7-26-03 -- The media, President Bush, and his entire administration are misleading the American people. The media is covering for Bush and his administration, they all lied to justify an invasion of Iraq. Read this information and you will see what I am talking about.

1) The media is only reporting attacks in Iraq where a US soldier gets killed. They are getting attacked 12 to 20 times a day, every day since may 1, 2003 when Bush declared the War to be over. Our soldiers get wounded (and killed) virtually every day, but the media does not report the attacks when nobody gets killed. They are doing this to help Bush, if they reported all the attacks, and all the wounded, Bush's approval rating would probably be about 30 percent.

2) They are also covering for Bush by only reporting combat related deaths. The total death count of US troops in Iraq is about 240, yet the media keeps saying 154 total deaths. That is a lie, they are lying to cover for Bush. They are not counting the deaths in non-combat situations.

Media Underplays U.S. Death Toll in Iraq

Fri, Jul 18 2003

Any way you look at it, the news is bad enough. According to Thursday's press and television reports, 33 U.S. soldiers have now died in combat since President Bush declared an end to the major fighting in the war on May 2. This, of course, is a tragedy for the men killed and their families, and a problem for the White House.

But actually the numbers are much worse -- and rarely reported by the media.

According to official military records, the number of U.S. soldiers who have died in Iraq since May 2 is actually 85. This includes a staggering number of non-combat deaths. Even if killed in a non-hostile action, these soldiers are no less dead, their families no less aggrieved. And it's safe to say that nearly all of these people would still be alive if they were still back in the States.

Nevertheless, the media continues to report the much lower figure of 33 as if those are the only deaths that count.

A Web site called Iraq Coalition Casualty Count (lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx) is tracking the deaths, by whatever cause, of U.S. military personnel in Iraq, based on official Pentagon and CENTCOM press releases and Army Times and CNN casualty trackers. Their current count is 85 since May 2.

Looking at the entire war, there was much fanfare Thursday over the fact that the latest U.S. combat death this week pushed the official total to 148 -- finally topping the 147 figure for Gulf War 1. However, according to the Iraq Coalition Casualty Count, the total number of all U.S. deaths, combat and otherwise, in Iraq is actually 224.

Full Story Here: www.mediainfo.com/editorandpublisher/headlines/article_display.jsp

3) This is misleading the American people, the media is intentionally covering for Bush, and his crooked administration.

4) If an attack happens and nobody gets killed, the media does not report it. Most people have no clue our boys are getting attacked 12 to 20 times a day.

5) This is an outrage, the people in the media should be fired. This is why we need a liberal tv news network, or an independent tv news network.

Bush Chases Saddam, Ignores Real Threats (Note the source, English Newspaper)


6) The media is also covering for Bush by not reporting on Afghanistan anymore. The situation in Afghanistan is bad, and getting worse. The US only has control of one city in Afghanistan (Kabul) the rest of the country is a free for all warlord controlled zone. As Bill Clinton said "Karzai is the president of Kabul" but the rest of the country is out of control.

Here are two news articles that explain in detail the real truth about Afghanistan:

The Complete Truth About the U.S. Attack on Afghanistan


The Truth About Afghanistan


7-26-03 - Where are the WMD's ?

1) Bush invaded Iraq about 4 months ago, he said Iraq had thousands of tons of chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam was running a working nuclear program, and that he was on the verge of having a nuclear bomb. He said Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA (even though we are 3000 miles away) and he said Iraq was working with Al-Qaida.

2) To this day, not one thing he said was true. It was all a lie, it was nothing but cooked intelligence and propaganda tricks. The UN, the CIA, the IAEA, and the 9-11 report all confirm Iraq had no connection at all to Al-Qaida. What the Bush administration neo-cons did was work it like a prosecutor doing a trial. They took ALL the intelligence, then they cherry picked the parts that made their case look good, then they ignored the parts that did not make their case look good.

