Dubya tips his hand concerning "new" evidence
Posted 01 February 2003 - 04:24 PM
In an exclusive story from MSNBC, Dubya has floated a trial balloon to see how the latest rationale will play around the world. He will claim to have electronic surveillance tapes from NSA eavesdropping that "prove" the Iraqis have been obstructing UN inspectors.
The problem: how to convince anyone that the tapes are real. Dubya has been claiming to have had damning evidence for nearly a year. Of course, he has been unable to provide any proof whatsoever. Now, according to the story, he has been gathering evidence over the last two months.
"For the past two months, ever since the U.N. inspectors re-entered Iraq and began searching for weapons of mass destruction, the NSA has been closely monitoring the conversations of Iraqi officials. The NSA intercepts establish conclusively that the Iraqis have been 'hiding stuff'."
Any normal, inquisitive person would have to ask themselves why, since he claims to have had evidence for a year, why is he suddenly is ready to release evidence gathered in the last 2 months? The answer to that is simple... he doesn't have any real evidence. And, if you read the article, you will see that people in the intelligence community are not in agreement as to what the tapes actually contain, even if they are genuine.
I think that the imperialist warpigs are so confounded by France and others who are stopping this war for oil that they are grasping at straws for any excuse to shed blood. I can just hear them... "Tapes, yeah, that's the ticket. People love tapes... remember Watergate"?
The tapes I'd like to hear are the tapes made by Dubya's spy ring on his own administration.
www.StopDubya.com and www.InternetFreeAmerica.com
Posted 01 February 2003 - 05:25 PM
Second, Firecat, you probably have little or no connection with any of the agencies which spy. It would follow then that you don't know how important human intelligence (HUMINT) is in garnering necessary information. And so it is that you (understandably) would be unaware how disclosure of some information could lead directly to the source of the information, resulting in not only loss of that information feed, but also death to the person reporting to an agency and that person's family and friends, in addition to any others the person caught might know who were participating in the HUMINT effort.
And finally, Firecat, you appear to be a person of the liberal internationalist persuasion. This excerpt is from a speech made in Dec 2002. In its entirety, the discussion is located at http://www.hillsdale...mis/default.htm
[quote]There are two schools of committed multilateralists, and it is important to distinguish between them. There are the liberal internationalists who act from principle, and there are the realists who act from pragmatism. The first was see in the run-up to the congressional debate on the war on Iraq. The main argument from opposition Democrats was that we should wait and hear what the U.N. was saying. Senator Kennedy, in a speech before the vote in Congress, said,
Posted 01 February 2003 - 05:57 PM
Perhaps because IT IS NOT THERE?
Dubyas latest nuclear threats clearly label him and his govt as international terrorists anyway. Read it and weep all you droogs who kept claiming that the USA never threatens anyone with nukes. I guess GW didn't read your posts soon enough.
Although, of course, your little droog minds are already trying to learn the herd argument as to why he is doing the right thing and that anyone who does not agree is just anti-American and jealous of your lifestyle...
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users