Why the bush admin. really outted Plame

Posted by: Zapata_

Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 01:21 PM

The bush admin. got caught trying to plant wmd in Iraq.<br><br><br>New aspect of Valerie Plame/Brewster Jennings exposure revealed. According to U.S. intelligence sources, the White House exposure of Valerie Plame and her Brewster Jennings & Associates was intended to retaliate against the CIA's work in limiting the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. WMR has reported in the past on this aspect of the scandal. In addition to identifying the involvement of individuals in the White House who were close to key players in nuclear proliferation, the CIA Counter-Proliferation Division prevented the shipment of binary VX nerve gas from Turkey into Iraq in November 2002. The Brewster Jennings network in Turkey was able to intercept this shipment which was intended to be hidden in Iraq and later used as evidence that Saddam Hussein was in possession of weapons of mass destruction. U.S. intelligence sources revealed that this was a major reason the Bush White House targeted Plame and her network.<br><br>Brewster Jennings <br><br>CIA counter-proliferation network prevented a WMD "salting" operation by Bush White House in Iraq. <br><br>In fact, U.S. intelligence sources report that the first shipment of VX nerve gas to Saddam Hussein was carried out between 1988 and 1989. The gas was shipped to Iraq by a U.S. company that was established in 1987 -- The Carlyle Group. <br><br>U.S. intelligence sources have also confirmed that Israeli military officers served unofficially with the U.S. Central Command headquarters in Baghdad. The Israelis were attached to the J2X (Joint Intelligence Liaison) in Baghdad. Their presence in Baghdad, according to the sources, was kept secret.<br><br><br>
Posted by: lanovami

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 01:29 PM

With such an incendiary charge you are morally obligated to provide a LINK, donchathink? No spoonfeeding please. <br><br>We are what we repeatedly do. -Aristotle
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 01:40 PM

Some other good stuff in there too!<br><br>http://waynemadsenreport.com/<br><br>Now if only the corporate media would do the job that they are supposed to do. <br><br>And still no mention in the amsm about the use of chemical weapons in Iraq by American forces. <br><br>
Posted by: Bryan

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 02:47 PM

If the Bush administration "outed" Plame, then why didn't Fitzgerald indict anyone for it?<br><br>Oops! Looks like your argument is taking on water...it's about to sink....[i][b]MAYDAY!!! MAYDAY!!!!!<br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 02:53 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p><br>And still no mention in the amsm about the use of chemical weapons in Iraq by American forces.<p><hr></blockquote><p>I love how use of WP for screening, something that has been done by every army since it's invention, is now referred to as "chemical weapons". You dump some Wiley Pete to flush the enemy out of the hole, then hit them with high explosive rounds. <br><br>I also like how the photos posted on this attack look more like bodies that have sitting out in the hot desert sun for a few days, then actual people who have been hit by WP rounds:<br><br><br><br><br>These guys were shelled with WP by SLORC soliders. But I wonder, why don't you ever take up the cause for these poor folks from Burma? Don't care about them? But hey you've got an agenda, and like you used to say, keep saying it and it'll become true...<br><br>Thirdly, if WP killed everyone within a tenth of a mile, then why aren't you dead from attending 4th of July celebrations? There's plenty of phosphorus going off at those events.<br><br>
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:12 PM

You're unbelievable Sarge. Well at this this time you can't deny the use of whiskey pete. The Pentagon admitted to it's use. Typical hypocracy. No surprise.<br><br>Have you gone through these?<br><br>http://www.rainews24.rai.it/ran24/inchiesta/slideshow.asp?gallery=1&id=2<br><br><br><br>Remember?<br><br>http://forums.maccentral.com/wwwthreads/...amp;o=&vc=1<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:20 PM

<br>I agree about those Italian photos.<br>Those unfortunate individuals look more like blackened bloated, <br>semi mummified, semi mortified partially rat chewed corpses.<br><br>
Posted by: steveg

