CNN spin on nuclear materials that Bush lost in Iraq

[Guest endymion]

Maybe because that's the truth?

You must have missed my explanation at the beginning of this thread about what went down last week with the UN. That was the real story but CNN and Fox News changed it all around to make it look like the UN didn't call us on our incompetence and offer to step in and rescue us. You read the CNN and Fox News articles and you get the impression that the US made the big discovery, never did anything wrong, and is working successfully and productively with the new Iraqi government.

If you read any of the other articles on this issue from anywhere else in the world, including the original news wire stories, you see that's not what happened at all. Why did CNN spin it almost identically to how Fox News spun it?

[Guest JMT]

perhaps the original story was spun, since the war is such a hit worldwide.

what did al jazeera report?

[Guest endymion]

Perhaps I'm really more interested in the big picture here. The oil wells were more important to us than the sites that we supposedly rushed in to secure and inspect? Buildings vanished and we didn't even notice because we were busy pumping oil? How does that make us look?

And "Oops!!" Bush is such a pathetic coach that he just gave the other guys a safety. IDIOT! Do you think that perhaps Miami is on Osama's list of cities to knock off all at once on some random Thursday morning five years from now? These mistakes have consequences and the consequences of some of this Bush incompetency could be US getting killed.

[Guest JMT]

yeah "we" are busy pumping oil? proof? LOL, so increased supply creates inflated prices. thats a new one for the economic theory.

doesnt take a 4 star general to realize the reason for guarding wells is to prevent things like this:

besides, there are no WMD.

[Guest endymion]

Supply is down because we can't do it because the people who we stole the oil wells from are really pissed off and they keep blowing things up.

[Guest JMT]

you should write comedy man.

[Guest endymion]

you should write comedy man.

The way I see it, it looks more like a Greek tragedy.

[Guest JMT]

an Oliver Stone film seems more accurate.

[Guest endymion]

It is so painfully obvious why our incompetent, special-interest-serving president needs to be fired that I don't have any need to invent things.

[Guest JMT]

nice that they threw in that part Saddam's hernia.

----------------------------------------------------------

Bodies of babies found in Saddam's 'killing field'

By Joe Murphy, Evening Standard Political Editor, This Is London

13 October 2004

A mass grave containing the bodies of children, babies and their mothers has been unearthed in Iraq.

Shocked investigators reported finding "thighbones the size of matchsticks" at what they believe is the site of one of Saddam Hussein's atrocities. Among the findings-were the skeletons of unborn babies and toddlers clutching toys.

A baby had been shot in the back of its head and was found still being clutched by its mother, who had been shot in the face. The discovery was reported as Tony Blair came under mounting pressure to apologise to Parliament for the misleading intelligence claiming Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

It will strengthen the Prime Minister's case that despite the intelligence failures the war to topple the Iraqi dictator was justified by his record as a mass killer of his own people. Mr Blair is facing MPs for the first time since the Iraq Survey Group report last week admitted there were no illegal chemical and biological weapons in Iraq.

The mass grave was being excavated near Hatra, a village in northern Iraq with a large Kurdish population. US-led investigators have located nine trenches so far containing hundreds of bodies, believed to be Kurds killed during the repression of the Eighties. The bodies had been bulldozed into the ground.

Evidence from the graves will be used at the Iraqi Special Tribunal where Saddam will face trial for war crimes. "It is my personal opinion that this is a killing field," said Greg Kehoe, a US official. "Someone used this field on significant occasions over time to take people up there and execute them."

One trench contains only women and children while another contains only men. "The youngest foetus we have was 18 to 20 foetal weeks," said a US investigating anthropologist. "Tiny bones, femurs - thighbones the size of a matchstick."

Some 300,000 people are thought to have been killed during Saddam's regime. Iraq's human rights ministry has reportedly identified 40 possible mass graves across the country.

Meanwhile, Saddam underwent an operation to repair a hernia about 10 days ago and has made a full recovery, Iraqi sources said today.

He has been in US custody since 13 December and appeared in court in July for a preliminary hearing.

[Guest endymion]

There are lots of mass graves in lots of countries that we don't give a rat's ass about. There is oil in Iraq, is the difference.

