Go Back  British Expats > Usenet Groups > rec.travel.* > rec.travel.europe
Reload this Page >

Yellowcake And Yellow Journalism

Yellowcake And Yellow Journalism

Old Feb 8th 2007, 5:24 am
  #1  
Earl Evleth
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Yellowcake And Yellow Journalism

February 7, 2007


To see how liberal history is created, you need to tune into the nut-
cable stations and watch their coverage of the Scooter Libby trial. On
MSNBC they're covering the trial like it's the Normandy Invasion,
starring Elvis Presley, as told by Joseph Goebbels.

MSNBC's "reportage" consists of endless repetition of arbitrary
assertions, half-truths and thoroughly debunked canards. No one else
cares about the trial - except presumably Scooter Libby - so the
passionate left is allowed to invent a liberal fable without
correction.

Night after night, it is blithely asserted on "Hardball" that Wilson's
trip to Niger debunked the claim that Saddam Hussein had been seeking
enriched uranium from Niger.

As David Shuster reported last week: "Wilson goes and finds out that
the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Niger is not accurate."

There have been massive investigations into this particular claim of
"Ambassador" Joe Wilson, both here and in Britain. Nearly three years
ago, a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee concluded that this
was not merely untrue, it was the opposite of the truth: Wilson's
report actually bolstered the belief that Saddam was seeking uranium
from Niger.

"The panel found," as The Washington Post reported on July 10, "that
Wilson's report, rather than debunking intelligence about purported
uranium sales to Iraq, as he has said, bolstered the case for most
intelligence analysts." So you can see how a seasoned newsman like
David Shuster might come to the exact opposite conclusion and then
repeat this false conclusion on TV every night.

Wilson's unwritten "report" to a few CIA agents supported the
suspicion that Saddam was seeking enriched uranium from Niger because,
according to Wilson, the former prime minister of Niger told him that
in 1999 Saddam had sent a delegation to discuss "expanding commercial
relations" with Niger. The only thing Niger has to trade is
yellowcake. If Saddam was seeking to expand commercial relations with
Niger, we can be fairly certain he wasn't trying to buy designer
jeans, ready-to-assemble furniture or commemorative plates. He was
seeking enriched uranium.

But Wilson simply accepted the assurances of the former prime minister
of Niger that selling yellowcake to Saddam was the farthest thing from
his mind. I give you my word as an African head of state.

Chris Matthews also repeatedly says that Bush's famous "16 words" in
his 2003 State of the Union address - which liberals say was a LIE! a
LIE! a despicable LIE! - consisted of the claim that British
intelligence said there was a "deal" for Saddam Hussein to buy
enriched uranium from Niger.

Matthews huffily wonders aloud why Wilson's incorrect report didn't
get into Bush's State of the Union address "rather than the
president's claim of British intelligence that said there was a deal
to buy uranium, which of course became one of the underpinnings of
this administration's argument that we had to go to war with Iraq."

Considering how hysterical liberals were about Bush's "16 words,"
you'd think they'd have a vague recollection of what those words were
and that they did not include the word "deal." What Bush said was:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently
sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Even if the British had been wrong, what Bush said was factually
correct: In 2003, the British government believed that Saddam sought
yellowcake from Niger. (Not "MSNBC factual," mind you. I mean "real
factual.")

But in fact, the British were right and Wilson was wrong. By now,
everyone believes Saddam was seeking yellowcake from Niger - the CIA,
the bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee, Lord Butler's report in
Britain, even the French believe it.

But at MSNBC, it's not even an open question: That network alone has
determined that Saddam Hussein was not trying to acquire enriched
uranium from Niger. Actually one other person may still agree with
MSNBC: a discredited, washed-up State Department hack who used his CIA
flunky wife's petty influence to scrape up pity assignments. But even
he won't say it on TV anymore.

Shuster excitedly reported: "We've already gotten testimony that, in
fact, that Joe Wilson's trip to Niger was based on forgeries that were
so obvious that they were forgeries that officials said it would have
only taken a few days for anybody to realize they were forgeries."

This is so wrong it's not even wrong. It's not 180 degrees off the
truth - it's more like 3 times 8, carry the 2, 540 degrees from the
truth. Shuster has twisted Wilson's original lie into some
Frankenstein monster lie you'd need Ross Perot with a handful of flow
charts to map out in full.

During Wilson's massive media tour, he began telling reporters that he
knew Saddam was not seeking yellowcake from Niger because the
documents allegedly proving a deal were obvious forgeries.

Again, thanks to endless investigations, we now know that Wilson was
lying: He never saw the forged documents. (Not only that, but Bush's
statement was not based on the forged documents because no one ever
believed them.)

The bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report notes that Wilson
was asked how he "could have come to the conclusion that the 'dates
were wrong and the names were wrong' when he had never seen the CIA
reports and had no knowledge of what names and dates were in the
reports." Indeed, the United States didn't even receive the "obviously
forged" documents until eight months after Wilson's trip to Niger!

Wilson admitted to the committee that he had "misspoken" to reporters
about having seen the forged documents. Similarly, Cain "misspoke"
when God inquired as to the whereabouts of his dead brother, Abel.

But on "Hardball," the forged documents that no one in the U.S.
government saw until eight months after Wilson's trip now form the
very impetus for the trip. A perfectly plausible theory, provided you
have a working time machine at your disposal.

If you wonder how it came to be generally acknowledged "fact,"
accepted by all men of good will, that Joe McCarthy was a monster,
that Alger Hiss was innocent, that mankind is causing global warming
and that we're losing the war in Iraq, try watching the rewriting of
history nightly on MSNBC. Don't forget to bring your time machine.
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.