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:29 PM

You spend your time soaking up photos like that and you call Sarge unbelievable? That's, um... unbelievable! <br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:34 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Well at this this time you can't deny the use of whiskey pete.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Why bother? They dumped some flares in to screen out the enemy. What's unbelieveable is how suddenly phosphorus flares are now "chemical weapons". <br><br>Perhaps you can brush up on the stuff, pay attention to the part that says "The dilute phosphoric acid in the aerosol cloud may be mildly irritating to the eyes but with normal field concentrations and exposure it is not harmful;" and pay particular attention to "Burns to persons struck by particles of burning WP are usually much less extensive than napalm or metal incendiary burns,<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Have you gone through these?<p><hr></blockquote><p>Oooooo. Dead bodies laying out in desert heat for a week. How shocking they'd look like that! There must be something sinister going on!<br><br>Do you have any that look like real WP wounds? Like those soldiers in Burma that were hit point blank with the stuff? Do we somehow have super WP? I mean, why weren't those Burmese folks melted and turned to leather? Oh, I know... they weren't laying out in the desert sun and being scavanged by dogs!<br><br>Perhaps the media hasn't picked up on the story... because there isn't one! Did you notice how the Al-Jazeera article says "napalm gas" was used? There is no such thing as napalm gas! And yet you link it as a credible source!!!<br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:41 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Those unfortunate individuals look more like blackened bloated,<br>semi mummified, semi mortified partially rat chewed corpses.<p><hr></blockquote><p>Though I can't give out names because he'd probably get canned, I'm friends with a P.G. County cop (MD side of Washington D.C.) who has stacks full of photos he's taken when he arrives first at a crime scene. <br><br>There are plenty of photos he has of discovered bodies that you could post and say the same thing Zapata is trying to claim. They look like they were burned.. but in reality they were sitting out in a dumpster in the heat, leg or arm chewed through.<br><br>I had the unfortunate experience of seeing one first hand on a ride-along. I'll never forget it. I'm not easily shaken or bothered by death, but it's not something you forget either.<br><br>Even worse are some of things drug dealers will do to each other for kicks. People jumped and screamed about the guy shooting the injured insurgent? Bah. That was nuttin. <br><br>
Posted by: steveg

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:41 PM

Well, ya know...<br><br><br>Notice something strangely familiar (or not so strange) in the url? <br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 03:42 PM

ROFLMAO!!<br><br>Of course, he never answered the question about taking up the cause for Burma!<br><br>Don't suspect he will either!<br>
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 09:37 PM

Considering you got it all wrong on Iraq, I wouldn't mention the word credibility if I were you. How could all that 'intelligence' be so wrong? If it was so wrong about Iraq, what else is the 'intelligence community' wrong about? I mean, if your intelligence is unreliable, that's not good.<br><br>Iraq is the most current of examples.<br><br>So how could you have got it so wrong? You thought you were so right.<br><br>It's not a good thing.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/14/05 11:20 PM

Ummmm<br>Stupid me, what the hell is THIS all about?<br><br>Easy to not be outraged by something I no ZIP about.<br><br>So now I have to figure out who these people are......<br>and what part we may (or may not have ) played in it<br>just to know if I'm supposed to be "outraged" by it?<br><br>Christmas Candy!<br><br>Here we poor dumb liberals can't hold 2 news stories<br>in our pea-brains at a time, and here you are throwing<br>more than one abomination at us as well?<br><br>OK, Sarge, it's 2:15AM, wanna break off attacking Zappy<br>for not ever having seen a rotting corpse before, long<br>enough to fill in the blanks?<br><br><br><br>
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 07:33 AM

US used white phosphorus in Iraq<br><br>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4440664.stm<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>US troops used white phosphorus as a weapon in last year's offensive in the Iraqi city of Falluja, the US has said. <br><br>"It was used as an incendiary weapon against enemy combatants," spokesman Lt Col Barry Venable told the BBC - though not against civilians, he said.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br><br> <br><br>
Posted by: steveg

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 08:46 AM

Yeah. We shoulda just thrown marshmallows at 'em. Like when they hit our convoys with those nasty water balloons.<br><br>
Posted by: sean

