english
nederlands
Indymedia NL
Independent Media Centre of the Netherlands
Indymedia NL is an independent free communication organisation. Indymedia offers an alternative approach to the news by using an open publishing method for text, images, video and audio.
> contact > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
Search

 
All Words
Any Word
Contains Media:
Only images
Only video
Only audio

Dossiers
Agenda
CHAT!
LINKS

European NewsReal

MDI's complaint against Indymedia.nl
Courtcase Deutsche Bahn vs. Indymedia.nl
Topics
anti-fascisme / racisme
europa
feminisme
gentechnologie
globalisering
kunst, cultuur en muziek
media
militarisme
natuur, dier en mens
oranje
vrijheid, repressie & mensenrechten
wereldcrisis
wonen/kraken
zonder rubriek
Events
G8
Oaxaca
Schinveld
Schoonmakers-Campagne
Help
Tips for newbies
A short intro into Indymedia NL
The policy of Indymedia NL
How to join?
Donate
Support Indymedia NL with donations!
Lawsuits cost a lot of money, we appreciate every (euro)cent you can spare!

You can also direct your donation to Dutch bank account 94.32.153 on behalf of Stichting Vrienden van Indymedia, Amsterdam (IBAN: NL41 PSTB 0009 4321 53)
Indymedia Network

www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa
ambazonia
canarias
estrecho / madiaq
kenya
nigeria
south africa

Canada
hamilton
london, ontario
maritimes
montreal
ontario
ottawa
quebec
thunder bay
vancouver
victoria
windsor
winnipeg

East Asia
burma
jakarta
japan
manila
qc

Europe
alacant
andorra
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
bristol
bulgaria
croatia
cyprus
estrecho / madiaq
euskal herria
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
lille
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
netherlands
nice
norway
oost-vlaanderen
paris/île-de-france
poland
portugal
romania
russia
scotland
sverige
switzerland
thessaloniki
toulouse
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia
west vlaanderen

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
brasil
chiapas
chile
chile sur
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso

Oceania
adelaide
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
oceania
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india
mumbai

United States
arizona
arkansas
atlanta
austin
baltimore
big muddy
binghamton
boston
buffalo
charlottesville
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
danbury, ct
dc
hampton roads, va
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
idaho
ithaca
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
omaha
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
seattle
tallahassee-red hills
tampa bay
tennessee
united states
urbana-champaign
utah
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
armenia
beirut
israel
palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
discussion
fbi/legal updates
indymedia faq
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech
volunteer
Credits
This site is produced by volunteers using free software where possible.

The system we use is available from:mir.indymedia.de
an alternative is available from: active.org.au/doc

Thanks to indymedia.de and mir-coders for creating and sharing mir!

Contact:
info @ indymedia.nl
Let Them Eat Yellowcake!
William Brinton - 29.07.2003 22:43

Did the Bush administration manipulate intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq?

As former African Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson 4th asked in a July 6 New York Times,
“Did the Bush administration manipulate intelligence about Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs to justify an invasion of Iraq? See What I Didn’t Find in Africa.

Having listened to the White House Press Conference on July 7, 2003, I came up a little short on the Niger-uranium exchange. The Administration appears to be doing an about-face regarding the intelligence they used to support claims of Saddam’s nuclear capabilities. Check out this wonderful exchange where Ari Fleischer attempts to clarify the Administration’s position:

Q: Can you give us the White House account of Ambassador Wilson's account of what happened when he went to Niger and investigated the suggestions that Niger was passing yellowcake to Iraq? I'm sure you saw the piece yesterday in The New York Times.

FLEISCHER: Well, there is zero, nada, nothing new here. Ambassador Wilson, other than the fact that now people know his name, has said all this before. But the fact of the matter is in his statements about the Vice President - the Vice President's office did not request the mission to Niger. The Vice President's office was not informed of his mission and he was not aware of Mr. Wilson's mission until recent press accounts - press reports accounted for it. See entire transcript of the July 7, 2003 White House press conference.

Finally, someone is showing some backbone here. Now keep in mind that one of the things the White House has said about the Niger-uranium issue is that even though the Niger documents were bogus, the White House had other evidence to support the President's claim. In other words, the White House had intelligence that was so top secret that it apparently couldn't be shared with the CIA, either then or even now.

On July 18, 2003, closed-door testimony was heard on Capitol Hill. A senator and other officials involved in the classified hearing said that CIA officials named a White House aide who persuaded the agency to allow a questionable allegation about Iraq to be included in President Bush's State of the Union address. Is Yellowcake-gate a ‘closed’ issue as Bush stated last week, or is it only just beginning to open up? It could be a battle as this is an administration that has shown that it will not be cowed by the truth.

Rather than a free and open debate over policy, analysts in the intelligence community and other agencies are finding that the White House only wants information that will further its own political goals. Instead of speaking truth to power, the political appointees tell the powerful what they want to hear; and the American public cannot assess accountability or proposals for reform. Is that what happened when the CIA reviewed a draft of the State of the Union speech – or when the agency crafted its assessment of Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction? Only an open, honest and independent investigation will determine the answer to that question.
 

Read more about: media

supplements
> indymedia.nl > search > archive > help > join > publish news > open newswire > disclaimer > chat
DISCLAIMER: Indymedia NL uses the 'open posting' principle to promote freedom of speech. The news (text, images, audio and video) posted in the open newswire of Indymedia NL remains the property of the author who posted it. The views in these postings do not necesseraly reflect the views of the editorial team of Indymedia NL. Furthermore, it is not always possible to guarantee the accuracy of the postings.