of Iraq's ongoing defiance of the world. Secretary of State Powell will present information and intelligence about Iraqi's legal -- Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempt to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups.

We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)

Tonight I have a message for the men and women who will keep the peace, members of the American Armed Forces: Many of you are assembling in or near the Middle East, and some crucial hours may lay ahead. In those hours, the success of our cause will depend on you. Your training has prepared you. Your honor will guide you. You believe in America, and America believes in you. (Applause.)

Sending Americans into battle is the most profound decision a President can make. The technologies of war have changed; the risks and suffering of war have not. For the brave Americans who bear the risk, no victory is free from sorrow. This nation fights reluctantly, because we know the cost and we dread the days of mourning that always come.

We seek peace. We strive for peace. And sometimes peace must be defended. A future lived at the mercy of terrible threats is no peace at all. If war is forced upon us, we will fight in a just cause and by just means -- sparing, in every way we can, the innocent. And if war is forced upon us, we will fight with the full force and might of the United States military -- and we will prevail.

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #33 on: June 22, 2005, 02:18:38 PM »
sorry raider, but your hero saddam the" butcher of baghdad", is in prision and nothing you can do or say will get him out.

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #34 on: June 22, 2005, 02:27:35 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by john9001
sorry raider, but your hero saddam the" butcher of baghdad", is in prision and nothing you can do or say will get him out.


Sorry John9001 but you have no clue as to what you are talking about.  You couldnt be more wrong about my feelings about Saddam. But you have a nice day anyway:)

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #35 on: June 22, 2005, 03:10:11 PM »
You have a speech. You have not proven that there is a deliberate attempt to falsify information, sorry 'bout that.

Anyone who thinks that the intel gathering situation is going to be perfectly or even regularly spot on is having a fantasy or watches way too much TV. All saddumb had to do to squash the invasion and remain in power was to open the doors to the UN inspectors and let them do their job instead of playing games.
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline TheDudeDVant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #36 on: June 22, 2005, 03:22:24 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Maverick
You have a speech. You have not proven that there is a deliberate attempt to falsify information, sorry 'bout that.

Anyone who thinks that the intel gathering situation is going to be perfectly or even regularly spot on is having a fantasy or watches way too much TV. All saddumb had to do to squash the invasion and remain in power was to open the doors to the UN inspectors and let them do their job instead of playing games.


Gee man.. The inspectors were there inspecting.. Bush pulled them out and said no more time to inspect.. Get da funk out!~

Oh, and how many other wars have we started with such questionable intellegence?? I would think if we are ready to kill and put our troops in teh way to be killed we'd be damn sure we were 'spot on'.. Doesn't that seem fair?

Edit:  Can we agree that at the time we went to war with Iraqi that our description of Iraqi and the threat that country posed to us was 100% wrong?
« Last Edit: June 22, 2005, 03:26:21 PM by TheDudeDVant »

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13958
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #37 on: June 22, 2005, 03:26:59 PM »
Really. I seem to recall that saddumb sent the inspectors packing. Later he denied them access except when accompanied by "escorts" and with prior notice. Again all he had to do to squash the invasion was to comply with the UN inspectors. If he'd said come look and gave them free access Bush would have had no leg to stand on if WMD's were shown to be non exostant.

As to the second sentence you had, it's rhetorical and a red herring, not rellevant.

As to the third, nope I can't accept your premise en toto.
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline TheDudeDVant

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2429
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #38 on: June 22, 2005, 03:35:36 PM »
That is incorrect.. The UN inspectors were in country in Iraqi inspecting.. We (the US) told the inspectors were to go..  We ( the US) said we had no more time for inspections as an attack from us was imminant.. Hence we (the US) told the UN inspectors to get da funk out..

My second sentence, red herring or not, is relavent to what you stated.. That anyone expecting our intellegence to always be spot on was watching too much TV.. Hey I can agree with that..  Completely..  As it seems though our intellegence was not spot on, at least in what intellegence we were shown about Iraqi. Does that seem fair or is being incorrect and putting our people at risk a neccassary cost of spreading democracy?

What percentage would you place on the incorrect information we as american were given compared to the actuall truth?

Offline Drunky

  • Parolee
  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2017
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #39 on: June 22, 2005, 04:05:56 PM »
DELETED

4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.
« Last Edit: June 23, 2005, 06:56:51 PM by MP4 »
Drunky | SubGenius
Fat Drunk Bastards
B.A.A.H. - Black Association of Aces High

Offline john9001

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9453
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #40 on: June 22, 2005, 04:35:37 PM »
i don't know how many times i will have to say this,

 the UN inspectors were not in iraq to play "find the easter egg" , they were in iraq to verify that saddam had desposed of the WMD he had at the end of gulf war 1 as per the UN cease fire.

Offline MP3

  • Military Police
  • Zinc Member
  • *
  • Posts: 5
      • http://www.hitechcreations.com/
Rules
« Reply #41 on: June 22, 2005, 04:42:42 PM »
4- Members should post in a way that is respectful of other users and HTC. Flaming or abusing users is not tolerated.

5- Flamebaiting, trolling, or posting to incite or annoy is not allowed.

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #42 on: June 22, 2005, 04:55:35 PM »
I do not claim to have "proof".  What I do claim is that looking at what we do know it seems as Bush followed an agenda to take out Iraq right after 9/11. All he did was look for excuses/reasons.  The main ones of which WMD and Terrorist have proven unfounded. IMO the threat of Iraq was deliberately overstated by our president and his cabinet so that the American Public and the rest of the world would go along with the attack. I am not sure if violation of UN resolutions and Saddam being an evil dictator would have been enough on its own to foster this support. But that is just my opinion.

Offline Raider179

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2036
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #43 on: June 22, 2005, 04:59:21 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by Maverick
All saddumb had to do to squash the invasion and remain in power was to open the doors to the UN inspectors and let them do their job instead of playing games.


1) see my post on "proof" I do not claim to have it. But I do have suspicions.

2)Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, said the recommendation was given late Sunday night both to his Vienna-based agency hunting for atomic weaponry and to the New York-based teams looking for biological and chemical weapons.

"Late last night ... I was advised by the U.S. government to pull out our inspectors from Baghdad," ElBaradei told the IAEA's board of governors. He said U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan and the Security Council were informed and that the council would take up the issue later Monday.

U.N. officials have said the inspectors and support staff still in Iraq could be evacuated in as little as 48 hours.

No one has yet given the order for the inspectors to begin pulling out, and they were working on Monday.


hmm still working when US "advised" them to pull out.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-03-17-inspectors-iraq_x.htm
« Last Edit: June 22, 2005, 05:05:27 PM by Raider179 »

Offline Momus--

  • Nickel Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 651
Downing Street Memos
« Reply #44 on: June 23, 2005, 03:52:49 AM »
"Fixing The intelligence" is such a crude expression. I believe the officially sanctioned term is "Policy driven analysis", at least that is what it was called in the 1970's on a previous occasion when Wolfowitz & Co indulged in "threat escalation" and the selective interpretation of intel for politically expedient motives.

Link

Link

A coincidental precedent to also be dismissed by the latest "true believers"?
« Last Edit: June 23, 2005, 03:55:42 AM by Momus-- »