Re: When you attack a country,INNOCENT people die and suffer.

Bush said:

"Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes
used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon."

That's a declarative sentence with no qualifiers. Bush didn't quote
his intelligence sources. He didn't say it was his opinion; he stated
that claim as though it were an undisputed fact. He said Iraq was
attempting to buy aluminum tubes to enrich uranium and they weren't.
Bush didn't tell the truth.

Did Bush know that the intelligence opinions on aluminum tubes were
controversial? If he did, he didn't tell the public and he was lying
by omission. If he didn't, it was obviously because he didn't want to
know. According to Colin Powell, they all knew there were differences
of opinion and that there was a controversy about what the tubes were
for and he was honest enough to state that in his address to the U.N.
Bush, on the other hand, stated it as though it were an undisputed
fact, which it wasn't. Both the DOE's Office of Intelligence and the
INR assessed that the aluminum tubes were probably not intended for a
nuclear program as did the U.N. inspectors before the invasion. Here's
what Powell said about the aluminum tubes:

"By now, just about everyone has heard of these [aluminum] tubes and
we all know that there are differences of opinion. There is
controversy about what these tubes are for. Most U.S. experts think
they are intended to serve as rotors in centrifuges used to enrich
uranium. Other experts, and the Iraqis themselves, argue that they are
really to produce the rocket bodies for a conventional weapon, a
multiple rocket launcher."
- Colin Powell, Speech Before the United Nations


On May 28, 9:17 am, "Tom" <boldsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>         If you read the information on that website apparently dedicated to
> disproving any rationale for invading Iraq, the fact remains that the best
> information available from trusted sources was otherwise.  If incorrect, it
> does NOT constitute a lie which would have only be acceptable or correct
> terminology if Bush had received the information from his intelligence
> agencies which indicated what the article, and the film, allege and ordered
> those agencies to change their reports to indicate that the threat remained
> real.  There is no evidence indicating that to be the case. BTW unlike this
> comment indicates "Despite the conclusions of the DOE – which possessed the
> most knowledge and experience about nuclear centrifuges of any U.S.
> intelligence agency", the DOE is NOT an intelligence agency any more that
> Ambassador Joseph Wilson was a competent, trained, intelligence agent
> capable of evaluating raw data obtained in the field such as the "Yellow
> Cake" controversy.
>
>         In any case, the only definitive piece of evidence against this
> being a reasonable part of the case to invade Iraq was the CIA's own
> internal investigation which, in hindsight, allowed them in 2004 to state
> that their previous report was incorrect.
>
>         Only those who still seek a smoking gun to hurt Bush, or at least
> his legacy at this point, in retaliation for the tarnished legacy of Bill
> Clinton and the setback to the progressive agenda that Clinton began and
> Bush further delayed are capable of continuing to attempt to rule the
> invasion of Iraq and the regime change that took place shortly thereafter, a
> policy that was first instituted by no less than Bill Clinton himself in
> 1998.
>
>         I imagine that the one quickly dismissed comment by the Obama
> Administration official that the Global War on Terror is over is heartily
> believed in the ranks of the progressives as well despite the fact that it
> appears Obama will not be pulling troops out of Afghanistan as precipitously
> as wished by the left. One thing that the Obama regime has proven to many
> Americans who are slightly and moderately left and to those who are any
> distance to the right is that every vestige of the far left progressive
> scourge much be flushed from the Democratic Party and from any elected
> position whatsoever.
>
> Tom
>
> "Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money,
> The Shit has hit the Fan"
> "Hiding in Honduras"
> - Warren Zevon
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: opendebateforum@googlegroups.com
>
> [mailto:opendebateforum@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mg
> Sent: Sunday, May 27, 2012 8:42 PM
> To: Open Debate Political Forum IMHO
> Subject: Re: When you attack a country,INNOCENT people die and suffer.
>
> Here's an example of a bush lie:
>
> "Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to
> enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon."
> - President Bush, Speech Before the United Nationshttp://www.leadingtowar.com/claims_facts_aluminum.php
>
> On May 22, 11:13 am, "Tom" <boldsa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >         What exactly would his lie have been?  That he believed that
> > they had WMDs or that WMDs formed his rationale for invading?  If all
> > intelligence agencies worldwide with which we had cooperation said
> > that their best estimate was that he did and if Saddam himself stated
> > that he did, what lie did Bush tell us?  If it was that the basis for
> > the invasion was solely the presence of WMDs that would be a
> > falsehood, not on Bush's head but on the heads of those who so stated
> > since Bush's statements concerning the reason for invading listed
> > approximately 21 reasons and not just WMDs.
>
> >         That is where any claims of culpability for violating Use of
> > Force requirements falls short and devolves into a political snipe
> > hunt rather than an honest evaluation of fact.  BTW, discovery of 500
> > drums of chemical weapons, whether they were old and present prior to
> > 1991 or not, is the discovery of 500 drums of chemical weapons.  As
> > for the claims that they would no longer have constituted a threat, my
> > training and experience as an RN, as a graduate of USAMRRID's
> > Management of Chemical Casualties course, and as a former trained
> > Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical warfare defense officer tells me how
> > ill informed those who claimed that particular point are in reality.
> > One of the first things I learned in NBC school was the story of the
> > French Farmer from Ypres, France who was clearing one of his fields of
> > trees in 1954.  He took a break and sat for a while on the stump of
> > one of the trees that he had felled.  Three hours later he was in the
> > local Emergency Room with Mustard gas induced chemical burns of his
> > buttocks and upper legs. Ypres was the site of the first use of chemical
> agents by the Germans in 1915 and mustard gas was one of the agents used
> there.
>
> > Tom
>
> > "Send Lawyers, Guns, and Money,
> > The Shit has hit the Fan"
> > "Hiding in Honduras"
> > - Warren Zevon
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: opendebateforum@googlegroups.com
>
> > [mailto:opendebateforum@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of mg
> > Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2012 9:42 AM
> > To: Open Debate Political Forum IMHO
> > Subject: Re: When you attack a country,INNOCENT people die and suffer.
>
> > I think if you were to ask George Bush why he invaded Iraq, he would
> > say "we thought they had weapons of mass destruction", which would be
> > a lie, of course.
>
> > So what's the real reason he invaded Iraq? The short answer is
> > corporate profits.
>
> > On May 22, 7:48 am, OccupySpring <soprano.olivi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Bush had NO REASON to attack Iraq.
>
> > >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ta-khdm8SJA&feature=related
>
> > > Be sure to read the comments, remember you tube is global and people
> > > from many countries can make comments.
>
> > > How did you feel during 9/11, Now multiply that by a 1000 fold and
> > > thats what we did to the innocent people in Iraq.
>
> > --
> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> > Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> > To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> > OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> > For more options, visit this group
> > athttp://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
> To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com To
> unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Open Debate Political Forum IMHO" group.
To post to this group, send email to OpenDebateForum@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to OpenDebateForum-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/OpenDebateForum?hl=en