3) The whole thing was a scam to justify the illegal invasion of Iraq.

4) Hell the neo-cons who now work for Bush planned this war in 1998, they sent a letter to Clinton asking him to invade Iraq. He said no, and told the morons to get a clue. Then 3 years later, after Bush stole the white house, they tricked Bush (the dummy) into believing their cooked up intelligence.

5) They used Bush as a pawn to have the war they planned in 1998. They also used 9-11 to link Al-Qaida to Iraq, this helped them scam more support for the war. Hell polls taken before the war showed 45 percent of the people thought the 9-11 hijackers were all Iraqis, and that Al-Qaida was working with Iraq. Even though it was all lies, the truth is 17 of the 19 hijackers were Saudis, not Iraqis, and Al-Qaida has no connection to Iraq at all.

6) If you can not see this, you are either in denial, or just stupid.

7) This also means that 90+ percent of republicans support this illegal war based on lies. In recent polls 90+ percent of republicans support Bush. That means they have no integrity, because we all know this war was illegal and un-justified.

8) It also means Bush should be impeached, and his whole crooked administration should be fired.

For detailed facts that confirm what I say on this web page check out these news articles. This is what you call real journalism, not the crap you get from CNN, MSNBC, and FOX.

Bush Uranium Lie Is Tip of the Iceberg
Press should expand focus beyond "16 words"

July 18, 2003

Five months later, the truthfulness of one claim in George W. Bush's State of the Union address has become the focus of growing media scrutiny. The attention media are paying to this single assertion should be part of a larger journalistic inquiry into other misstatements and exaggerations that have been made by the Bush administration about Iraq.

In the January 28 speech, Bush claimed that "the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." That assertion was similar to claims made previously by administration officials, including Secretary of State Colin Powell (CBS Evening News, 12/19/02), that Iraq had sought to import yellowcake uranium from Niger, a strong indication that Saddam Hussein's regime was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program.

In fact, the Niger story, as documented by journalist Seymour Hersh (New Yorker, 3/31/03) and others, was based on crudely forged documents. In addition, the administration's own investigation in March 2002 concluded that the story was bogus. As one former State Department official put it, "This wasn't highly contested. There weren't strong advocates on the other side. It was done, shot down" (Time, 7/21/03).

Full Story Here: www.fair.org/press-releases/beyond-niger.html

Ex-Spies: CIA Workers Outraged Over Iraq Intelligence Claims

Before the bombs fell on Baghdad, there were analysts inside the American intelligence community who were troubled by the U.S. case for war, reports CBS News Correspondent Jim Acosta.

Raymond McGovern, a former CIA analyst and supervisor, says, "Never before in my 40 years of experience in this town has intelligence been used in so cynical and so orchestrated a way."

McGovern is one of several retired intelligence analysts who say they are speaking out for those who can't inside the CIA.

"The Agency analysts that we are in touch with are disheartened, dispirited, angry,” he says. “They are outraged."

Full Story Here: www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml

The Amazing Stories (Lies) of Condoleezza Rice

Condoleezza Rice is the nation’s top national security official. After September 11th, she claimed that the White House had no prior knowledge that Al Qaeda was planning to hijack planes in a terrorist attack. That assertion was proven false. In the months before the Iraq War, Rice repeatedly reassured the public that the U.S. was seeking a peaceful resolution, and that war was not a foregone conclusion.

However, it now appears that at the same time she was saying this, she was telling senior State Department officials that the decision to go to war had already been made – well before diplomatic efforts to diffuse the situation even began. Most recently, it appears that she has given three separate, incongruent stories about her role in the massive intelligence breakdown that led to the White House making false statements about Iraq’s nuclear capabilities.

It appears that Rice has either been misleading the public about her role in that fiasco, or alternately, has been grossly negligent in not reading the government’s most important intelligence documents.

