Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-09-23 02:43am

Journo claims proof of WMD lies
By Paul Mulvey in London
September 23, 2003

AUSTRALIAN investigative journalist John Pilger says he has evidence the war against Iraq was based on a lie that could cost George W. Bush and Tony Blair their jobs and bring Prime Minister John Howard down with them.

A television report by Pilger aired on British screens overnight said US Secretary of State Colin Powell and National Security Adviser Condoleeza Rice confirmed in early 2001 that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein had been disarmed and was no threat.

But after the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington on September 11 that year, Pilger claimed Rice said the US "must move to take advantage of these new opportunities" to attack Iraq and claim control of its oil.

Pilger uncovered video footage of Powell in Cairo on February 24, 2001 saying, "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Two months later, Rice reportedly said, "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

Powell boasted this was because America's policy of containment and its sanctions had effectively disarmed Saddam.

Pilger claims this confirms that the decision of US President George W Bush - with the full support of British Prime Minister Blair and Howard - to wage war on Saddam because he had weapons of mass destruction was a huge deception.

Pilger interviewed several leading US government figures in Washington but said he did not ask Powell or Rice to respond to his claims.

"I think it's very serious for Howard. Howard has followed the Americans and to a lesser degree Blair almost word for word," Pilger told AAP before his program was screened on ITV tonight.

"All Howard does is say `well it's not true' and never explains himself.

"I just don't believe you can be seen to be party to such a big lie, such a big deception and endure that politically.

"It simply can't be shrugged off and that's Howard's response.

"Blair has shrugged it off but Blair is deeply damaged. It's far from over here, there's a lot that is going to happen and much of it could wash onto Howard.

"And it's unravelling in America and Bush could lose the election next year.

"I've not seen political leaders survive when they've been complicit in such an open deception for so long."

Howard last week dismissed an accusation from Opposition Leader Simon Crean that he hid a warning from British intelligence that war against Iraq would heighten the terrorist threat to Australia.

In his report, Pilger interviews Ray McGovern, a former senior CIA officer and friend of Bush's father and ex-president, George Bush senior.

McGovern told Pilger that going to war because of weapons of mass destruction "was 95 per cent charade."

Pilger also claims that six hours after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he wanted to "hit" Iraq and allegedly said "Go Massive ... Sweep it all up. Things related and not."

He was allegedly talked down by Powell who said the American people would not accept an attack on Iraq without any evidence, so they opted to invade Afghanistan where Osama bin Laden had bases.

Pilger claimed war was set in train on September 17, 2001 when Bush signed a paper directing the Pentagon to explore the military options for an attack on Iraq.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-23 02:46am

I think that everyone's figured out by now that the Bush Administration was lying about WMD in Iraq. The problem is that (as one Newsweek writer pointed out) it's become a matter of national pride and saving face.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-09-23 02:52am

Dear oh dear, it just gets better and better...

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-23 02:55am

Don't worry. Axis Kast will find some way to rationalize it away, deny its validity, or just generally make an ass out of himself.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-09-23 02:55am

More ammo for the people that know Bush lied, and think it matters that they did.

Hamel · Post by **Hamel** » 2003-09-23 02:56am

Hamel wrote:More ammo for the people that know Bush lied, and think it matters that they did.

Hey, check it out

I just made myself look like a stupid

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-23 03:02am

The Rumsfeld "sweep it all up thing's related and not" thing has been around for quite a while- I read that over a year ago.

TrailerParkJawa · Post by **TrailerParkJawa** » 2003-09-23 03:13am

This isnt new. I remember this being discussed way back when. Powell did make the statement that Iraq was'nt much of a threat. However, it has long since been lost in the clutter. You also have to remember, when Bush was first making his case for the war. Anyone who questioned the war was savagely attacked as being un-American.

WMD's and the fear they generate were one of the only acceptable excuses they could come up with to invade Iraq.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-23 05:04am

Condi Rice also said the same thing as Powell.

BoredShirtless · Post by **BoredShirtless** » 2003-09-23 05:08am

Hamel wrote:Pilger uncovered video footage of Powell in Cairo on February 24, 2001 saying, "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

So.....where is the video footage then? Has anybody actually seen it?

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-09-23 09:46am

Unless we get to actually see the footage... It doesn't mean shit....

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-23 10:07am

theski wrote:Unless we get to actually see the footage... It doesn't mean shit....

John Pilger has made more than a few documentaries about wars and atrocities- he'll certainly put it in one if he does one about Iraq, which he undoubtedly will (he also did one on East Timor).

