July 18, 2003
TONY BLAIR'S SOURCE....Who was Tony Blair's "entirely separate and credible source" for the Niger uranium allegations? All we know is that according to one British official it was "based on intelligence from a third country that was reliable."
General Glut takes a look at the pieces and concludes that the most likely source is Israeli intelligence. I'm not sure if his case his convincing, but it's at least suggestive. Take a look and decide for yourself.
And as long as you're over there, check out this interesting post. According to Le Monde (quoting La Repubblica),
Silvio Berlusconi personally called George Bush three days before the
State of the Union address to hawk the Niger documents that we now know
were forged. Maybe they can discuss it next week when Berlusconi is
scheduled to pay a visit to the Crawford ranch....
Posted by Kevin Drum at July 18, 2003 10:53 PM
| TrackBack
When Tony Blair said Israel should get security, that's when I got
concerned. Why do I see Tony Blair and the Trojan Horse of security
meaning that Israel will get UN forces to protect the new terrorist
state?
Okay, it won't happen. I don't know how Sharon will play this, but
he's going to be the one, down the line, that gets the salute in the
history books.
Tony? Bush? Here, I just don't know.
Bush would be wise if he uses a business model in Iraq and not build a
Potemkin Village ... but it seems Halliburton and Bechtel aren't
creating jobs in Iraq. They're using the military! Slave labor. And, it
makes no sense.
Meanwhile, we're supposed to be interested in Tony Blair's comments that Julia Child always uses yellowcake? Dunno.
This news gets screwier than some of you think my posts are.
As to the Brits, and their claims about Israel and security issues,
it's a wonder the IRA guy didn't get killed when he got captured. It
seems there's a bottom line to British 'intelligence' that leaves a lot
to be desired. Israel seems to take much of what the British say with
grains, and grains of salt.
Now, why isn't Iraq being rebuilt? What's wrong with the picture
that Halliburton and Bechtel are getting rich on contracts and we're not
seeing those massive cranes moving in and moving the earth around?
Amazing. Israel has good reason to want to remain anonymous. If Israel was the source of this information, and if that's confirmed, and if it turns out to be of dubious reliability....
this will explode.
(Perversely, however, this may improve the credibility of the information. Mossad isn't legendary for nothing.)
Carol: offhand, I imagine it's because they're waiting until they can
reasonably assume they won't be shot at. (Sweet irony if those two
companies are ticked at the "throwing flowers" crowd.)
And, this just in from the Jerusalem Post; until Sharon sat down with
Blair for lunch there were no high level channels for Israeli
Intelligence to reach Downing Street.
Bigger question is why did the Brits throw the Irish Journalist, John
Morgan, to Shin Bet? Were they hoping Israel would kill him? HA!
Now, just whose gonna get blamed for the new dead body showing up in
England? Conditit. Doesn't have to make sense. The press just LUVS ta
gossip over dead bodies. There's one now in England, not Israel. Meaning
that if Israeli Intelligence had been involved in 'yellow cake' it
would have struck gold. Not this nitwit story.
Who makes sentence decisions, anyway, on presidential speeches? What
a horrid job. Worse that cribbing text in college for a paper you'd
think no one would read.
HOW MANY PEOPLE ACTUALLY REMEMBER BUSH'S SPEECH?
Can't wait till someone pulls a Ph.D out of a hat on this one! Folks, buy your spy glasses, here.
While the Bursceloni story is certainly interesting, it should be
noted that La Repubblica was very anti-war editiorially, so caveat
emptor.
What I find absolutely hillarious is that according to the Guardian article,
Israel has its own equivalent of the Office of Special Plans, which
bypasses their own intelligence apparatus. Just like ours. This just
gets better and better. Even if anything comes out of this which is
actually positive, this whole thing is a cesspool of crap. And that it
happened at all is entirely due to us, the people, who let it happen.
In many cases, actually campaigning for it to happen. Process is there
to actually prevent this kind of crap.
You know, I'm pretty sure that there aren't a whole lot of people out
there willing to absolutely hate Israel that don't already do so.
If the information comes out, it won't change anyone's mind.
One of my readers sent me This Article in response to some of my recent posts. I responded here. While both the Israeli and French connection ideas are interesting. They come without substantiation. How conveinient.
These "other sources" stories are just a distraction. If other
sources backed up Bush & Blair, it would have killed this story from
the get go and we would already know.
The "other sources" stories will be fed to the public through
compliant press/media until the story dies of boredom or something else
happens to take it off the front page.
Other sources? You all know better.
These "other sources" are just like those "Iranian moderates" Reagan
used to blather about: Fig Newtons of the neo-fascist imagination.
Kevin, you should change the name of this site to "NigerPundit." ;)
The General raises some potentially relevant points, but he also
quotes the just de-classified part of the NIE as saying that "reports
indicate Iraq also has sought uranium ore from Somalia and possibly the
Democratic Republic of the Congo." The wording indicates that they had
at least slightly more of a reason to believe in a Somalia connection
than a DRC one, and I can't think of any reason that Israel would have
better Somalia sources than the US or Britain, as opposed to the
General's not-too-wild conjectures about possible Israeli intelligence
connections in Kenya and DRC. It doesn't really add up to Israel being
the "third country"--but it's probably not that much worse a guess than
the one about an Iraqi/Africa/uranium connection in the first place!
