Now, will there be a rush to go back and reread in detail every report Blix has issued to see if he hid anything else in the fine print? As bad as whatever Blix might uncover, was this just something he missed? Or was it deliberate?
The article seems pretty damning against objectivity:
(Emphasis mine.)
No, I’m not changing my personal position opposing this war. This revelation just makes it more difficult to assess the reports, be it by Bush, and now Blix.
Of course, as we approach the midnight before the first missiles strike, more and more information may start to appear. As either side scrambles for public opinion, and to gather support for their side, anything is possible now. It happens too often, in crises, even in sports as one side goes to a full court press.
But now we have an “impartial” UN chief inspector appearing not to be. Yes, buring the data, only to have it exposed now only strengthens the Bush war footing. OK, I’ll deal with that. But it also begins to crack the credibility and objectivity of UN reporting and inspections; something that Bush can use to make the UN even more irrelevant.
I’ve come to expect member countries of the UN to play their political games, grand-standing and ego wanking. It’s part and parcel of politics and diplomacy. But we now now appear to have an “objective,” non-partisan employee of the UN at a very high level joining this game.
I think the slippery slope just got a spray of lubricant.
His position must be damned near impossible. He doubtless wants to do a good job, but if you’re a man of any kind of conscience at all and war hangs on interpreting your words…stress doesn’t say it.
And the US just isn’t that much of an angel here. Colin Powell keeps talking about all this irrefutable intelligence he’s got about what Saddam has, but can’t seem to say where exactly. Without fail he repeats his theme of being totally for sure that Saddam has all this terrible shit, but refuses to say how he knows.
Wasnt that long ago that the US was swearing up and down, Iraq is just weeks away from having nukes, we have irrefutable proof, no question about it. All bullshit.
One other thing I’m bugged about. I listened to todays reports, and the nuke inspection guy (whose name escapes me) very delicately discussed “intelligence reports” about Iraqi officials shopping for uranium in Africa. About how he tracked it all down and there isn’t any truth to it. Whose intelligence reports? Ours, by chance?
Now I have been operating under the assumption that Goddam Hussein being an evil old bugger, he almost certainly does have all this nasty shit, just like we say he does. But with all the lies and bullshit the ostensible good guys have been slinging around, I’m even starting to wonder about that. I don’t think I could stand it, I’d start pulling my hair out and run screaming from the room if it turns out that the only thing the rotten bastard is actually innocent of is the stuff we’re going to war over!
Elucidator, you’re just getting more and more hysterical.
Cite, please.
Look, this is pretty serious - Hans Blix made an oral presentation in which he was supposed to describe exactly what they had found. He knew they had found an illegal drone, and spraying equipment that could be used to distribute chemical weapons. He chose to WITHOLD that information from the Security Council, for his own reasons, and then bury the information in the final report. At the very least, this has to call his objectivity into question. Or his competance.
It was also stupid of him. He should have known that the information would be discovered in the final report, and that fact would be used to discredit anything positive he had to say about Iraq.
Sam, you kidding me? You don’t remember when GeeDubya stood there with Tony the Poodle and waved that report in the air, saying here’s the proof positive, what more proof do you need? Here’s the UN inspection report that says Iraq will have nukes toot damn sweet? You remember, don’t you, the report that didn’t fucking exist!
I got some short term memory problems maybe, due to a lifelong glaucoma prevention regimen. Whats your excuse?
I remember the report. It did not say that Saddam Hussein would have a bomb in a matter of ‘weeks’. It was a matter of a few years if he had to make his own fissionables, or perhaps six months IF he already had plutonium. They even added that there was no proof he actually had plutonium.
As I noted in the other thread, the U.S. military has talked about how they’ll need Special Ops teams to take out sites that they can’t bomb for fear of releasing dangerous chemical or biological weapons into the air. If we already know where that stuff is well enough to plan around it, what is the point of what Blix doing anyway?
