Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

News Bad information

  1. Jul 10, 2003 #1
    Well, the administration admitted that it used false intelligence in its case for war against Iraq. The docuements used to support the claim that Iraq was trying to purchase uranium from Niger were forgeries. In fact, this has been know by many for a while.

    This means that either:
    A) We were deliberately deceived
    B) Bush and his comrades were too eager for evidence that they didn't use very much discretion, which makes me question their abilities and integrity.

    What do you think?
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 11, 2003 #2
    My main point of contention is that they either knew and lied, or lied to themselves, or were simply incompetent. There is no reasonable excuse for the assurances that Bush and his cabal KNEW that Iraq was a threat. Iraq was obviously not a threat.
  4. Jul 11, 2003 #3


    User Avatar

    It's unclear to me whether you're referring to the niger papers strictly or an additional situation. Can you show a link to where the administration "admits" anything? I've been a bit busy with our south african/american teen retreat this week. (very fun and interesting btw) and have missed most recent news.
  5. Jul 11, 2003 #4
    Why are you retreating from South African kids? Are they chasing you?

    Actually, almost every news report I'm reading(except from right-wing cultists like WorldNetDaily) has reports that senior intelligence agents have known t6hat the info Bush and his cabal have presented has been either fraudulent, unreliable, or misrepresented to show a greater threat than actually existed.
  6. Jul 11, 2003 #5
    The Key word there is incompetent. Idiot politicions must have known that it would have leaked out eventually so why would they have lied about it?
  7. Jul 11, 2003 #6
    Becausae as long as Bush pretends to be a fighter pilot, most people just don't care...and any time that someone objects, they use their code words, like 'liberal media'.
  8. Jul 11, 2003 #7
    Re: Re: Bad information


    An interesting development, in which Condoleezza Rice makes statements contrasting those of a CIA official:
  9. Jul 11, 2003 #8


    User Avatar

    Thanks, Dan.:wink:
  10. Jul 12, 2003 #9

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I think Bush Jr was duped into this war by his war mongering father and his war machine comrades in the white house and the CIA. I think Jr had and has delusions of grandeur. I also think that they believe that they are acting in the best interest of the US. This has been my objection to the right wind ever since Reagan and the Iran-Contra hearings. They would destroy the Constitution and everything that it stands for in order to save it.

    On the other hand, this may be a simple power grab.

    On my third hand, maybe they know something we don't. It is possible that the motives are worthy but that honesty is a political impossibility.

    Personally, I suspect that the Bush's are the worst thing that has ever happened to this country. I would not even dare say what I think may be true. I will say this, look at every bit of extremely dirty political business in the US for the last 40 years and you will find a Bush nearby.
    Last edited: Jul 13, 2003
  11. Jul 13, 2003 #10


    User Avatar

    why is it the cia director's fault that bush used bad information in his speech? true, the cia needs to check his speech to make sure everything he says is kosher, but they shouldn't take the blame for lies bush knowingly used.
  12. Jul 13, 2003 #11

    Ivan Seeking

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    I question the avenues for the information that was fed to Bush Jr. You know his dad was once the director of the CIA. [maybe only assistant director]. The connections to the good ole boy war machine are all around. Hell, some of these guys worked for Nixon...like Cheney and Rummy. I don't think they can understand the concept of peacful resolution. You solve problems with missiles and tanks damnit!
  13. Jul 16, 2003 #12
    I don't think you can classify it as a strictly innocent mistake, for the IAEA and diplomat Wilson informed the office of the vice president of the obvious forgery more than a year before the state of the union.
    That said, is it possible that at some time in the past Iraq has sought Uranium from Africa, of course.
    But the design of the statement by the president was FEAR. To scare the public into "supporting" (i.e. not rioting against) a dubiously justified war for the purposes of 1) exploiting Iraq's natural resources and 2) enriching Texas based oil companies, in the name of "democracy."

    Good job, President Bush!

    You got rid of Saddam. Good job. That probably saved some oil rich neighbors of Iraq a devastating chemical war. Maybe, it saved Israel from a pre-emptive strike. That's great for those guys, but what about the American guys? Those guys who make 10-27K per year, who don't own stock, who are giving up their lives for all the high principles you yak. When you ask the sons of patriots to go defend their homeland, don't you think you ought to be honest and tell the truth once in a while?
  14. Jul 17, 2003 #13
    I'm sorry, at the moment I am out of date, can you please tell me where to find this?
  15. Jul 17, 2003 #14
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 20, 2017
  16. Jul 18, 2003 #15
    Thank you, I will search and I will also go to that BBC link you posted. However, Rense does not seem to be a big news website, and it has a disclaimer that says information may be false. So, I would be careful believeing EVERYTHING you read.

    Can you really believe ANYTHING completely these days?
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook