"Still at it, huh Democrats?"
Posted on 11/03/2005 10:08:53 AM PST by sonsofliberty2000
ROME (AP) An Italian lawmaker says the government warned the United States before the Iraq war that documents about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium in Africa were forged.
"An Italian lawmaker says the government warned the United States"
So were the five thousand dead Kurds.
So were the 100,000 dead Iraqi's in mass graves.
So was the invasion on Kuwait
So were the torture rooms.
So were the terrorist camps.
Man, the things you can do with Adobe Paintshop today.
This guy needs to go shave his sister's pits and fade to black.
A real piece of implied logic by the AP: As if the sole basis for the war were based upon the Niger uranium claim. If only the hellbent-on-war-deny-all-evidence-to-the-contrary-Bush admin had listened to us before... Another pathetic attempt to rewrite history.
"Rather, they fibbed and we all bit into it."
What, specifically, the hell are you talking about?
Rather, you are a fool, and have taken a drink from their cool-aide. Your statement is demonstrably false.
Welcome to FreeRepublic anyways. Read up and learn something.
Review of Intelligence on Weapons of Mass Destructions
The Butler Review
Download area 1 PDF
Download area 2 PDF
http://www.butlerreview.org.uk/report/index.asp
A long read. You might want to go to Download 2,scroll to page 503
It has been public knowledge since early 2003 that this set of documents was forged. I think it's still an open question as to who forged them and why they were disseminated.
My apologies doctor, as I did not correctly read your post, and hastily wrote something in response. I would like to retract my previous post to you.
No doubt everyone is tired of the Niger uranium story. But this article by Terence Jeffrey in Human Events, linked to this morning by Real Clear Politics, caused me to think again about the practical reality of trade between Iraq and Niger.
Jeffrey's article notes that in 1999, according to the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency, an Iraqi named Wissam al Zawahie was sent on a "trade mission" to Niger. The article's main theme is that al Zawahie was one of the chief Iraqi advocates for the development of nuclear weapons by that country. Jeffrey also recounts that he tried to get more information on Zawahie's contacts with Niger from the U.N., which interviewed him in Baghdad, but the U.N. refused to disclose any information that had not already been made public.
One of the unanswered questions that Jeffrey posed to the U.N. was: What did Zahawie say Iraq hoped to import from Niger? This caused me to wonder about Niger's export economy. Niger is one of the world's poorest countries; what, exactly, might it have to sell that Iraq would want to buy? Bearing in mind, of course, that there is no question that Iraq bought large quantities of uranium from Niger in the 1980's.
Here is what the World Bank tells us: In 1991, Niger's exports totaled a minuscule $270 million, of which $199 million was uranium. By 2000, exports had crept up to $283 million, of which $90 million was uranium--the decline largely the result of falling prices. Other than uranium, the only exports substantial enough to merit mention by the World Bank were livestock products, at $49 million.
Atlas Marketing Services sheds additional light with this narrative:
"One of the poorest countries in the world, Niger's economy is based largely on subsistence crops, livestock, and some of the world's largest uranium deposits. Drought cycles, desertification, a 3.3 percent population growth rate and the declining world demand for uranium have undercut an already marginal economy. Deteriorating terms of trade due to persistently high domestic wage levels and currency devaluations in Nigeria have also contributed to economic decline. Many of the modern sector's private and parastatal industries have shut down, leaving only a handful of companies engaged in light industry....
"Of Niger's exports, foreign exchange earnings from livestock, although impossible to quantify, are second only to those from uranium; actual exports far exceed official statistics, which often fail to detect large herds of animals informally crossing into Nigeria.
"The persistent uranium price slump has brought lower revenues for Niger's uranium sector, although uranium still provides 68 percent of national export proceeds....Niger's two uranium mines (SOMAIR's open pit mine and COMINAK's underground mine) are primarily owned and operated by French interests."
