Another lie from U.S. gov in the Iraq case

Post-9/11 Era Forum

WHO LIED TO WHOM?
by SEYMOUR M. HERSH

Last September 24th, as Congress prepared to vote on the resolution authorizing President George W. Bush to wage war in Iraq, a group of senior intelligence officials, including George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, briefed the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on Iraq’s weapons capability.
.....
The suitability of the tubes for that purpose had been disputed, but this time the argument that Iraq had a nuclear program under way was buttressed by a new and striking fact: the C.I.A. had recently received intelligence showing that, between 1999 and 2001, Iraq had attempted to buy five hundred tons of uranium oxide from Niger, one of the world’s largest producers.
....
On March 7th, Mohamed ElBaradei, the director-general of the International Atomic Energy Agency, in Vienna, told the U.N. Security Council that the documents involving the Niger-Iraq uranium sale were fakes. “The I.A.E.A. has concluded, with the concurrence of outside experts, that these documents . . . are in fact not authentic,” ElBaradei said.

One senior I.A.E.A. official went further. He told me, “These documents are so bad that I cannot imagine that they came from a serious intelligence agency. It depresses me, given the low quality of the documents, that it was not stopped. At the level it reached, I would have expected more checking.”

....


and you want an "Allie" to trust and follow a gov which need fakes info to make their proof of evidences ?

Again: There is the law and there is the U.S. gov.
One thing to add in the long list of the "bad" thing U.S. gov did ....

who is the betrayer ?

You must be ashamed of your own country as well? Or maybe your afraid your country will be ashamed of you?

nowar - Thank God you are not from the U.S., but I would bet that your life has benefited from American technology or generosity. Your just another worthless whiner from some no-where country that dislikes America because you are jealous of what we have and the freedoms that we enjoy. So in closing you can kiss my *** along with all you other friggin' as*holes!!!!

I might add, if we would have faked them we would have done a better job.

That's funny

ingnorance is funny when it involve yourself only

not when it's used to start a war, it becomes a crime .....


The biggest power in the world, CIA, FBI and others trust documents like that ?

U.S. gov did not made them, but used them to go to war ....

I think it's worst then making fake docs.

Anyway, what is it true on the proof of evidences against Iraq shown by U.S. except that Saddam is a dictator ?

Nowar...

Maybe when this is all over we will see what evidence there is. Maybe there will be justification and proof and then again maybe there won't be any.

But I still ponder what will happen "if things are found". I believe I know the answer to that already (maybe this isn't fair of me to say...as no events have occurred as of yet) .... It will be said that the US planted the illegal items...and that the US is again lying.

It doesn't matter anymore what happens, sides have been taken. To those that opposed the actions of the Alliance of Nations for this war will always be evil...primarily the US. To those that oppose this alliance will always be considered by the Alliance as "those people who supported evil". In the end....we are all evil, just depends on which side of the fence you stand.

FBI may look into false Niger-Iraq nuclear documents
Staff Reporter
WASHINGTON, 17 March 2003
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) may take up the case of forged documents cited by the Bush administration as evidence of Iraq's nuclear ambitions.

WASHINGTON: Secretary of State Colin Powell says US officials received in good faith from foreign sources the evidence purporting to show a recent attempt by Iraq to buy uranium from the African nation of Niger. He told Congress this past week that evidence was then passed on to the United Nations in good faith. "It was provided in good faith to the inspectors and our agency received it in good faith," said Powell.

But a State Department official tells VOA the UN's eventual determination that the evidence was fabricated "did not come as a surprise." The official says there was "a fair bit of scepticism" about the authenticity of the charges when they first surfaced.

The official was authorised to speak to VOA by the State Department but on condition of anonymity. He did not explain why the State Department went ahead and cited the charge publicly, even naming Niger. He now acknowledges that the State Department "could have been more circumspect" in pinpointing a possible African source of uranium for Iraq.

Political motives denied

However the official denies that political motives prompted the Bush administration to make the charge public anyway. For his part, Secretary Powell has denied any US role in the falsification of the evidence.

A spokesman for the Federal Bureau of Investigation, indicates the FBI may now look into the forgery of the documents.

But the spokesman suggests there will not be a formal investigation but rather just laboratory analysis of the false evidence. He tells VOA the falsification, especially since it was apparently carried out abroad, was probably not a violation of any criminal statutes in this country.

Intelligence sources say the fake evidence purported to show the existence of a secret agreement three years ago under which Niger would sell Iraq 500 tons of yellowcake, a colorful form of concentrated uranium ore.

President Bush, in his State of the Union address, noted what he termed Saddam Hussein's efforts to obtain significant quantities of uranium in Africa, an apparent reference to the charge.

Niger has strongly denied any illicit uranium deals with Iraq. US intelligence officials have said there was never any proof of recent uranium shipments to Baghdad despite sales two decades ago.

Nabeel Masawi Chief Intellegence Officer for the Iraqi Opposition in an interview just now LIVE, said that it was well known that Saddam has clear ties with Al-Qaeda. He said that Usama had even visited the terrorist training camp in norther Iraq.

He also said that is is well known in Iraq that Iraq and Al-Qaeda have developed ties and that people just choose to look the other way. Hence why we are seeing Al-Qaeda type tactics being used by the Iraqi's.

Sorry I can't give you a link, as I said it was a LIVE interview.

The US can (along with a whole slew of other countries) blow another up based on an "if"....."if" they choose to do so.

