Greenpeace co-founder Paul Watson said:
“It doesn’t matter what is true, it only matters what people believe is true.”
The BBC is going to tell you a story…..
Next Monday Panorama broadcasts this:
The Spies Who Fooled the World
On the eve of the tenth anniversary of the Iraq War, Panorama reveals how key aspects of the secret intelligence used by Downing Street and the White House to justify the invasion were based on fabrication, wishful thinking and lies. Peter Taylor tracks down some of those responsible and reports on the remarkable story of how, in the months before the war, two highly-placed sources – close to Saddam Hussein – talked secretly to the CIA and MI6. Their intelligence said Iraq did not have an active WMD programme – but it was simply dismissed.
‘fabrication, wishful thinking and lies.‘…extremely emotive and powerful words…..and not the whole truth…nowhere near the whole truth…..as much a lie from the BBC as some of the intelligence was in its emphasis (sexing up) and omission.
Presumably the BBC is claiming the ‘Spies’ are intelligence agents of the US and UK and that they willingly used intelligence they knew was wrong…thereby undermining every claim about Iraqi WMD and the justification for war……
…No intelligence is ever 100%…as Blair said decisions are made based on “the calculus of risk” as well as intended outcomes and probable outcomes…not necessarily the same things.
Awkward that the BBC’s own Iain watson admitted:
‘In fact, George Bush’s predecessor, Bill Clinton, in 1998, finally took the view that regime change in Iraq was necessary because he could not trust Saddam to disarm.’
An inconvenient fly in the ointment is that even the weapons inspectors thought that Saddam had a WMD programme…as he almost certainly did have….research and development if not final production. France, Germany and Russia all believed saddam had WMD.
Why does the BBC broadcast this decade old story? The only reason is Hutton…the BBC can’t accept it was badly wrong and has spent years skulking Achilles-like in its tent plotting its revenge, aiming to claim redemption.
Presumably Dr David kelly was not a liar, a fabricator or someone prone to wishful thinking…
Weapons inspector Dr David Kelly was held in high esteem by his colleagues:
‘Among his fellow inspectors Dr Kelly was considered the consummate inspector.
They admired him tremendously for his very effective interviewing technique; his encyclopedic knowledge; and his determination to out the truth about the former Soviet and Iraqi biological weapons programmes. Put another way, David’s colleagues were somewhat in awe of his skills as an inspector.’
Here is what David kelly had to say about Iraq and its weapons programme…..
‘I had no doubt about the veracity of it (the Iraq Dossier) was absolute.’…..’It is an accurate document, I think it is a fair reflection of the intelligence that was available and it’s presented in a very sober and factual way….it is well written.’
“I was personally sympathetic to the war because I recognised from a decade’s work the menace of Iraq’s ability to further develop it’s non-conventional weapons programmes…..We were 100% certain that Saddam had a biological weapons programme.”
The BBC can manufacture and distort history all it likes but the truth is somewhat different to that which they want us to believe.
The BBC’s own policy is ‘when the legend becomes fact print the legend.’.…. the BBC fully intends to be the only one that writes the legend and to be the last voice heard.
That is the problem with the BBC…any complaint against it can be swatted aside and the BBC has of course the resources and ability to defend itself and limit voices raised against it having the invaluable ability to give itself a ‘good Press’…and as we see it can go on for years producing programmes with the sole intent of recovering its ‘good name’.
Headline to article in tomorrow’s ‘Financial Times’ (£):-
“Iraq, 10 years on.
The U.S won the war, Iran won the peace and Turkey won the contracts.”
SYRIA.
More topically, INBBC could do a critical analysis on these lines, but it may be politically embarrassing:-
“Syria: Obama Administration is Arming–and Training Militarily?–Radical Islamists”
By Barry Rubin.
http://rubinreports.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/syria-obama-administration-is-arming.html
Lets face it the Iraq war was ordered by the Israeli government partly because of the so called supergun but mainly because Sadam Hussein was paying the families of Palestinian suicide bombers $10 000.
I’m afraid that this came from a highly place US official Philip D. Zelikow Co Chair of the 911 comission. He’s a pretty credible source.
“Why would Iraq attack America or use nuclear weapons against us? I’ll tell you what I think the real threat (is) and actually has been since 1990 — it’s the threat against Israel,” Zelikow told a crowd at the University of Virginia on Sep. 10, 2002, speaking on a panel of foreign policy experts assessing the impact of 9/11 and the future of the war on the al-Qaeda terrorist organization.