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 08:56 AM

so, we used it as a weapon and that's now been admitted? i thought that was the debate you were having with sgt.?<br><br>but, in sgt's defense, it's hard to support the statements made by our administration when we get stuff like this:<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>The State Department, in response, initially denied that U.S. troops had used white phosphorous against enemy forces. "They were fired into the air to illuminate enemy positions at night, not at enemy fighters."<br><br>The department later said its statement had been incorrect.<p><hr></blockquote><p>--<br>"I am mindful that diversity is one of the strengths of the country" --president bush on 9/27/05
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 09:05 AM

That's what they are trained to do. Deny and lie. Until undeniable evidence is brought forward.<br><br>The region has been through this before with the brits in the early part of last century. They know.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 02:13 PM

<br>It's that nasty assed Geneva Convention thing again.<br>You no, we don't light your ass on fire, in hopes that<br>you observe the same rules (or face prosecution by<br>the world court)<br><br>Incendiary devices are NOT (repeat NOT) to be used <br>as anti-personnel weapons.<br><br>My comment above (And I believe Sgt.'s as well) was<br>directed at the pictures and the allegation that they <br>(the blackened, leathery, corpses, wearing clothes<br>that were not burned) were not the result of white<br>phosphorus. They were INDEED Dead, and may have<br>died as a result of said white phosphorus. But the <br>condition of the bodies was more likely to have <br>resulted from corpses left exposed, to hot, dry, <br>desert-like conditions, and seemingly fed upon by<br>vermin of one sort or another.<br><br><br><br>
Posted by: steveg

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 02:15 PM

Thanks for clearing that up. I thought we were talking about gas vs. charcoal.<br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 02:38 PM

Hmmm, well let's see I'm not the one linking sources like Al Jazeera that are making up weapons, am I? So if you want to claim I'm not credible then you're an incredible hypocrite, it's not the first time you've rushed to post crap without even bothering to check it's credibility and I doubt it'll be the last.<br><br>My intelligence was simply the UN reports on Iraq, reports that when they had left in the 90's stated Iraq still had chemical weapons, reports that absolutely no one, most notably yourself, had answered where they went to in the intermediate time period. In some of the UN quarterlies when the inspectors when back, Blix mentioned they had found some quantities of mustard gas. Even old Blix himself stated until mid '03 that he believed they still had the weapons, I suppose now he's a liar in your eyes? Considering Iraq managed to continue biological research for 4 years under UN inspections in the '90's before being caught it's not such a stretch to consider they might have had the inspectors fooled.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 02:46 PM

D'oh!<br>And here I thought you'd said marshmallows s water balloons.<br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 02:51 PM

<blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>Incendiary devices are NOT (repeat NOT) to be used<br>as anti-personnel weapons.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>Actually I believe it's specifically directed that incendiaries are not to be purposefully used against civilians (i.e. the firebombing of Dresden in WWII):<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>...Protocol III on Prohibitions or Restrictions on the Use of Incendiary Weapons prohibits, in all circumstances, making the civilian population as such, individual civilians or civilian objects, the object of attack by any weapon or munition which is primarily designed to set fire to objects or to cause burn injury to persons through the action of flame, heat or a combination thereof, produced by a chemical reaction of a substance delivered on the target.<p><hr></blockquote><p><br>The language itself is pretty sparse, essentially it's interpreted as "don't shoot the stuff at civilians purposefully, but go ahead and light up your enemy."<br><br>The United States actually did not sign this protocol, mainly because everyone who did basically ignores it anyway.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 03:00 PM

<br>Next time you do a web search, and the story<br>is printed in Al Jeezeer {sp?) read it, and do <br>a further search for the ORIGINAL source.<br><br>The first few time I did that, I steeled myself<br>expecting it to be bias and twisted etc, etc.<br><br>Look for yourself. Most of their stories are <br>reprinted from other sources (in this particular<br>case, from Italy*) and every time I took the<br>time to compare them side-by-side, they are<br>printed word-for-word, without comment or<br>embellishment. (No bold type, or underlining<br>or whatever) They're just another news source.<br><br>*btw, that story out of Italy was from that<br>Italian woman that had been captured & held, <br>a couple of months ago, and when the Italians <br>arranged for he release, she was fired upon and <br>her rescuer killed. That was the story she was<br>carrying at the time.<br><br><br><br>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 03:04 PM

