GazeboflossUK

^ yes, it's that stupid, I know. AND it's not a case of Left Vs Right.......it's Right Vs Wrong....Truth Vs Lies.....ok I've never claimed to be far Left Wing and I'm not - it's just a way for the people who don't to hear the truth to discredit the movement.....calling the truth seekers 'far left' is supposed to make us appear less credible. It's ridiculous.

Right on.

Yeah, I read that earlier. The Wheel is turning. It's time to really learn about this and fast - or get ready to feel very disillusioned with the world. I only post about this because I think that it's the most important thing in our lives to not let 'them' get away with this and anything afterwards. It's getting to the point where people need to get rid of the word "theory" and start to see that it really isn't a case of guessing...it's that clear there's a huge cover-up Believe it or don't believe it.....it's coming out.

Oh dear, He's a Evil man but it's not there.....and we were told it was.

"This Harris Poll® was conducted by telephone within the United States between July 5 and 11, 2006 among 1,020 adults (aged 18 and over). Figures for age, sex, race/ethnicity, education, region, number of adults in the household, number of phone lines in the household were weighted where necessary to bring them into line with their actual proportions in the population." Poll List http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PollYear=2006

Yeah, he was a currupt, mass murdering bastard and he enjoyed it. But when Colin Powel did his famous presentation on Saddams Weapons of MAss Destruction - it's looks certain that they weren't even there then. However, as you say, he had the scientists that had worked for him in the past.....but even the Bush Administration has just about admitted that they weren't there..... I too wouldn't be suprised if someone like Saddam had such weapons - but it's just he didn't.

Yes.

Ermm.....what? To shift all the stuff that they were said to have had would have been SO difficult. The inspectors even said that they don't think that anything was there for years and years....

Ahh, it's that simple.

Israeli pilots 'deliberately miss' targets Fliers admit aborting raids on civilian targets as concern grows over the reliability of intelligence Inigo Gilmore at Hatzor Air Base, Israel Sunday August 6, 2006 http://observer.guardian.co.uk/world/story/0,,1838437,00.html At least two Israeli fighter pilots have deliberately missed civilian targets in Lebanon as disquiet grows in the military about flawed intelligence, The Observer has learnt. Sources say the pilots were worried that targets had been wrongly identified as Hizbollah facilities. Voices expressing concern over the armed forces' failures are getting louder. One Israeli cabinet minister said last week: 'We gave the army so much money. Why are we getting these results?' Last week saw Hizbollah's guerrilla force, dismissed by senior Israeli military officials as 'ragtag', inflict further casualties on one of the world's most powerful armies in southern Lebanon. At least 12 elite troops, the equivalent of Britain's SAS, have already been killed, and by yesterday afternoon Israel's military death toll had climbed to 45. As the bodies pile up, so the Israeli media has begun to turn, accusing the military of lacking the proper equipment, training and intelligence to fight a guerrilla war in Lebanon. Israel's Defence Minister, Amir Peretz, on a tour of the front lines, was confronted by troubled reserve soldiers who told him they lacked proper equipment and training. Israel's chief of staff, Major-General Dan Halutz, had vowed to wipe out Hizbollah's missile threat within 10 days. These claims are now being mocked as rockets rain down on Israel's north with ever greater intensity, despite an intense and highly destructive air bombardment. As one well-connected Israeli expert put it: 'If we have such good information in Lebanon, how come we still don't know the hideout of missiles and launchers?... If we don't know the location of their weapons, why should we know which house is a Hizbollah house?' As international outrage over civilian deaths grows, the spotlight is increasingly turning on Israeli air operations. The Observer has learnt that one senior commander who has been involved in the air attacks in Lebanon has already raised concerns that some of the air force's actions might be considered 'war crimes'. Yonatan Shapiro, a former Blackhawk helicopter pilot dismissed from reserve duty after signing a 'refusenik' letter in 2004, said he had spoken with Israeli F-16 pilots in recent days and learnt that some had aborted missions because of concerns about the reliability of intelligence information. According to Shapiro, some pilots justified aborting missions out of 'common sense' and in the context of the Israeli Defence Force's moral code of conduct, which says every effort should be made to avoiding harming civilians. Shapiro said: 'Some pilots told me they have shot at the side of targets because they're afraid people will be there, and they don't trust any more those who give them the coordinates and targets.' He added: 'One pilot told me he was asked to hit a house on a hill, which was supposed to be a place from where Hizbollah was launching Katyusha missiles. But he was afraid civilians were in the house, so he shot next to the house ... 'Pilots are always being told they will be judged on results, but if the results are hundreds of dead civilians while Hizbollah is still able to fire all these rockets, then something is very wrong.' So far none of the pilots has publicly refused to fly missions but some are wobbling, according to Shapiro. He said: 'Their target could be a house firing a cannon at Israel and it could be a house full of children, so it's a real dilemma; it's not black and white. But ... I'm calling on them to refuse, in order save our country from self-destruction.' Meron Rappoport, a former editor at the Israeli daily Haaretz and military analyst, criticised the air force's methods for selecting targets: 'The impression is that information is sometimes lacking. One squadron leader admitted the evidence used to determine attacks on cars is sometimes circumstantial - meaning that if people are in an area after Israeli forces warned them to leave, the assumption is that those left behind must be linked to Hizbollah ... This is problematic, as aid agencies have said many people did not leave ... because they could not, or it was unsafe to travel on the roads thanks to Israel's aerial bombardment.' These revelations raise further serious questions about the airstrike in Qana last Sunday that left dozens dead, which continues to arouse international outrage. From the outset, the Israeli military's version of events has been shrouded in ambiguity, with the army releasing a video it claims shows Katyusha rockets being fired from Qana, even though the video was dated two days earlier, and claiming that more than 150 rockets had been fired from the location. Some IDF officials have continued to refer vaguely to Katyushas being launched 'near houses' in the village and to non-specific 'terrorist activity' inside the targeted building. In a statement on Thursday, the IDF said it the air force did not know there were civilians in what they believed was an empty building, yet paradoxically blamed Hizbollah for using those killed as 'human shields'. Human rights groups have attacked the findings as illogical. Amnesty International described the investigation as a 'whitewash', saying Israeli intelligence must have been aware of the civilians'. One Israeli commander from a different squadron called the Qana bombing a 'mistake' and was unable to explain the apparent contradiction in the IDF's position, although he insisted there would have been no deliberate targeting of civilians. He said he had seen the video of the attack, and admitted: 'Generally they [Hizbollah] are using human shields ... That specific building - I don't know the reason it was chosen as a target.'

