President Bush - about bush

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-06 18:45:49

Wow, haha, this is quite hilarious. Apparently the UK Downing Street report (which Powell praised during his UN meeting) was plagriazed from some guys essay!

The government's carefully co-ordinated propaganda offensive took an embarrassing hit tonight after Downing Street was accused of plagiarism.

The target is an intelligence dossier released on Monday and heralded by none other than Colin Powell at the UN yesterday.

http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/sto … ssier.html

Mawhaha, the Downing Street people must have Googled for Iraqi intelligence information and taken directly from that guys essay! Wow, that's so amazing, that government data, you know, data we use as evidence to blow people up, comes off the internet.

Guys like me use the internet for information. I accept that the information I get can be wrong (a lot of times it is!). But you cannot expect government officals to do the same thing. especially with regards to things like, well, a costly war. Especially when Googling for various text within it will bring up someone elses work!

The UK better hope that guys essay was accurate...

soph · 2003-02-06 18:59:27

come on josh, this is a joke, and you know it. please dont pretend that the government is dumb enough to do something like that.

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-06 19:00:44

Oops, it wasn't Powell's report, it was the UK report... editing original to reflect that. (However, Powell did praise the UK report.)

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-06 19:07:06

Large parts of the British government's latest dossier on Iraq - which allegedly draws on "intelligence material" - were plagiarised from published academic articles, it emerged yesterday.

The dossier, entitled Iraq - its infrastructure of concealment, deception and intimidation, won high praise from the US secretary of state, Colin Powell, in his speech to the UN security council on Wednesday.

"I would call my colleagues' attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed... which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities," Mr Powell said.

More: http://politics.guardian.co.uk/foreign....00.html

C'mon soph, you gotta laugh about this. Seriously. It's funny.

soph · 2003-02-06 19:24:37

If it's true, yeah it is kinda funny. but i doubt that, and it would still be funny if it werent true, because of the big deal thats being made of it.

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-06 19:39:40

Yeah, perhaps. It would be a big deal if they were geniunely passing off old data as new data, though. I read that Blair got slammed tonight in a public Q&A about it... so it probably is a bigger deal than you'd think.

I'm not bored enough to compare the two, but if you want, go right on ahead.

Roark · 2003-02-07 21:04:05

The French are weenies. That's why they have always been so good at surrendering. This time the battle hasn't even begun and they've surrendered. Way to go France!

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-07 22:31:49

Did you actually hear Frances' argument with the US? I'd say they'e challenging the US... not cowering from Saddam. They know Saddam isn't a threat. It's the US which is fearmongering (ie, the whole alert crap, the same day it comes to light that the UK papers were plagiarized) over an issue which really is nothing to be concerned about beyond legitimate inspections.

If the US were honest about it, they would have provided the inspectors with plenty of information. There are more than 120 inspectors in Iraq at the momment, if I recall correctly. It could be doubled if need be. The point is, the US doesn't give a shit about diplomacy, even though they pretend to go to the UN about the whole thing. This is exactly why those in the security council are standing their ground, they know the US has no case.

soph · 2003-02-07 22:34:02

Josh, I have to agree with the US's evidence. There is a point where you have to stop covering your ears and start looking at the facts. I was against the war before I heard the speeches by Bush and Powell, but I think they did a damn good job...the people who dont want to hear it simply wont because theyre too busy denying it.

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-07 22:40:36

What are you talking about, soph? This isn't a case of not listening. I certainly listened to the whole UN Council Hearing.

What strikes me most is that it's quite obvious the US wasn't trying to provide the inspectors with information which would lead to discovery.

What's laughable, is that Powell comes out saying ?look at the facts, look at the facts? and provides mostly speculation! ?They're hiding... something. We don't know what it is, but we'd like to bomb it, whatever it is. It'd be fun.?

I'm not saying that Saddam isn't hiding WMDs or other things of that nature. I'm saying that we haven't proven our case to the Security Council.

There's a point where you, soph, have to stop being a conformist and listen to the facts. Then again, you're in a minority... because most Americans say they want to go through the UN, which means that the US hasn't proven its case.

soph · 2003-02-08 05:41:34

Most of the evidence is probably classified. Or don't you realize how much the military keeps secret?