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-09-24 02:57am

theski wrote:Unless we get to actually see the footage... It doesn't mean shit....

I am inclined to think the report is accurate given what has happned, if he claims to have footage, then the sooner he produces it the better, or he will look a bit silly.

Xon · Post by **Xon** » 2003-09-24 05:19am

Journo claims proof of WMD lies
By Paul Mulvey in London
September 23, 2003

AUSTRALIAN investigative journalist John Pilger says he has evidence the war against Iraq was based on a lie that could cost George W. Bush and Tony Blair their jobs and bring Prime Minister John Howard down with them.

This guy is on something.

Johny Howard has practically admited in parliament that the WMD didnt actually have any solid proof(and the Opposition cryed that one from the rooftops). And the public didnt care.

Hell, there was a serious security leak via classified documents on this very subject. The public didnt care about that either. The Opposition caught the government redhanded and havent actually got anything out of it, since the public doesnt care.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-09-24 12:40pm

Anyone care to argue that this is a Non- story or others would have picked up on it....

Supreme_Warlord · Post by **Supreme_Warlord** » 2003-09-24 03:10pm

BoredShirtless wrote:So.....where is the video footage then? Has anybody actually seen it?

This program was aired on ITV1 on Monday night and yes, I have seen the footage. Powell and Rice said exactly what they are said to have said. Paraphrasing:

Powell: Saddam has not been able to develop any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction and that he is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.
Rice: We (America) are able to keep arms from him via the sanctions policy.

theski wrote:Anyone care to argue that this is a Non- story or others would have picked up on it....

You wouldn't be referring to the sycophantic American media would you?

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-09-24 03:28pm

Supreme_Warlord wrote:

You wouldn't be referring to the sycophantic American media would you?

How about BBC or You don't think if this is true the NY Times wouldn't give their left nut to run it.. It is bullshit untill conformation

FBHthelizardmage · Post by **FBHthelizardmage** » 2003-09-24 05:10pm

Well assuming this is the program I think it is, (and I'm sure it is, since it featured this footage) then it was on ITV about two nights back here in britain and did in fact has said footage.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-09-24 06:54pm

theski wrote:Supreme_Warlord wrote:
You wouldn't be referring to the sycophantic American media would you?

How about BBC or You don't think if this is true the NY Times wouldn't give their left nut to run it.. It is bullshit untill conformation

If it has already been on TV, with Rice and Powell saying what they are claimed to have said, that it has not been on BBC or in the NYT is irrlivant.

Post by **Vympel** » 2003-09-25 05:18am

To put the nail in the 'unconfirmed' coffin:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

"...the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue."

Almost 2 years later, complete 180 in his farcical UN address.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2003-09-25 05:26am

Vympel wrote:To put the nail in the 'unconfirmed' coffin:

http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

"...the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place, but we are always willing to review them to make sure that they are being carried out in a way that does not affect the Iraqi people but does affect the Iraqi regime's ambitions and the ability to acquire weapons of mass destruction, and we had a good conversation on this issue."
Almost 2 years later, complete 180 in his farcical UN address.

And there we have it, Bush & co are big fat liers.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-09-25 11:53am

I do so enjoy watching the Bush apologists reflexively try to defend his bullshit, and act as though the quote was so implausible that they would need to see the video for themselves before they believed it. Did they develop amnesia, and forget that America was not concerned about Iraq as a thread before Bush came to power?

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-09-25 12:31pm

Mike.. Thats bullshit... If one of us posted something like that about any WMD info.. that they found some.. You would be railling for a second source too..

The Dark · Post by **The Dark** » 2003-09-25 12:38pm

theski wrote:Mike.. Thats bullshit... If one of us posted something like that about any WMD info.. that they found some.. You would be railling for a second source too..

So news.com.au and ITV1 don't count as two sources? Warlord said he saw the video (as did FBHthelizardmage), and the original article was on an Aussie news site. That sounds like a second source to me.

theski · Post by **theski** » 2003-09-25 01:47pm

The Dark wrote:

So news.com.au and ITV1 don't count as two sources? Warlord said he saw the video (as did FBHthelizardmage), and the original article was on an Aussie news site. That sounds like a second source to me.

I guess I should have said Major news outlet...

and still we have not heared one word about this from any organization here in the states

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies

Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies

Re: Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies

Re: Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies

Re: Aussie has the dirt on WMD lies