Full Story Here: www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/25_condi.html

Report Shows Bush Had Specific Warnings Before 9-11 Attacks

President Bush was warned in a more specific way than previously known about intelligence suggesting that al Qaeda terrorists were seeking to attack the United States, a report on the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks indicated yesterday. Separately, the report cited one CIA memo that concluded there was "incontrovertible evidence" that Saudi individuals provided financial assistance to al Qaeda operatives in the United States.

These revelations are not the subject of the congressional report's narratives or findings, but are among the nuggets embedded in a story focused largely on the mid-level workings of the CIA, FBI and U.S. military.

Two intriguing -- and politically volatile -- questions surrounding the Sept. 11 plot have been how personally engaged Bush and his predecessor were in counterterrorism before the attacks, and what role some Saudi officials may have played in sustaining the 19 terrorists who commandeered four airplanes and flew three of them into the World Trade Center and Pentagon.

Full Story Here: www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43291-2003Jul24.html

9/11 Report: No Iraq Link to al-Qaida

WASHINGTON - The report of the joint congressional inquiry into the suicide hijackings on Sept. 11, 2001, reveals U.S. intelligence had no evidence that the Iraqi regime of Saddam Hussein was involved in the attacks, or that it had supported al-Qaida, United Press International has learned. "The report shows there is no link between Iraq and al-Qaida," said a government official who has seen the report.

Former Democratic Georgia Sen. Max Cleland, who was a member of the joint congressional committee that produced the report, confirmed the official's statement. Asked whether he believed the report will reveal that there was no connection between al-Qaida and Iraq, Cleland replied: "I do ... There's no connection, and that's been confirmed by some of (al-Qaida leader Osama) bin Laden's terrorist followers."

The revelation is likely to embarrass the Bush administration, which made links between Saddam's support for bin Laden -- and the attendant possibility that Iraq might supply al-Qaida with weapons of mass destruction -- a major plank of its case for war.

"The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaida) to scare the pants off the American people and justify the war," said Cleland. "What you've seen here is the manipulation of intelligence for political ends." The inquiry, by members of both the House and Senate intelligence committees, was launched in February last year amid growing concerns that failures by U.S. intelligence had allowed the 19 al-Qaida terrorists to enter the United States, hijack four airliners, and kill almost 3,000 people.

Although the committee completed its work at the end of last year, publication of the report has been delayed by interminable wrangles between the committees and the administration over which parts of it could be declassified. Cleland accused the administration of deliberately delaying the report's release to avoid having its case for war undercut.

"The reason this report was delayed for so long -- deliberately opposed at first, then slow-walked after it was created -- is that the administration wanted to get the war in Iraq in and over ... before (it) came out," he said.

Full Story Here: truthout.org/docs_03/072503B.shtml

24 "Deceptions" In 704 words: Bush's 2003 SOTU

1. "We will not deny, we will not ignore, we will not pass along our problems to other Congresses, to other presidents, and other generations." How about the nearly $7 trillion national debt that's increasing by $475 billion or more this year and every year that Bush remains in office.

2. "Our first goal is clear: We must have an economy that grows fast enough to employ every man and woman who seeks a job." Highest unemployment in a decade, climbing higher every month.

3. "…the best and fairest way to make sure Americans have that money is not to tax it away in the first place." Unless you're poor or middle class.

4. "92 million Americans will keep, this year, an average of almost $1,000 more of their own money." Bill Gates goes into a bar where nine unemployed workers are nursing their beers. "Whoopee we're rich!" shouts one of them. "The average net worth of every one in this room is 3 billion dollars."

5. "I ask you to end the unfair double taxation of dividends…" The federal government levies an income tax on the pay of every wage earner. That pay is then taxed again for Social Security, Medicare, State income tax, unemployment benefits, workers comp… That's sextuple taxation. Why not end that!

