« Hope glimmers | Main | Fraternal victory »

September 24, 2010

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

HuwOS

Google it and you will find it KayTie.
National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran's "Nuclear Intentions and Capabilities" in November 2007.

In general when the aggressive nation's reports say there is no reason to attack another country they can be believed.

Despite the constant refrain of the warmongers, the intelligence agencies, including the US ones were all generally in agreement that Iraq did NOT have any WMD and did not have the capability to create any.

Which is why the Bush administration had to set up their own group to cherry pick all the various reports and ignore everything they didn't like to even begin to make their ludicrous case against Iraq.
Even with that, it fell over at every hurdle, with every piece of checkable evidence being proven false, within days or even hours of each fictional claim being made, from the time they started, up to and including Colin Powell's disgraceful UN presentation.

It is very kind of you KayTie to want to include me in your fantasy world, but I have a deep and abiding relationship with reality and so am unable to join you in that bizarre nightmarish place between your ears that is your prison and to be honest, there is no space there for anyone else anyway, you are clearly cramped enough as it is.

The point however is that the president of country that is constantly threatening another with war. This aggressive nation that has a proven track record of breaking international law and of lying about evidence has absolutely no business being angry about statements made by their currently targeted victim.
Even when the statements are, as they are in this case, ludicrous.

Ah diddums, the representative of the country they keep threatening lashes out verbally at them and now their feelings are all hurt and stuff, poor dears.

If anyone hoped that Obama and the administration he leads would be anything better than a GW Bush who could speak in coherent sentences, his reaction as well as the petulant antics of the US and UK delegations at the UN is clear evidence that there is no change whatsoever in US policy other than being slightly more polite to their putative allies.


Kay Tie

"Even the US intelligence services declared in 2007 that Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons programme."

So now you choose to believe rather than castigate the US intelligence reports? Probably you never read such a report but just dreamed about a report in the Guardian on an article in the New Statesman about it. You have such a weak grasp on reality that I wonder if you're actually real and not some Joe Orton parody of an idiot leftie.

HuwOS

"No, not at all. And when he gets the bomb, he still won't be threatening," -KayTie

What? Like Iraq and their WMD?
Yes we all shivered in our boots for fear of that threat.

Even the US intelligence services declared in 2007 that Iran does NOT have a nuclear weapons programme.
But if they did ever get nuclear weapons by breaking their obligations under the NPT they would be well balanced by all the other countries who have breached their obligations under the NPT, like the US, UK, France, Russia, China, India, Israel and Pakistan.

Oh, the last three didn't agree to the NPT did they.

I can think of little less shameful than you and the stances you take KayTie, but somehow you do manage to lower the bar with every new twist and turn your deranged imagination takes.

Kay Tie

"So while we empty the palaces to save cash let's not forget the Civil Service and the Thousands of subsidy junkie parasites."

It's more than thousands. It's hundreds of thousands. Whenever you hear on Today some tiresome whining about some issue, it's nearly always a "charity" at root, issuing a cooked-up report. Then you discover the charity gets 99% of its funding from the taxpayer. Smoking, drinking, education, road safety, knives, food, you name it, we are paying these groups to hector and nag us.

Billions can be saved by chopping the funding. We have just saved £10m a year by chopping the funding of trade unions (yes, taxpayers give £10m a year to the unions - and the unions give £10m a year to Labour).

Kay Tie

"Ahmadinejad's statements have a tendency to be at least unwise and mostly foolish, but he is not threatening the US"

No, not at all. And when he gets the bomb, he still won't be threatening,

I'm surprised that your mental home has a net connection. Must be some bizarre outreach programme.

HuwOS

"Obama has the right to be angry."
"Rage on Obama. This is a foul, cruel and stupid accusation." - PF

Obama described Ahmadinejad as "hateful" and "inexcusable".
and of course the US and UK delegations walked out when Ahmadinejad made these statements.

I found it bizarre really.
Obviously false statements are not things you walk out on. The Chinese walk out on people who accuse them of human rights abuses, I fail to see why the US didn't just take the opportunity to correct Ahmadinejad's view that such conspiracy theories were widely held, which of course they are not.

But,Obama has a right to be angry?

The US has been pushing sanction after sanction against Iran for many years now.
The US history in this, is of course in overthrowing Iranian democracy and replacing it with dictatorship which eventually fell to the ultra religious.
Ahmadinejad insulted them verbally, the US has been causing real insult and injury to Iran for decades and its most recent form has been the ongoing push for sanctions and the constant threat of war.
Ahmadinejad's statements have a tendency to be at least unwise and mostly foolish, but he is not threatening the US although the US has done little but threaten Iran for years now.

Obama has no right to be angry and the prissy little walk out, deserves to be laughed at.

Patrick

I'd be quite happy to see the royals living on council estates but if 'it's about saving the country money' then why not blog about the Civil Service as well?

Public Sector Pay; 38,000 receive salaries over £100K while over 9,000 of those are paid more than the Prime Minister.

To be taxed 100k a private sector individual or company has to generate many many times that figure.

The wages in the public sector are not just unsustainable they are obscene.

So while we empty the palaces to save cash let's not forget the Civil Service and the Thousands of subsidy junkie parasites.


Ad

You can’t believe a lie. So don’t spread lies.

I'm not going to comment on what Ahmadinejad specifically said at this point. I will say without doubt that Ahmedinejad is responsible for less bombings of foreign people, less imprisonment without charge and less torture than any of Bush, Obama, Blair, Brown and Cameron.

You are still an Obama worshipper then.. There is no cause for alarm now that Obama rules is there?

Frankly, I don't accept that 911 is some untouchable emotive subject. This atrocity was used as a pretext for crimes on a much greater scale whose victims are still being counted.

There is a multitude of rubbish conspiracy theories and DVDs relating to 911 and it is regretful. But that doesn't equate to saying the George Bush White House narrative is the only acceptable narrative simply because the conspiracy theorists are outrageous and contemptible on several levels.

The joint House-Senate enquiry led by former Senator Bob Graham is the really important enquiry into 911. This preceded the 911 Commission, and it has been overlooked.

It found that two of the hijackers happened to be living with an FBI informant prior to 911. The handler of this informant, FBI agent Steve Butler, told the enquiry that these two hijackers had received funding from the wife of the then Saudi ambassador to America, Prince Bandar. A man so ingratiated with the Bush clan that he was dubbed ’Bandar Bush’.

How did the George Bush White House react to this? They redacted 28 pages relating to this information from the House-Senate report!

The sensible question was asked by the authors of this report:

‘Why would this government have provided the level of assistance--financial,
logistical, housing, support service--to some of the terrorists and not
to all of the terrorists? We asked that question. There has been no
response.

My own hypothesis--and I will describe it as that--is that in fact
similar assistance was being provided TO ALL OR AT LEAST MOST of the
terrorists. The difference is that we happened, because of a set of
circumstances which are contained in these 28 censored pages, to have
an UNUSUAL WINDOW on a few of the terrorists. We did not have a similar
window on others. Therefore, it will take more effort to determine if
they were, in fact, receiving that assistance. That effort has, in my
judgment, been grossly insufficiently pursued.'

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s102803.html

These circumstances should have been investigated. Instead, the White House heavily censored the report, prevented the joint House-Senate commitee from interviewing the FBI informant and of course had no inclination to further investigate these circumstances.

Why not? Here they rubbish the notion that it was national security imperative.


‘Again, the chairman and vice chairman of the committee that led or
that directed the preparation of this report say most of that
information of the 28 pages should be declassified, implying, I
believe, since they are not quoted directly, that declassifying that
would not compromise sources and methods and not compromise our
intelligence community.’

http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/2003_cr/s102803.html


The comments to this entry are closed.