Until recently you would have come back with "silly Techjunkie, Iraq was about WMD!" Uhm, okay, but the oil wells were more important than monitoring those nuclear materials sites that we didnt' trust the UN to monitor.

"Silly Techjunkie, Iraq was about al Qaeda!" Well that one has been shot down too so what's left?

$$$

[Guest JMT]

no, Saddam has the capability to do damage in an unstable part of the world is the difference. in addition he killed 300,000 men, women and children and used gas on 1000s of others.

he was going to try to build nukes no matter what. either deal with him now, or later when it could be too late.

i just showed you why they protect the oil wells. pretty big pic, you cant miss it.

AND, "they didnt have WMD."

[Guest endymion]

AND, "they didnt have WMD."

They didn't, they do now. THAT is the big picture. Oops, hey, Bush tried, he just FAILED MISERABLY.

[Guest JMT]

AND, "they didnt have WMD."

They didn't, they do now. THAT is the big picture. Oops, hey, Bush tried, he just FAILED MISERABLY.

who is "they"? and how did some WMD just magically appear? the entire anti-war movement is based on NO WMD. everyone confirmed there were no WMD. this is another example of playing both sides of an issue.

[Guest endymion]

Somebody has a bunch of dual-use nuclear materials including a bunch of yellow cake uranium that was previously bolted down and monitored by the UN. Now it's missing, the Iraqi government is going on the record saying that a "neighboring country" took it. That means terrorists no matter how you look at it.

NOW there are WMD. NOW our enemies can equip with nuclear weapons. Saddam was not the link that handed nuclear materials to al Qaeda, WE WERE. We dropped the ball and focused on a bunch of oil wells while the Syrians or the Iranians or somebody were carting off with materials that could be used to nuke NYC.

Oh and America is safer now.

[Guest JMT]

oh, so when these "dual use" nuclear materials where solely in Saddams possession they were harmless.

and NOW there are WMD.

i think you just hit your all time low with that post man. you could not have typed that without cracking a smile.

[Guest endymion]

You're missing the issue. Before the invasion they were monitored by UN inspectors and were not WMD programs.

NOW they are.

[Guest JMT]

You're missing the issue. Before the invasion they were monitored by UN inspectors and were not WMD programs.

NOW they are.

harmless programs, converted just like that? yet he was no threat. you cant be that naive.

and those crafty UN inspectors never miss anything right? not unless its a few billion dollars of a UN sponsored program.

if he had materials that can be so easily manipulated in to WMDs, than he had WMDs. youre playing both sides here, plain and simple.

[Guest endymion]

harmless programs, converted just like that?

Those are exactly the facilities that we rushed in to secure and inspect. The UN was monitoring them to ensure that they were harmless, Bush didn't believe that they could do their job and feared that the nuclear materials would fall through Saddam into the hands of terrorists. We bullied the UN out of the way, invaded supposedly in order to secure those sites, then abandoned them to the point where somebody stole ENTIRE BUILDINGS.

How do you mismanage a secure-and-monitor operation so fully that a bunch of Syrians or Iranians can waltz in and steal ENTIRE BUILDINGS out from under your nose? If securing and monitoring those facilities was really our big goal as Bush said it was then we would have done that. We didn't. Res ipsa loquitor.

[Guest JMT]

dont you mean "loquitur"?

nothing that can be converted that easily is harmless. I dont buy the "UN was monitoring them" bit.

[Guest endymion]

Okay, that one is easy. If the UN weren't monitoring the sites then how is it that they immediately documented the missing materials AND BUILDINGS the moment they were allowed to return to the sites? Hmm...

They noticed the moment they were allowed back. We didn't. Yet the CNN story doesn't cover the IAEA's announcement to the UN that they had discovered the loss. No, CNN and Fox News publish a story that the US has announced an investigation in cooperation with the Iraqi government. Spin spin sugar.

[Guest JMT]

and what motivation would CNN possible have for spinning it?

[Guest endymion]

What motivation could Fox News have for spinning it?

[Guest slamminshaun]

What motivation could Fox News have for spinning it?

There aren't enough Fox News' to make up for all the CNN's, NBC's, ABC's, CBS's and PBS's out there.

[Guest JMT]

What motivation could Fox News have for spinning it?

none. story is bullshit.