Numbers 6 Thru 24 Here: www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/22_sotu.html

The spies who pushed for war (Note the source - English Newspaper)

Julian Borger reports on the shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force

As the CIA director, George Tenet, arrived at the Senate yesterday to give secret testimony on the Niger uranium affair, it was becoming increasingly clear in Washington that the scandal was only a small, well-documented symptom of a complete breakdown in US intelligence that helped steer America into war.

It represents the Bush administration's second catastrophic intelligence failure. But the CIA and FBI's inability to prevent the September 11 attacks was largely due to internal institutional weaknesses.

This time the implications are far more damaging for the White House, which stands accused of politicising and contaminating its own source of intelligence.

According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior administration figures created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency.

The agency, called the Office of Special Plans (OSP), was set up by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess CIA information and operated under the patronage of hardline conservatives in the top rungs of the administration, the Pentagon and at the White House, including Vice-President Dick Cheney.

The ideologically driven network functioned like a shadow government, much of it off the official payroll and beyond congressional oversight. But it proved powerful enough to prevail in a struggle with the State Department and the CIA by establishing a justification for war.

Full Story Here: www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html

White House Had Niger Forgeries 3 Months Before January SOTU Speech

Note: They even removed the 16 words on the Niger claims in the presidents october 2002 speech, so they knew in october of 2002 the claim was false. Yet they put it back in the SOTU speech in January of 2003.

7-26-03 -- Remember that Condi Rice said the white house did not know the Niger documents were forged until about a month ago.

Transcript from Wolf Blitzer Interview of Condi Rice:

RICE: Wolf, let me just start by saying, it is 16 words, and it has become an enormously overblown issue.

BLITZER: But 11 months earlier, you, the Bush administration, had sent Joe Wilson, a former U.S. ambassador to Niger, to find out whether it was true. He came back, reported to the CIA, reported to the State Department, it wasn't true, it was bogus. The whole issue was bogus. And supposedly, you never got word of his report.

RICE: Well, first of all, I didn't know Joe Wilson was going to Niger. And if you look at Director Tenet's statement, it says that counterproliferation experts on their own initiative sent Joe Wilson, so I don't know...

BLITZER: Who sent him?

RICE: Well, it was certainly not a level that had anything to do with the White House, and I do not believe at a level that had anything to do with the leadership of the CIA.

BLITZER: Supposedly, it came at the request of the vice president.

RICE: No, this is simply not true, and this is something that's been perpetuated that we simply have to straighten out.

The vice president did not ask that Joe Wilson go to Niger. The vice president did not know. I don't think he knew who Joe Wilson was, and he certainly didn't know that he was going.

The first that I heard of Joe Wilson mission was when I was doing a Sunday talk show and heard about it.

Full Transcript Here: www.oreilly-sucks.com/transcripts/wolfrice.htm

Note: Ms. Rice is now a proven liar, we now know the white house got copies of the forged documents 3 months before the Bush SOTU speech. We also know Cheney asked the CIA to send someone to Niger to investigate the uranium claims. We also know he came back and reported to the CIA that the documents were forged, we know this because it was taken out of the october speech.

We now know that Bush and the white house is lying their ass off, and the republicans in the senate blocked an independent investigation to cover for them.

It is time to start the impeachment.

Friday 18 July 2003

The State Department received copies of what would turn out to be forged documents suggesting that Iraq tried to purchase uranium oxide from Niger three months before the president's State of the Union address, administration officials said.

The documents, which officials said appeared to be of "dubious authenticity," were distributed to the CIA and other agencies within days. But the U.S. government waited four months to turn them over to United Nations weapons inspectors who had been demanding to see evidence of U.S. and British claims that Iraq's attempted purchase of uranium oxide violated U.N. resolutions and was among the reasons to go to war. State Department officials could not say yesterday why they did not turn over the documents when the inspectors asked for them in December.

The administration, facing increased criticism over the claims it made about Iraq's attempts to buy uranium, had said until now that it did not have the documents before the State of the Union speech.

Full Story Here: www.truthout.org/docs_03/071903A.shtml