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-08 06:55:42

When you make a case for war, you come out with the verfiable, damning evidence, you don't make claims that your information is classified, and hope that people will believe you.

When the Cuban missile crisis occured (probably one of the few times the US was really threatend by a nation), JFK showed the evidence to the American people. He didn't say, ?Well... we think that... well... under those piles of hay... there might be some... um... stuff... so we'd like to go to war. Now this is fact, though, because you can tell something is under there, because the haystacks don't look right.?

soph · 2003-02-08 09:45:24

"Well, since we have a satellite here, here, and here, we know that they have nuclear weapons on the launch pad! Oh, now you know where are intelligence is coming from. Crap."

Or, you don't say anything and the missles are launched. The media often keeps sources anonymous, yet youlove citing the media! We shouldny believe anybody who doesn't cite everything...i don't hear witnesses giving full citations during testimony in court.

dicktice · 2003-02-08 12:50:49

Here is a tasteless and non-politically-acceptable point regarding the postulated war between a Consortium and Iraq that I have yet to see addressed, namely:

What if the Consortium were to invade Iraq on the ground? In view of Iraq's assurances that they have no hidden bacterial or chemical weapons...rather than admit they lied to the U.N., wouldn't this prevent their use of such weapons on the invading ground-troops, even if they actually clandestinely possess these weapons?

soph · 2003-02-08 12:59:21

Well, yes and no. If it meant Saddam's life, I think they would break the charade, assuming they have these weapons!

dicktice · 2003-02-08 13:26:27

Soph--I really think this deserves more than a "...if Saddam thinks..." response! The difference in world consequences, involving masses of humanity hinging on a point of honour, I feel should be openly publicized.

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-08 16:23:01

My brother is a sargent in the military in Kuwait. He says that they're going to go in by next month, earliest estimates. I hope they're wrong.

Iraq actually has too much support now to really do anything crazy. They can now use France, Germany, and China's support to get the sanctions lifted eventually. I might even wager that these supposed moving labs will stop! Saddam doesn't need WMDs to protect himself. All he needs is international support and respect.

soph · 2003-02-08 18:17:24

Oh, I just remembered, the rush is because of our anti-biological weapons suits. After february, it gets too hot to wear them!

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-09 00:05:40

Yeah, my brother said something about having to wear those.

clark · 2003-02-10 10:51:02

march 3rd is the next new moon.

CalTech2010 · 2003-02-11 22:19:51

Caltech, if Powell was so convincing, why is it that the Security Council stood their ground? You know what I find laughable? That the whole thing was clearly set up for the American people to watch. All the National Stations had Powell, and only Powell on TV. FOX News cut away every time dissentors (China, France, etc) spoke, and had their little journalistic dialoug, praising Powell's ablity to convince people (no one was convinced).
Powell had absolutely no effect on the international community.
The inspections will continue.

I think it's even funnier that we gave France and Britain their nuclear technology, and the Russians stole most of theirs from us!

France, Russia, and China are a******s. We have provided clear evidence that Iraq has not disarmed, and yet they sit there with their vetos and oppose us still. Just because the nations still oppose our action doesn't mean Iraq hasn't really disarmed.

I have two jokes:

Why doesn't EuroDisney in Paris use fireworks during the grand finale at the end of the day?

*The French keep surrendering!

Why are the streets of Paris lined with trees?

*So the Germans can march in the shade!

Maybe I just needed to blow off steam, but %@&# France! It's not like they've ever provided us support before (they didn't even let us use their airspace in Desert Storm), and Russia and China haven't exactly been taking leading roles in keeping nations disarmed (oh, that's right. Those dirty Ruskies are locked into oil with Iraq, and that's where Iraq probably got their weapons material from. Oh, and France sold military intelligence pictures to Iraq a while ago. Just who was fighting a politically-motivated war again?).

I am going to visit the Get the US Out of the UN website tonight and write my congressmen. I'm so tired of those bastards being stubborn, especially since we put them where they are... if it weren't for Americans, the Parisans would be speaking German right now.