Any theories as to why Israel would give the intelligence to the
Britain and not the U.S., and why Britain would not give it to the U.S.
either? Seems implausible to me.
NYer: yeah, that occurred to me too. If there really is a third
party (which I'm not entirely convinced of), it seems that it needs to
be someone comfortable with passing information to the UK but to the
U.S. Not sure who that would be.
Here are some possible reasons Israel would not give it to the US. #1
The CIA and moreso State might not be buying unless it was verifiable
and the British have hinted that it's from no more than 2 human sources
(assuming there's anything at all). #2 They know it would look bad for
them (Israel) and us (US) if it came out that they were our intel source
for such a serious charge. What would look better would be #3 if they
could give it to the British, a credible 3rd party, who could cite it
publicly without revealing the source, allowing Bush to then cite the
British. That's plausible to me.
But it makes more sense that there isn't any solid evidence and it's
easier to rely on this mystery 3rd party than fess up. And bringing
Israel into it is a bit of a hot potato that I'm not altogether
comfortable speculating on. With the scant details available it's just
as likely Pakistan is the 3rd party.
So, perhaps the Blair government is lying about having additional
(credible) evidence? Two things that seem to indicate that. In March
when the IAEA discovered the forgery, they asked some more questions:
The IAEA asked the U.S. and Britain if they had any other evidence
backing the claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium. The answer was no.
The next piece to look at is the State Department's response to Waxman (pdf) at the end of April:
Beginning in late 2001, the United States obtained information
throught several channels, including U.S. intelligence sources and overt
sources, reporting that Iraq had attempted to procure uranium from
Africa. In addition, two Western European allies informed us of similar
reporting from their own intelligence services. As you know, the UK made
this information public in its September 2002 dossier on "Iraq's
Weapons of Mass Destruction." The other Western European ally relayed
the information to us privately and said, while it did not believe any
uranium had been shipped to Iraq, it believed Iraq had sought to
purchase uranium from Niger. We sought several times to determine the
basis for the latter assessment, and whether it was based on independent
evidence not otherwise available to the U.S. Not until March 4 did we
learn that in fact the second Western European government had based its
assessment on the evidence already available to the U.S. that was
subsequently discredited.
I don't think there was any other real information than the
scattering of reports that the US already decided were totally bogus.
I've constructed a timeline that tries to set these things in context.
On 11 Sep 2001, were there not five "Middle Eastern" types drinking
beer, cheering and otherwise, celebrating, from across the Hudson River,
in a park, as the WTC event progressed to collapse?
On arrest, were they not then found to be Isrealis and within days, deported?
Where is the followup? Who were they? Why were they "celebrating",
cheering according to one witness, as first one, then the other tower
collapsed?
and, where are the news-stories? Would this not be of interest?
Excellent site I have bookmarked your site yet and I will come back soon!
You`re absolutely right, but telling the truth sometimes hurts!
To be or not to be? That`s the question.
What a fantastic idea! You think also about details.
Blair and the neocons saw what they wanted to see and expected others
to follow along. Sadly, we are too smart for crap like that anymore.
Long live the collective intelligence!
www.burningcar.net Site Map
Pocket Bike only $299.95,
plus free shipping!49cc Pocket bikes 47cc mini pocket bike super electric pocket
bike Mini Gas scooters
- Pocket
- pocket bikes Gas scooters guide
- Super
2005 Pocket Bikes - 47cc Pocket Bike Now only $299.95, plus free
shipping!
- Mini
Gas Pocket Bikes - 49cc pocket Bike Now only $459.95, plus free
shipping!
- Cheap
Pocket bikes for sale - 47cc Pocket Bike Now only $299.95, plus
free shipping!
- New
Fastest Pocket Bikes - 47cc Pocket Bike Now only $299.95, plus free
shipping!
- Gas
power Pocket Bikes - 47cc Pocket Bike Now only $299.95, plus free
shipping!
- 47cc
Mini Pocket Bikes - 47cc Pocket Bike Now only $299.95, plus free
shipping!
- 49cc
rocket Pocket Bikes - 49cc Pocket Bike Now only $459.95, plus free
shipping!
- Cheap
Pocket Bikes - 49cc Pocket Bike Now only $459.95, plus free shipping!
- Rocket
Pocket Bikes - 49cc Pocket Bike Now only $459.95, plus free shipping!
- Big
Pocket Bikes - 49cc Pocket Bike Now only $459.95, plus free shipping!
source? what source? he was too busy gambling at our online casino. there was no source.
The other day I was looking for some :
online casino , casino , online gambling , gambling , online casinos , casinos , internet casino , gambling online , blackjack , casino online , craps , slots , slot machine , video poker , slot , roulette , baccarat , slot machines , online roulette , online blackjack , internet gambling , online casino gambling , online internet casino , online casino games , best online casinos , best online casino , casino gambling , offshore online gambling , free casino games , casino games , free online casinos , casinos online , free online blackjack , free online gambling , online gambling casino , gambling casino online , free casino gambling , free online casino , free online casino games , casino bets online , casino games online , free slots .
|