The SLORC is the Burmese government. They've been renamed since the '90's I believe, but it's still the same military dictatorship.<br><br>Anyone who truly considers themselves a humanitarian will make it their business to find out as much as possible about Burma, who's people have been enslaved by a military government since the early 60's.<br><br>They've been part of probably one of the worst humanitarian disasters in history, but never seem to get much attention unfortunately.<br><br>I came into knowlege about Burma in college, when I was studying Bando, which is a style of karate based on the movement of animals that came out of Burma in the 40's during WWII. Our teacher made us study up on Burma, and it just stuck with me.<br><br>I know being someone that seems to care a lot about the afflicted you'll be interested, so please check out the Free Burma website! :)<br><br>**edit- Bando is NOT Karate, my teacher would kill me for saying that! It's the offical Burmese fighting system! :P<br><br><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by SgtBaxter on 11/16/05 06:07 PM (server time).</EM></FONT></P>
Posted by: SgtBaxter

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 03:09 PM

Regardless, if they simply respew incorrect information they're not a credible source. A credible news source will check for errors like that, or if they find it later, post retractions.<br><br>Granted, they might have posted corrections, I haven't looked to check.<br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 05:11 PM

I agree, and I have no doubt that they cherry pick <br>their stories to slant the information as a whole.<br><br>...but I can't say for certain,, since I neither subscribe <br>to nor make it habit of reading the paper itself, I've <br>only read the occasional link, and read it out of curiosity.<br><br><br><br>
Posted by: Celandine

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 05:42 PM

I understand fighting styles, as opposed to the TV Type <br>shouting, board-breaking, style of popularly called "Karate"<br><br>I helped one of my best friends choose the style he's<br>since mastered. AikiJujitsu.<br><br>But it truth I'm not, nor have never claimed to be a<br>Humanitarian. I'm an Environmentalist. The two are<br>often at odds with each other.<br><br>I'd just never heard about the human right abuses in Burma.<br>I will do some reading on the subject, thanx for bringing it <br>to my attention.<br><br><br>
Posted by: Zapata_

Re: Why the bush admin. really outted Plame - 11/16/05 09:00 PM

Yup,(almost forgot the comma ) ignore the cbc, bbc, all the OTHER links I provided, over something that minute. Regardless it is and was correct in it's content. (how about some correction for reporting marconi balloon inflators as bio-weapons labs) <br><br><br>Now since you mention blix and the U.N.<br><br>Blix says Iraq war illegal  <br>Bernard Hibbitts at 3/5/2004 08:18:53 AM<br><br>Hans Blix, the former chief UN arms inspector in Iraq and an international lawyer by training, told the UK Independent Friday that he believed the 2003 war against Iraq was illegal. He rejected arguments made by the British and American governments that the war in Iraq was authorized by Saddam Hussein's breach of UN resolutions prior to 1441 (under which the Security Council threatened Iraq with "serious consequences") made an explicit second Security Council resolution condoning the use of force unnecessary. "I don't buy the argument that the war was legalised by the Iraqi violation of earlier resolutions," he said. In any event, the US and UK had no right to act alone: "It's the security council that is party to the ceasefire [at the end of the Gulf War], not the UK and US individually, and therefore it is the council that has the ownership of the ceasefire, in my interpretation". The Independent has more. Blix's new book about his UN work, entitled Disarming Iraq: The Search for Weapons of Mass Destruction, is due to be published tomorrow. Excerpts will be available on the UK Guardian's website<br><br>http://jurist.law.pitt.edu/paperchase/2004_03_05_indexarch.htm#107849273394501690<br><br><br>Iraq war illegal, says Annan<br><br>The United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has told the BBC the US-led invasion of Iraq was an illegal act that contravened the UN charter.<br><br><blockquote><font size=1>In reply to:</font><hr><p>When pressed on whether he viewed the invasion of Iraq as illegal, he said: "Yes, if you wish. I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal."<p><hr></blockquote><p>One last link here<br><br>http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timel...areas=deception<br><br>The admin. knew they would not find what they said was there and hence the topic of this thread was ........<br><br>Documents don't forge themselves. <br><br><br>