March 08, 2003
More evidence of US/UK desperation - if evidence don't exist, make it up...
Rather obviously (building on "Bush's previous lies":http://nontroppo.org/blog/archives/2002/10/23/bush_and_his_lies.html#000034), the evidence of Iraq trying to get uranium in the last few years to make a bomb is another load of outright fabrication:
"Britain/US uses Fabricated Evidence against Iraq":http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,910113,00.html?=rss
The article suggests that there is no evidence suggesting that it was British/US intelligence services who were responsible, but that leaves me feeling rather cold. Why, exactly, would Niger (the country involved) fabricate evidence it was purposefully selling nuclear material to Iraq when it wasn't? Surely the agent with the most to gain is the USA/UK, who benefits greatly from wave after wave of half-truths and outright lies propagating through media channels. Then, when the fabricated nature of the 'facts' are exposed, the west can simply claim it had no part in its fabrication (or the media just blanks it as 'uninteresting' news). So a small UN body can easily reveal flaws in information that the heavily funded and far more 'connected' intelligence services fail to? I think either out-right fabrication or a cynical faked 'ignorance' over the dubious sources is much closer the mark. The governments of the USA and UK have been desperately searching for *anything* as evidence, and this is just a further depressing marker of such propaganda.
Oh, and IAEA *completely dismissed* the repeated major accusations by Bush and Powell that Aluminium tubes were being purchased by Iraq to make centrifuges for a nuclear weapons program ("see here":http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59403-2003Mar7.html).
Posted by Ian at March 08, 2003 05:05 PM
| TrackBack