OK, let's put this together. Apart from livestock that cross over into Nigeria, it is hard to find any reference to an export product other than uranium. Iraq had bought uranium from Niger in the 1980's, and in 1999 one of Iraq's principal advocates of nuclear weapons development was sent on a trade mission to Niger. (He was also accredited as Ambassador to Niger.) If he wasn't trying to buy uranium, then what was he trying to buy? The French, who would be in the best position to know since they operate Niger's uranium mines, apparently told the British that he was trying to buy uranium. Would someone please tell me what known facts have "discredited" the claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium in Niger?
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/mt/mt-diespammers.cgi/4151
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference So What Was Iraq Buying From Niger?:
» Niger, Uranium, and the SOTU from The American Mind
Hindrocket wonders what Niger could have possibly offered Iraq except for uranium. He then asks, "Would someone please tell me [Read More]
Tracked on August 2, 2003 11:47 AM
"Still at it, huh Democrats?"
However I'm dead serious about Avian.
Yeah yeah yeah, i know, 10 million dead, "The Stand", cats and dogs living together, the dead walk the earth. I know. My issue is refuting your contention that Bush lied. Keep in mind that I am not a Bush fanantic, but a conservative supporter. but I have never seen ANYTHING that explicitly categorized that even though everyone all over the globe was telling Bush there was no evidence of WMD, he went anyway. Instead I've seen evidence that everyone all over the globe was telling Bush there WAS evidence to WMD (CLINTON AND KERRY INCLUDED). So you are the sitting, president, you had two towers knocked down by terrorists, 3,000 dead. And all your advisors, world leaders (arab included) are telling you Iraq has them, and they will use them, and by the way, there are documented terrorist camps in Iraq. What are you going to do? Go back for another chapter of "My Pet Goat"? Or are you going to state to the world, "You are either with us, or against us."
Stick to medicine, Dr "Log in into FR on 11/2/2005"
Actually, the Bush administration did neither.
The problem with the scenario you presented is that the Bush administration cannot have it both ways. If Saddam Hussein was not a threat to this country, then we had no business going to war in Iraq. If he WAS a threat to this country, then the Bush administration was grossly negligent in pursuing stupid resolutions at the United Nations instead of just getting down to business.
This was one of the best collections of fact on this matter I've seen yet.
Thanks for taking the time to assemble and post it for us.
:O)
P
You obviously have not been following all of the public information in the lead up to the war from the Clinton and Bush Administrations. You must have missed the Kay and Duelfler Reports, the esteemed 9/11 commission and the Senate Intelligence Report.
I'm not sure why some insist on distorting what the President said prior to the war. Even the intel about the aluminum tubes that some claim to be false, the FRENCH confirmed that Rice and Powell were CORRECT.
I won't bother to address the hyping of the Avian flu in 2 months. I don't know what you are reading but you should change your sources.
bonk
And why did the PM of Niger say, when asked what the Iraqis were looking for, say, "We only make three things here and the only one they could have been interested in was yellowcake."?
Hey, i think Wilson is a liar. But, I also think that we should be able to do an honest evalutaion of where/if we had faulty intelligence. We know they had wmd, i'm simply speaking of nailing it down so there cannot be a claim by the left that we did not thouroughly review everything in an official inquiry. I feel we'd be vindicated.
Didn't you hear the story that we took out 1.7 metric tons of enriched uranium and highly radioactive sources out of Iraq?
We already knew he had scientists burry nuclear development equipment in their back yards.
It doesn't matter where he got the uranium, it doesn't matter where the scientists got the stuff that was buried in their back yards. SADDAM WAS HOT AFTER THE BOMB, HAD USED WMDS ON THE KURDS AND SAID HE WOULD DESTROY US.
The press and the dems are trying to spin that the war wasn't justified to try to create the Vietnam failure (which they engineered in the first place) to get back into power. It is a craven political operation showing the DEMS AND THE PRESS ARE UNWORTHY OF OUR TRUST IMHO.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.