http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tm...31/wl_mideast_afp/us_iraq_powell_030531004225 I had agree with Colin on this one. I thought the same thing when I heard the speech. Or as we say in the computer biz, "Garbage in, garbage out."
"The pressure forced Powell to appoint his own review team that met several times with Central Intelligence Agency (news - web sites) Director George Tenet and national security adviser Condoleezza Rice (news - web sites) to prepare the speech, in which the secretary of state accused Iraq of hiding tonnes of biological and chemical weapons. Notice the spelling of tons. This is obviously written by a foreign journalist, and should be taken with a grain of salt.
Cheney's aides wanted Powell to include in his presentation information that Iraq has purchased computer software that would allow it to plan an attack on the United States, an allegation that was not supported by the CIA, US News reported. True story - I saw that program on sale at CompUSA, and wouldn't you know it, Iraq came out of nowhere, jumped in front of me and grabbed the last one! I had to settle for Railroad Tycoon II, which is a good game, don't get me wrong, but it's certainly no program that allows me to plan attacks on the United States. Drat. Just as well though, I guess. I haven't got any weapons of mass destruction lying around, either.
The biological and chemical weapons are hidden together with tons of available Galaxy seats for the home opener...
Since we're to take foregn journalists with "a grain of salt", here's something from an American newspaper. http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/international/worldspecial/04WEAP.html Does anyone else think this is probably the most embarrasing moment in U.S. history?
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101030609-455828,00.html?cnn=yes From another American journalist.
What? More embarrassing than Remember the Maine? All our meddling in nations south of the Rio Grande? Not believing an eyewitness to Holocaust who has escaped and asks you to stop what is happening? The Gulf of Tonkin Resolution? Bombing Cambodia? The handling of the USS Liberty attack? Watergate? Negating an October Surprise? Iran-Contra? The Highway of Death? I did not have sex with that woman? Reading a book about a goat while allowing hijacked planes to crash into American buildings then running scared around the nation? I know I've left out a lot.
------------------------------------- Wolfowitz: Iraq war was about oil George Wright Wednesday June 4, 2003 Oil was the main reason for military action against Iraq, a leading White House hawk has claimed, confirming the worst fears of those opposed to the US-led war. The US deputy defence secretary, Paul Wolfowitz - who has already undermined Tony Blair's position over weapons of mass destruction (WMD) by describing them as a "bureaucratic" excuse for war - has now gone further by claiming the real motive was that Iraq is "swimming" in oil. The latest comments were made by Mr Wolfowitz in an address to delegates at an Asian security summit in Singapore at the weekend, and reported today by German newspapers Der Tagesspiegel and Die Welt. ------------------------------- As much as I hate this guy, this has to be a misquote. There's no way he would come out and say this.
Good Lord, I hope that's a complete and total misquote. If not, Bush better fire the sonuvabitch before sundown.
I know what is going on here. The people running the country are using a Wolfowitz quote on foreign land - which will never be a big deal in the US media - as a feeler to see how people respond to the idea. If it pans out, they might slowly become more forthright about the empire we are building.
Ahh, you guys all missed the money quote in the Yahoo article. Yahoo uses Agence France Presse (AFP) wires, hence the "foreign" spelling. Read the dateline people. Xenophobes may now begin your Frog-bashing.
Scooter?? Who knew that a guy named Scooter crafted the speech that cemented American opinion that led to the war that brought down Sadaam? Scooter beat Sadaam. Wow.
Ops Blow Back created envio 4 gulf war 1 However, these sweeping comparisons have been questioned due to the initial support of Iraq by the United States and a history of legitimate conflict with Kuwait. The 1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran threatened to divert Iraq from the secular nationalism of the Sunni-dominated Ba'athist regime. In addition, Iraqi Shiites, many of whom were sympathetic to Iran's Ayatollah, accounted for the majority of Iraq's population. The pretext for the bloody, protracted Iran-Iraq War was a territorial dispute, but most attribute the war as an attempt by Saddam, supported by both the US and the USSR, to have Iraq form a bulwark against the expansionism of radical Iranian-style revolution. The war with Iran left Iraq bankrupt. No country would lend it money except the United States and borrowing money from the US made Iraq its client state. Iraq had also borrowed a tremendous amount of money from other Arab states, including Kuwait, during the 1980s to fight its war with Iran. Saddam Hussein felt that the war had been fought for the benefit of the other Gulf Arab states as much as for Iraq, and so all debts should be forgiven. Kuwait, however, did not forgive its debt and further provoked Saddam by slant drilling oil out of wells that Iraq considered within its disputed border with Kuwait. In 1990 Saddam Hussein complained to the United States State Department about Kuwaiti slant drilling. This had continued for years, but now Iraq needed oil money to pay off its war debts and avert an economic crisis. Saddam ordered troops to the Iraq-Kuwait border, creating alarm over the prospect of an invasion. After talks with April Glaspie, the United States ambassador to Iraq, assured him that the US considered the Iraq-Kuwait dispute an internal Arab matter, Saddam sent his troops into Kuwait. April has a fuzzy memory. In 96' when Frontline ran a 5yrs after the Gulf War special to tell the complete story, she said, "the US is not interested in interfering in Arab-Arab relations," then she added that she left the meeting confident Saddam had no intentions of invading Kuwait. Wrong on both fronts Miss Glaspie. You do realize that if we'd brokered an agreement 2 relieve iraqi debts, he never woulda invaded kuwait and we never woulda been stationed in SA to prevent him from moving south. if that never happens, there is no WTC bombing w/ Yussef, no OBL, no Kobar Towers, no twin embacy bombing, no egyptian tourist bus explosion, no USS Cole disaster, Al-qaeda backed taliban, & no 9/11. Thanks for serving your country.
Cman found the money quote! Not bad for a Fire fan! Powell's entire speech was bull$hi*. The entire time I was listening to it, I thought he would crack, slam the table, and say "I can't take it any more." One can dream. He is the worst secretary of state since Kissinger. How can one adminstration go from the entire world sympathizing with out loss from 9/11, to resorting to lies to grab some oil-soaked real estate? Useless bastards.
Back to the real debate...how many people are in on this lie? http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/05/international/worldspecial/05PENT.html ------ One senior official, who said he was skeptical of Mr. Feith's account, was too angry to answer immediately. Another official said simply, "There was a lot of doublespeak out there." ------
The translation isn't so bad. The major problem is that die Welt apparently (I say that because I haven't read the whole article) left out the bit about North Korea teetering on the brink of economic collapse. If that's the case, it's not so much a bad translation as it is taking a quote out of context to achieve a desired effect. I'm actually a German/English translator, so I have to defend whomever translated the quote. Looks more like slanted journalism on the part of die Welt. And that's not so surprising, considering that most of Europe was against this war.
> Sorry to bust your bubble I guess it didn't fit in this case, but you have to admit it is a very common tactic in this administration.