Interesting point, Apos. Reminds me of how Colin Powell keeps repeating that we know for certain that Goddam Hussein has all this Nasty Stuff, we have irrefutable intelligence reports, and so on. But we don’t know where it is, exactly. We can’t tell Mr. Blix where to look, because even though we have intelligence that proves for sure it exists, somehow the intelligence doesn’t specify where it is. Just that it is.
Has it ever occurred to anyone else that a really evil, cunning guy like Saddam might, in fact, find it to his advantage to comply? To actually destroy all the nerve gas, anthrax, etc. knowing he can re-make it later when we’re busy with somebody else?
Our certainty that he has this shit basicly depends on the fact that hes an evil old bugger. But an smart evil old bugger would, in fact, comply with our demands. Because he’s evil.
Please note the recent Newsweek revelations: about how the defector, Saddams woefully retarded son-in-law, revealed a bunch of damaging facts about Saddams regime that the Bushistas made much ado over, while neglecting to mention that he testified that Saddam destroyed his nerve/bio weapons in '91.
The one scenario that no one wants to consider is that the reason Hans Blix can’t find any forbidden weapons is because there aren’t any. Even the Devil can tell the truth if it serves his purpose.
Perhaps the reason we don’t know exactly where it is is because Hussein specifically planned for that contingency. Pehaps you have read about the mobile chemical and biological labs they bought from the Germans?
The truth and evidence is out there, you just don’t want to see it because it conflicts with your preconceived position.
There’s the rub: the U.S. keeps screaming that Iraq has all sorts of nasty WOMD, but can’t seem to produce any evidence of it. We’ve got all these high-tech, read-your-license-plate spy satellites, but can’t seem to tell the U.N. inspectors where to find the nasty stuff we’re “sure” Iraq has.
Colin Powell (who’s lost a lot of my respect over the last few weeks) keeps claiming that the Iraqis are somehow preventing the inspectors from finding the bad stuff, yet the inspectors aren’t being kept away from anything, as far as I can tell. Not once, AFAIK, have the Iraqis refused to let them enter any site they wanted to enter.
If we know that Iraq has banned weapons, let’s just tell the inspectors where to look. In other words, put up or shut up. If we can’t tell the inspectors where to look, then it’s pretty obvious that we’re not, in fact, sure that Iraq has any banned material. Want to make sure? Simple. Just let the inspections continue, and let our spy satellites keep watching for suspicious activity. No harm in that.
If there are no forbidden weapons, that would mean that Saddam secretly destroyed them, without allowing UN inspectors to verify. Don’t forget that he was definitely known to have a huge store of chemical and biological weapons in 1998, when the inspectors left.
No doubt even Saddam can tell the truth if it serves his purpose. But, what purpose would it serve to destroy all his forbidden weapons without UN inspector verification?
Cite? What we knew in 1998 is that there were still some bio/chemical agents that were unaccounted for. There is a big difference between “unaccounted for” and “known to have”.
In fact, the UN inspectors destroyed 90%-95% of the what was known to have existed at one time. They knew of NOTHING remaining when they left in 1998. They just couldn’t account for the last 5% to 10%.
For all of you questioning Hans Blix’ integrity, please , oh please, speculate as to his motivations. Saddam used to accuse the UN inspectors of being US spies. Now we are suggesting that Hans Blix is an agent for Iraq? Come on…
Now, if you go through that report, you will certainly find many items that “remain unaccounted for” - just what I said. But I challenge you to show where there ANY KNOWN TO EXIST!
Please quick playing fast and loose with the facts. If you can’t make your case with the facts available, don’t feign surprise if we don’t take your word for it.
So these documents had “relatively crude errors” showing them to be forgories yet an extensive review by U.S. intelligence found them all hunky dory? :dubious:
If I were going to make a wild assed guess, without the slightest suggestion that I know something you don’t, I would guess Isreali intelligence, known as Mossad. They are a very sophisticated and crafty bunch of honchos and they definitely have a dog in this fight. Trouble with that is, they are way to smart to make the kind of dumb-fuck errors that gave this one away.