“And this is the threat that dare not speak its name, because the Europeans don’t care deeply about that threat, I will tell you frankly. And the American government doesn’t want to lean too hard on it rhetorically, because it is not a popular sell,” said Zelikow.
Sure, sure – the Elders of Zyon issued their instructions and the American puppets jumped to it. Strewth.
I thought the figure was $25K, but whatever. And it did stop once he went into hiding. But if the Jews are so powerful, why Iraq? Why didn’t they get the US to take out/over Jordan and Lebanon already? Much easier, less messy afterwards, and definitely infinitely less expensive. And you know how Jews are about money. And why don’t the Jews control their own holiest of holy sites? Seems a bit crap for a group so omnipotent as to order something as massive.
If we believe you and Zelikow, we also have to believe the Jews are so disgusting and sub-human as to willingly lie back and think of England while Sadaam shot SCUDs at them because the US was doing their bidding. Or just out of solidarity with their fellow Sons of Abraham in Saudi Arabia, maybe? I know the BBC made sure to remind you that it was a doddle, but still.
Did Israel approve of the whole thing? Of course. But that’s not the same thing as granting permission or giving the order. Did the US consult them beforehand to make sure everyone was on the same page? Sure. Keeps things simpler, especially with all the intelligence being shared the whole time. I wish we had behaved better along those lines with Britain in certain circumstances, but one can’t hold Israel responsible for that.
Iraq was a Bush family thing in a way, but not a Jewish trophy.
Of course Israel had to have a say. They were, as clearly demonstrated with Scuds, within firing range of Iraq!
You’ve gone way off-piste with that one thoughtful me ole china!
Ah maybe not ordered it (mistake) but certainly pressing for it.
At this time the doings of the vile A Q Khan had not become common knowledge, but the supergun was and delivering a nuclear warhead accurately is even more difficult than building the thing.
Zelicow is no bit player, this is a senior Republican apparachik, his words carry significance.
Maybe it might be more fair to say that the defence of Israel was a major contributory factor in the decision to go to war, however it gets very little coverage, and when that happens people get suspicious.
Thoughtful wrote:
Lets face it the Iraq war was ordered by the Israeli government partly because of the so called supergun
Would that be the gun which:
a) Never got built (look up how the guy who designed it was shot dead in March 1990, Saddam invaded Kuwait in Aug)
b) The gun only worked if you buried it, hence it was a one direction gun. (Not much use there against a country around 30 miles wide at its most populous)
c) Lastly Once Saddam took Kuwait he massed his forces against Saudi Arabia So actually it was the Islam and not Judaism which kicked started the Gulf war. Just as it did in 1980.
Next time you come on here with your wack job anti-Semitic theories, please ensure you come up with something that a smart arse like me isn’t going to destroy with facts within seconds.
Wow pounce you missed out WAAAYCISM there!
You think you destroyed the arguement? you havesn’t! In fact you’ve perhaps added even more credence to it!
The gun was under construction, you may or may nor remember the Sheffield Forgemasters court case in which a Tory Minister admitted to lying although he called it being ‘economic with the actualitee’.
Dr Gerald Bull the guns designer was shot dead in Brussels, in what appears to be a professional hit, no one has been accused but the finger is pointed at Mossad.
Farzad Barzoft rumoured to be a Mossad spy was captured together with British national Daphne Parrish close to the site of the supergun, what were they doing there if not spying? Why had he taken a soil sample?
The guy who designed it shot in 1990, but what else happened that year?
HM customs & excise impounded a shipment of ‘krytons’ – nuclear triggers.
They also impounded a shipment of gun barrels bound for Iraq.
Israel had bombed the Iraqi nuclear plant at Al-Tuweitha in 1981 because of fears a nuclear device was being produced.
Here’s the expert assessment of a lesser gun which was actually completed & tested:
Other reports reveal that in 1988 and 1989, Iraq, with Bull’s assistance, also built a supergun called Baby Babylon, which had “an expected range of 465 miles.” Baby Babylon, according to Iraqi defectors, was to be used for “long-range attacks, possibly using chemical and biological warheads.” Defectors also reported that there was talk of the possibility of arming Baby Babylon shells with nuclear warheads and also using them as anti-satellite weapons.
The big one was even more powerful and easily capable of targetting Israel.
Intelligence sources genuinely believed that Iraq did possess a nuclear device, there is ample evidence that if not complete there was intention to do so, but the big problem is in the delivery of the weapon and rockets are not easy hence the big gun.
