New Article On Speicher Case.
dump...@hotmail.com
The United States just didn't believe him.
So it took the most powerful military in the world
18 years to find the remains of the only U.S. Navy
pilot shot down in an aerial battle in the 1991 Gulf
War.
Michael "Scott" Speicher's bones lay 18 inches
deep in Iraqi sand, more or less right where a group
of Iraqis had led an American search team in 1995.
The search for Speicher was frustrated by two
wars, mysteriously switched remains, Iraqi
duplicity and a final tip from a young nomad in
Anbar province."
See:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091128/ap_on_go_ca_st_pe/us_missing_pilot_hidden_in_sand
Eunometic
> "Saddam Hussein was telling the truth, this time.
Which of these men lied and which told the truth on WMD: Saddam
Hussein, Tony Blair or George Bush?
Glad they found his remains.
Steven P. McNicoll
>
> Which of these men lied and which told the truth on WMD: Saddam
> Hussein, Tony Blair or George Bush?
>
Hussein lied, Blair and Bush did not.
Jack Linthicum
wrote:
Ah, so, desuka
Blair told Iraq had no WMD
GORDON RAYNER, LONDON
November 27, 2009
FORMER British prime minister Tony Blair received intelligence that
Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction had been ''dismantled''
10 days before Britain invaded Iraq, the Chilcot inquiry has been
told.
The British Foreign Office did not believe Iraq had nuclear missiles,
but Mr Blair told Parliament Saddam was still a threat to the Middle
East with chemical and biological weapons that could be launched at 45
minutes' notice.
But Sir William Ehrman, the director of international security at the
Foreign Office from 2000 to 2002, told the inquiry into the Iraq war:
''We were getting, in the very final days before military action, some
[intelligence] on chemical and biological weapons that they were
dismantled and [Saddam] might not have the munitions to deliver it.
''On March 10 [2003] we got a report saying the chemical weapons might
have remained disassembled and that Saddam hadn't yet ordered their
reassembly, and he might lack warheads capable of effective dispersal
of agents.''
Despite the information, coalition forces invaded Iraq on March 20,
2003.
The issue of Iraq's ability to produce or use weapons of mass
destruction is central to the inquiry, which must determine whether Mr
Blair misled Parliament over reasons for going to war.
Tim Dowse, the head of counter-proliferation at the Foreign Office
between 2001 and 2003, told the inquiry Iraq had not been "top of the
list" for nations causing concern about the spread of weapons of mass
destruction in the two years before the invasion.
Mr Dowse said Iran, North Korea and Libya had caused far greater alarm
than Saddam's regime. He said that when he came to the job in 2001,
both Libya and Iran had been placed ahead of Iraq.
And while Saddam had supported Palestinian terrorist groups, the
assessments worked on by his officials described the regime's contacts
with al-Qaeda as "quite sporadic".
"After 9/11, we concluded Iraq actually stepped further back. They did
not want to be associated with al-Qaeda. They weren't natural
allies,'' he said.
The Foreign Office ranked Iraq only the fourth most dangerous rogue
state trying to develop WMD in 2001.
Sanctions made it virtually impossible for Saddam to restart his
nuclear program, the inquiry heard, and even without sanctions it
would likely have taken five years for it to build a nuclear weapon.
The hearing continues.
http://www.theage.com.au/world/blair-told-iraq-had-no-wmd-20091126-juj4.html
Eunometic
wrote:
Not according to General(Rtd) Sir Hugh "Michael" Rose KCB, CBE, DSO,
QGM often known as Mike Rose.
As well as commanding 22 SAS, he was Commander UNPROFOR Bosnia in 1994
during the Yugoslav Wars.
He has called for Tony Blair prosecution as a war criminal.
That would be equivalent to Collin Powel calling for the impeachment
of President Bush.
Misleading Parliament is taken very seriously in westminister systems.