Italian Journalist Says She Gave US Uranium Info

AP ^ | July 19, 2003

[nwrep]

ROME - A journalist for an Italian news magazine has come forward, saying it was she who turned over to U.S. diplomats some documents purportedly showing that Iraq (news - web sites) wanted to buy uranium from Niger. The documents turned out to be forgeries.

In an interview published Saturday, Corriere della Sera, a leading Italian daily, quoted Elisabetta Burba as saying her source "in the past proved to be reliable." The journalist, who writes for the weekly Panorama, refused to reveal her source.

[Destro]

Listen, I have had enough of a science education background to know that you can't hide thousands of tons of existing WMD stockpiles without a trace. You can hide components and the machines to make them because they are few in number but EXISTING chemical and radiation weapons leave a trace that can be followed.

We can't see upturned dirt from spy satellites? We can and we looked--and we found nothing of existing weaponry. If they were smuggled out--may I ask why the airforce could not see convoys of trucks heading out to Syria? And even this convoy would leave a trace-chemical residue-nuclear residue...traffic jams at border crossings...

[Destro]

The terror camps were no where near Mosul but deep in Kurdish territory out of Saddam's reach and near the Turkish-Iranian border.

[Destro]

PS: I will never apologize for calling a woman a "Babe".

[William McKinley]

And I have enough of a science degree to know you can't destroy them without being able to provide some evidence of their destruction.

They had them- they inventoried much of it for the UN after the first Gulf War.

They said they destroyed them, but refused to prove it. And besides, they were supposed to destroy them in front of the UN so as to avoid questions- but they refused to do this.

Spin it all you want. They had them, which is only disputed by the far, far left. Is that where you want to be?

[Miss Marple]

You are assuming that we have all information on WMD. That is not true. Much of the information has not been released yet, which if you will scan many of the Iraq war articles on FR you will see. David Kay has a huge pile of documents which won't be released until September.

Why hasn't it been released yet? For two reasons: the military doesn't want bad guys to know where things are in Iraq, and they want to have an iron clad case when it is brought before the world.

And for your information, 54-year old grandmothers don't like being called "Babe." I suggest you not do so in public.

[breakem]

Thank you!

[Destro]

54 these days is not what it used to be. I am not there yet but my Babe still stands. In addition your comments reflect nothing on our origin issue--Suadi Arabia and al-Qaeda vs Iraq and al-Qaeda. I don't buy that we don't want to let the bad guys know where it is. The bad guys would already know where it is since the Iraqi bad guys put them there and since they work with al-Qaeda - they would know too!!!!

So that argument sinks not swims.

[Miss Marple]

No, the argument doesn't sink. If there is more than one set of bad guys in Iraq (which I belive there are) most wouldn't know where the stuff is. In fact, most of Saddam's former government probably didn't know. You have Shiites from Iran hooked up with the mullahs, Al Qaueda, representatives of Hammas and Hezbollah, Russian mafia, radical Kurds, and general crooks, ALL of whom would like to get their hands on this stuff and sell it to a high bidder.

So YOUR argument doesn't fly.

[Destro]

Well if you say Saddam and Al-Qaeda are allies--why would they not tell us al-Qaeda where its buried? You make no sense.

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

Oh that is interesting!

[Ernest_at_the_Beach]

My head is hurting too!

How many of these Socialist countries are in on this ," Lets bring America down"?

[Miss Marple]

Are you asking me why Sadam wouldn't tell Al Qaeda? Heck, he didn't even tell everyone in his own government!

Also, those in Al Qaeda who knew might have been killed in Afghanistan, or are trapped in places like Egypt and unable to move around. Also, it is quite possible that some in Al Qaeda DID know where things are, but they are prevented from getting there by the presence of our military, and announcing where the WMD's are is asking for an attack.

In addition, we might have moved certain items and do not want to let bad guys know of the new location.

I am possibly wrong, but you certainly have not proven your case.

[Destro]

Yea, Saddam is not cooperating with al-Qaeda on WMD but he is. He is keeping it all a secret because the hundreds of men needing to bury all those tons are so loyal to him--maybe they are dead. And maybe he is waiting to tell Osama where he hid them one day....

[McGavin999]

Hate to tell you this, but there was more than one camp discovered. They've reported several of them all over Iraq.

[Jorge]

If the WH sold the war just on non-compliance and told us flat out we don't think they have WMD stockpiles (but with a better safe than sorry provision) I think that would have been more--honest---and would not have gotten us into the PR problems the WH is having now with this issue.

Why should this be a WH problem?
The United Nations and numerous intelligence agencies, even those of countries against the war reported tons of bio and chemical weapons stockpiles that were yet unaccounted for.

Was Bush supposed to deny the assertions from all these different sources and tell Amercicans there were no stockpiles?

It's rather amusing that so many people now have developed amnesia and are trying to tell us this was all a Bush invention to go to war.

These accusations against Blair and Bush are intellectually dishonest and far more representative of distortion than anything these two great leaders have ever said.

[Jorge]

If the WH sold the war just on non-compliance and told us flat out we don't think they have WMD stockpiles (but with a better safe than sorry provision) I think that would have been more--honest---and would not have gotten us into the PR problems the WH is having now with this issue.

Why should this be a WH problem?
The United Nations and numerous intelligence agencies, even those of countries against the war reported tons of bio and chemical weapons stockpiles that were yet unaccounted for.

Was Bush supposed to deny the assertions from all these different sources and tell Amercicans there were no stockpiles?

It's rather amusing that so many people now have developed amnesia and are trying to tell us this was all a Bush invention to go to war.

These accusations against Blair and Bush are intellectually dishonest and far more representative of distortion than anything these two great leaders have ever said.

[Destro]

Blair -- a Socialist - a great leader?????

[Jorge]

Blair -- a Socialist - a great leader?????

Yes..Blair is has shown himself to be a man of conviction and courage..and a great leader who we saw get an incredible reception by both parties of the US Congress that few world leaders ever receive.

And he deserves to called a great leader for how he's stood by this country in the war on terrorism.

[Destro]

You mean that speech which spouted off left wing ideas that America should uphold? As a conservative Blair's speech made me sick with disgust that he was being congratulated by Republicans. If you are not politically smart enough to understand what it means to be a conservative and what parts of Blair's speech was left wing ideology then I suggest you read more.

[PhilDragoo]

Blair has shown himself to be a man of conviction and courage..and a great leader who we saw get an incredible reception by both parties of the US Congress that few world leaders ever receive.

Blair put national security ahead of political expediency in his alliance with us against Saddam Hussein.

Blair showed moral conviction and personal integrity in that, and received a deserved warm welcome here.

It would have been far, far easier for Blair to have drug his feet, as did Chirac, and Schroeder.

The current orchestrated attacks on him by the extremist Left terrorist groupies will fail.