No, it's not the "best way" to think as you put it. It never is the best way to think. Military intervention is not "always" the right answer or recourse, but at times, yes it is necessary. Nearly every "western" nation practices that option in defense of their stance. Why else would the French send in military forces to the Ivory Coast? They are there under the pretempances of enforcers of "peace"...but who's peace are they there to enforce? A large number of the citizens of the Ivory Coast do not wish for them to be there and to get involved....but yet they are there. They practice exactly what they oppose of the Alliance of Nations in conflict with Iraq right now. Their troops (the French) were bound to get involved, through their fault or not (who fired the first shot concept). If they had not sent any military forces there, they would not be in that situation. They chose to send and establish their military presence there...yes, to some degree under UN backing...but I don't think it was the UN's intent to see any French soldier fire a shot. But they have and do.

And...by the way...I honestly do not care where you are from, for that matter, where anyone who posts to this message board is from. Each person has their view, they do not speak for an entire country or nation. I enjoy the "content" and "views" of each individual...that is what makes each and everyone of us so unique.

About France and Ivory:

Ivory was a french colony. When France left Ivory, they made agreements and treaties in order to develop Ivory.

I don't know where you come from but it seems that you don't know africa and old colony.

What the French did by sending their soldier was only to avoid civil war between the 2 sides.

They helped french people living in Ivory to quit.
They have been involved in some shots, but nobody knows who started, and this from both side.
Do they are fighting ?
Do they launch missiles ?

One side of the Ivory citizens are against French due to the agreement signed in France between both party, giving some "rebels" place in Ivory government.

But they don't do a war .....

I'm coming from ex-Zaire (Congo now, lived there 23 years) which was under Mobutu rules, another dictator which was a very good friend of U.S. gov at that time (check a map from mid Africa in 1970).

There have been exactly the same from Belgium, French .... and U.S.A. to evacuate their citizens and try to avoid fight between rebels and gov.
They have been involved in fight too with the rebels and the gov. soldiers .......

so stop using arguments that you seems not understand
it has nothing in common with the Iraq war.

as I said, you don't read.
You even quoted the question:

NoWar says: Did U.S. gov used fake documents to build the case against Iraq ?


is that making or using when the verb "use" is .... used

when you can't read you can't be reporter, and this is the polite way

Marc Flemming
continue you reporter job, you do it well .......

oh dear. *sigh*

Does that really change anything??? You're dwelling on this as if to imply that the US KNEW they were fake and went ahead with using them anyway - as if they NEEDED fake documents to make their case - as if they were betraying us because they KNEW 100% that these documents were faked.

Where do you get your intelligence from? Somewhere other than the toilet?

Other Nowar quotes:

for sure not a the same place as yours and I'm happy of that ....


the biggest investigation system did not saw that there was fake docs to build the case against Iraq ?

****, you should fired all these guys

it's not my saying about "the biggest investigation system", U.S. gov does


and about my english: niangalakata

and you will not find that on altavista

No War...yes..there is a war going on there...a civil war. And yes....the French are meddling into their affairs, just as alot of people feel the US is meddling into others affairs.

The French colonized and now has vast business interests within the Ivory Coast, for that reason they will protect to keep their choice of "government" there, it is not necessarily what the local populace wants. So what you are saying is that it is okay for the French to "colonize" and force others to believe what the French want?

And what do you understand? Except that you dislike what is going on and for that everyone involved is wrong. I have seen photo's and video clips of the demonstrations occuring in the Ivory Coast....the people there are chanting..."Chirac Assasin". Now does that sound to you of people wanting the French influence there? The French are profiting from the Ivory Coast with their businesses as the economy there dwindles...where is the cooperation? So I would suggest that you study what is going on before you speak of something you do not understand.

Missles or no missles...war is war...innocent people die.

And...before you begin to use the English language against a someone, learn to use it first. I don't understand French, Italian, German, etc., well enough to go posting in their languages and then attempt to correct them if I feel they are incorrect. You are using English in an improper manner and really, to be honest (though I must credit you with at least trying) are not making one bit of sense.

You cannot "USED" anything in the sense and tense that you are speaking in. A more proper way of probably expressing the sentence that you are attempting to would be more like....(though I am no English Scholar myself)

"Did the US gov USE fake documents to build THEIR case against Iraq?"

Before you go any further in down playing anyone for their use and mastery of a said language, learn to use it properly yourself.

Just to throw a monkey wrench into all this. The US Government still believes that the documents are authentic and has the FBI investigating.

Keep in mind that the reason that Elbaradi and the IAEA say that the documents were fakes was because they weren't on official paper. Since when does someone doing something in a secret deal use official paper.

Also Elbaradi said that when they questioned the to parties involved, both said that the persons involved no longer worked there.

what do you have seen about Ivory ?
what do you know about Ivory ?

"Chirac assassin" comes from the people which are against the treaty signed in France which gives rebels a place in the Ivory government.

And the other part of Ivory citizens agree with this treaty.

As far as I remember it's the Ivory president which asked the french gov to let their soldier in Ivory.
The mission of these soldiers was to rapatriate the french citizens living in Ivory .....


And about my english, right, it's not my mother tongue ....

but the question would have been: Did the U.S. gov and U.K. gov HAVE USED fake documents to build THEIR case against Irak ?


apologies for my so bad english .....

So, you are saying that it's "justified" for the French to be there, since they were asked by a political figure? Since some of the people want them there, it's okay?

There are exiled military and political leaders of Iraq who have requested the help of the US and UN to clear out Saddam and his government structure so that Iraq can be rulled by others. Not for the US to rule Iraq...to dispose of the its current government so that a new Iraqi (who ever that will be) government can run their country.

By your own admissions....this conflict in Iraq becomes justified then...because some of its people wish for it to happen.

Again...I applaud you on your English, as I've said its better then I could ever attempt...but again back to your sentence....

Did the US gov and UK gov "HAVE USED".....

A more proper way is to simply say "USE"....

Not sure why you are continuing to attempt to utilize "use" as "used".