How do you know that Saddam wasn’t trying to source the parts to finish the gun from other countries?
Saddam was only a Moslem when it suited him – no one believed he was and no one answered his hypocritical calls for Jihad.
There are other theories about the Kuwait invasion including the US pressing him to pay his debts to them for arms supplied in the Iran Iraq war and covertly suggesting that he might find more income if he took over Kuwait which Iraq had long had claims over.
Sorry but you’re going to have to be much more of a smart arse if you think you can destroy facts with a badly put together arguement like that!
The politics of the Middle East are dirty and never clear, no one has a full picture, and it is unlikely they ever will have in the future. The best anyone is able to do is to derive an educated guess from the facts available.
There is no ‘anti semitism’ which is hatred of the Jews for what they are. Criticism of a nation using facts is not to say that someone hates all the citizenry so lay off the leftie bully words eh? They’re not helpful.
.what were they doing there if not spying?
Journalism.
Thoughtful wrote:
The gun was under construction,
But not built, in other words it was as much use as a chocolate fire-guard.
Thoughtful wrote:
Israel had bombed the Iraqi nuclear plant at Al-Tuweitha in 1981 because of fears a nuclear device was being produced.
Which transpired after the Iranians bombed it first.
Thoughtful wrote:
Saddam was only a Moslem when it suited him –
You mean like each and every Muslim in the UK. But at the end of the day..still Muslims.
Thoughtful wrote
but the big problem is in the delivery of the weapon and rockets are not easy hence the big gun.
Which is why everybody in the world has decided to spend more money and effort in building the much harder to achieve Missile technology than the much easier gun.
Thoughtful wrote:
Dr Gerald Bull the guns designer was shot dead in Brussels, in what appears to be a professional hit, no one has been accused but the finger is pointed at Mossad.
You left out Iran is also implicated as is the UK/US/Canada and Germany or even ..Iraq. (Well he did walk out on Saddam)
Thoughtful wrote:
Other reports reveal that in 1988 and 1989, Iraq, with Bull’s assistance, also built a supergun called Baby Babylon,
Well if it was built why wasn’t it used? Ah could that be it never was built?
Thoughtless wrote:
There are other theories about the Kuwait invasion including the US pressing him to pay his debts to them for arms supplied in the Iran Iraq war
Oh please, the biggest arms supplies to Iraq were:
Russia
France
Eastern Europe
China
South Africa
When Nations came a clambering for monies owed by Iraq the US and Uk were owed very little. In contrast to all of the above. So on that note as a Military Vehicle recognition instructor (which includes weapons systems) care to name me actual (yes Actual) Weapons systems used by Saddam built by either the US or Uk. I’ll save you the bother, it is nil. Oh and before you come back with a load of Bell 212 or 214 Helicopters, they were civilian helicopters sold for Coast guard use and then pressed ganged into use as taxis for the Iraqi Officer class. No use on the battle field , which is why Iraq bought Mil 17s and Mil 24.
If you wish to continue, can I ask you start a fresh post otherwise this one will thin out. Me I’m off to work to check my post and my e-mails. (Well I am on leave)
So we are led to believe that the US Jewish lobby is more powerful than the US oil lobby – which stood to gain from Iraqi regime change, and which will gain even more from the probable war with Iran.
Rubbish. The result of such US policy has been threats and attacks on Israel, with both Saddam and the mullahs hoping that US Jews will thereby pressurise their government to back down.
Mind you it’s a lot easier to blame the Yids.
If I was the Israeli PM, you bet I’d be in a US President’s ear every five minutes if I thought something needed his attention. It’s what national leaders are supposed to do, and partially why Sarkozy and The Obamessiah think Netanyahu is a pain in the ass. Everybody does it. Japan is doing it right now regarding China, Colombia did it back when Heroic Hugo was using FARC as a weapon against them, etc. That’s not the same thing as having the kind of influence being suggested, though.
If two countries share the same foreign policy goals, of course there will be cooperation and winks and nods. This is normal, not a unique conspiracy between the US and the Jews. It’s laughable to believe otherwise.
But I do agree with thoughtful that Sadaam was at best a fair-weather Islamist. He was an Arab nationalist, spoke often about his desire for some kind of Pan-Arab empire. With him in secular charge, of course. The religion just came along with the territory and was an occasionally useful networking tool. He attacked more Muslim countries than anybody other than the current US President, for his own personal gain, not because of his religion. That’s another reason why I doubt the whole “The Jews ordered Sadaam’s destruction” fantasy: if he ever really did develop some form of WMD, he’d have used it against Iran or somebody else first, a country that wouldn’t have been able to bomb his ass back to the Stone Age. Israel was not first on his list of targets.