Before I go, NATO is pissing me off, too. I can't believe those traitors won't protect Turkey. Hell, it's not like Europe even has to do anything... the US has offered to protect Turkey through the whole engagement in Iraq. What's the damn treaty for anyway if Europe won't even let a nation in another hemisphere protect it's members?!

Euler · 2003-02-12 01:32:26

How is Iraq a threat to the US? The US is responsible for 4/9 of the World's military expenditure, spending about $400,000,000,000 per year. Iraq spends 1/300 of this amount. The US has enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world several times over. Iraq has no nuclear weapons, though the US alleges that they have chemical and biological weapons (Iraq denies this, which is supposedly what the conflict is all about). The US has ICBMs and stealth bombers that can destroy Iraq before Saddam even realizes what is happening. Iraq posses no means of directly attacking the US mainland.

Saddam isn't stupid or crazy. Even assuming he has biological or chemical weapons, he would not give them to terrorist for several reasons: 1. Terrorist are generally not very trustworthy, so Saddam cannot be sure that they will not be used against him. 2. If he did give weapons to terrorist, and the US tracked them back to Iraq, Saddam would not be able to survive the repercussions. 3. Saddam does not really gain anything from an attack on the US. 4. Saddam and the Iraqi government are not religious extremists (actually, this was one of the reasons for Iraq's war with Iran). 5. It would be hard for Iraq to replace any chemical weapons that it gives away due to the weapons inspectors, sanctions, and the fact that the US will not give Saddam any more chem. weapons.

Based on all this, I really don't see how Iraq poses any credible threat to the US.

Josh Cryer · 2003-02-12 02:00:29

Yaknow, nothing beats seeing warmongers being peeved at world issues. Since that usually means diplomacy is happening or trying to happen. It's funny.

And Euler, don't question US military spending! You anti-American bastard! Don't you know that our military is necessary for the Republic! You should be shot.

Euler · 2003-02-12 02:16:45

If only we decided to spend that $400 billion/year for space exploration...We could build a whole city on Mars!

soph · 2003-02-12 05:29:28

Josh, you still haven't gotten around the problem of Europe actually having a military if we cut ours. Closing bases overseas, yes, cutting our military capabilities, no. I think we can trim about $50 billion off without harming our capabilities.

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#501 2003-02-06 18:45:49

Re: President Bush - about bush

#502 2003-02-06 18:59:27

Re: President Bush - about bush

#503 2003-02-06 19:00:44

Re: President Bush - about bush

#504 2003-02-06 19:07:06

Re: President Bush - about bush

#505 2003-02-06 19:24:37

Re: President Bush - about bush

#506 2003-02-06 19:39:40

Re: President Bush - about bush

#507 2003-02-07 21:04:05

Re: President Bush - about bush

#508 2003-02-07 22:31:49

Re: President Bush - about bush

#509 2003-02-07 22:34:02

Re: President Bush - about bush

#510 2003-02-07 22:40:36

Re: President Bush - about bush

#511 2003-02-08 05:41:34

Re: President Bush - about bush

#512 2003-02-08 06:55:42

Re: President Bush - about bush

#513 2003-02-08 09:45:24

Re: President Bush - about bush

#514 2003-02-08 12:50:49

Re: President Bush - about bush

#515 2003-02-08 12:59:21

Re: President Bush - about bush

#516 2003-02-08 13:26:27

Re: President Bush - about bush

#517 2003-02-08 16:23:01

Re: President Bush - about bush

#518 2003-02-08 18:17:24

Re: President Bush - about bush

#519 2003-02-09 00:05:40

Re: President Bush - about bush

#520 2003-02-10 10:51:02

Re: President Bush - about bush

#521 2003-02-11 22:19:51

Re: President Bush - about bush

#522 2003-02-12 01:32:26

Re: President Bush - about bush

#523 2003-02-12 02:00:29

Re: President Bush - about bush

#524 2003-02-12 02:16:45

Re: President Bush - about bush

#525 2003-02-12 05:29:28

Re: President Bush - about bush

Board footer