True, but of course the Jews, er Israel makes a nice scapegoat for rotten middle eastern regimes, the western middle class left, and nazi nut-jobs – but fortunately, that’s all. 😉
DP wrote:
But I do agree with thoughtful that Sadaam was at best a fair-weather Islamist.
And as i said before still a Muslim, you know like all those muslims in the Uk who drink Alcohol, Steal, commit murder, Gamble,Eat Pork, wear Gold, Smoke. Muslims only become true Muslims when it serves their purpose otherwise they do as they well please.
Just to be pedantic …
Hussain did have WMD and used them on the Kurds. He also used them against the Iranians.
Did he have them when the US & UK attacked him? Had he used them all up or got new ones? We’ll probably never know for sure but if he did they are probably hidden in the Syrian desert.
Now there’s a funny thing …
How about it was both?
In all this debate one major thing is always omitted when approaching the topic from an assigning blame view. And that is the fact that the “war in Iraq” didn’t start in 2003. It was the reassuming of the responsibilities the UN had for the 1991 intervention and the 18-19 standing resolutions left on the table. Corruption in the Oil-for-Food Programme involving members of the Security Counci prevented the UN to assume its responsibilities.
My final break with the BBC was during the run-up to the Iraq war. The BBC was moderating its forums and phone-ins in favour of the extreme Left ‘stop the war’ movement. The same names (mostly the ragbag bogus academics from former polytechnics who keep the SWP and its ilk alive), were given hugely undue access to the airwaves.
I had spent years fighting against a growing conviction that the broadcaster had been completely infiltrated by the extreme Left. Much as I despise Blair, Campbell and their nest of vipers, this episode convinced me, beyond doubt, that the BBC was, and is, a completely lost cause to rational debate.
Which reminds me: where are all those anti-war luvvies these days? The BBC seems seriously incurious as to their absence from the US Drone Wars.
…they’re too busy campaigning against Torycuts here, and the War On Women in the US…and any other right-wing bogeymen they can dream up.
Funny, they don’t mind burkhas though. I even overheard a feminist say they were “liberating” once.
Sure – they liberate women from the embarrassment of showing their bruises.
Will this be all their own work or will the Bureau of Inventive Journalism have hand in it?
Thoughtful wrote:
There are other theories about the Kuwait invasion including the US pressing him to pay his debts to them for arms supplied in the Iran Iraq war
Good point, but hang on why is it acceptable to say not all Muslims are terrorists for the act of a
fewlarge number of Muslims. But perfectly acceptable to berate Jews for what happens in Israel.POT, KETTLE,BLACK.
Damn wrong past, I’ll try again:
There is no ‘anti semitism’ which is hatred of the Jews for what they are. Criticism of a nation using facts is not to say that someone hates all the citizenry so lay off the leftie bully words eh? They’re not helpful.
Good point, but hang on why is it acceptable to say not all Muslims are terrorists for the act of a
fewlarge number of Muslims. But perfectly acceptable to berate Jews for what happens in Israel.POT, KETTLE,BLACK.
I well remember the few days before the attack. It seemed to me, and I am willing to be corrected, that Sadam would have done anything to stop the attack and that there were no super weapons.
He was just plain scared.
Now the Romans would have dealt with him in a much more creative and self interested way.
A demonstration of very nasty brute force directed at his palaces and prize infrastructure and then an offer he could not refuse.
For some odd reason Western liberal democracies do things differently and end up in a real mess and far more people die. It is the guilt thing. We are only doing this so that you too can have a democratic state just like ours. A fundamentally dishonest posture. I much prefer the Roman way.
Did Israel approve of the whole thing? Of course. My understanding is that Israel advised against Iraq, considering that Iran was the much more dangerous threat. When the decision was made they loyally hid their misgivings so as not to undermine an ally.
In terms of the original post, I don’t disagree with anything you’ve written about the reasons for the invasion. But I dont see what that’s got to do with this BBC programme.
You seem to have forgotten that they didnt find any WMDs. Peter Taylor is a very good, repected investigative journalist and this seems a worthy subject for a Panorama.
I don’t see that you have a case at all. You may wish to ignore what doesn’t suit your agenda, but I would prefer the BBC make programmes like this which are in the public interest.