Half of U.S. Still Believes Iraq Had WMD Fox News Asks "ARE SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WMDS NOW IN HEZBOLLAH'S HANDS?" CHARLES J. HANLEY / AP | August 6 2006 Do you believe in Iraqi "WMD"? Did Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003? Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in Iraq. People tend to become "independent of reality" in these circumstances, says opinion analyst Steven Kull. The reality in this case is that after a 16-month, $900-million-plus investigation, the U.S. weapons hunters known as the Iraq Survey Group declared that Iraq had dismantled its chemical, biological and nuclear arms programs in 1991 under U.N. oversight. That finding in 2004 reaffirmed the work of U.N. inspectors who in 2002-03 found no trace of banned arsenals in Iraq. Despite this, a Harris Poll released July 21 found that a full 50 percent of U.S. respondents -- up from 36 percent last year -- said they believe Iraq did have the forbidden arms when U.S. troops invaded in March 2003, an attack whose stated purpose was elimination of supposed WMD. Other polls also have found an enduring American faith in the WMD story. "I'm flabbergasted," said Michael Massing, a media critic whose writings dissected the largely unquestioning U.S. news reporting on the Bush administration's shaky WMD claims in 2002-03. "This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence," Massing said. Timing may explain some of the poll result. Two weeks before the survey, two Republican lawmakers, Pennsylvania's Sen. Rick Santorum and Michigan's Rep. Peter Hoekstra, released an intelligence report in Washington saying 500 chemical munitions had been collected in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. "I think the Harris Poll was measuring people's surprise at hearing this after being told for so long there were no WMD in the country," said Hoekstra spokesman Jamal Ware. But the Pentagon and outside experts stressed that these abandoned shells, many found in ones and twos, were 15 years old or more, their chemical contents were degraded, and they were unusable as artillery ordnance. Since the 1990s, such "orphan" munitions, from among 160,000 made by Iraq and destroyed, have turned up on old battlefields and elsewhere in Iraq, ex-inspectors say. In other words, this was no surprise. "These are not stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction," said Scott Ritter, the ex-Marine who was a U.N. inspector in the 1990s. "They weren't deliberately withheld from inspectors by the Iraqis." Conservative commentator Deroy Murdock, who trumpeted Hoekstra's announcement in his syndicated column, complained in an interview that the press "didn't give the story the play it deserved." But in some quarters it was headlined. "Our top story tonight, the nation abuzz today ..." was how Fox News led its report on the old, stray shells. Talk-radio hosts and their callers seized on it. Feedback to blogs grew intense. "Americans are waking up from a distorted reality," read one posting. Other claims about supposed WMD had preceded this, especially speculation since 2003 that Iraq had secretly shipped WMD abroad. A former Iraqi general's book -- at best uncorroborated hearsay -- claimed "56 flights" by jetliners had borne such material to Syria. But Kull, Massing and others see an influence on opinion that's more sustained than the odd headline. "I think the Santorum-Hoekstra thing is the latest 'factoid,' but the basic dynamic is the insistent repetition by the Bush administration of the original argument," said John Prados, author of the 2004 book "Hoodwinked: The Documents That Reveal How Bush Sold Us a War." Administration statements still describe Saddam's Iraq as a threat. Despite the official findings, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice has allowed only that "perhaps" WMD weren't in Iraq. And Bush himself, since 2003, has repeatedly insisted on one plainly false point: that Saddam rebuffed the U.N. inspectors in 2002, that "he wouldn't let them in," as he said in 2003, and "he chose to deny inspectors," as he said this March. The facts are that Iraq -- after a four-year hiatus in cooperating with inspections -- acceded to the U.N. Security Council's demand and allowed scores of experts to conduct more than 700 inspections of potential weapons sites from Nov. 27, 2002, to March 16, 2003. The inspectors said they could wrap up their work within months. Instead, the U.S. invasion aborted that work. As recently as May 27, Bush told West Point graduates, "When the United Nations Security Council gave him one final chance to disclose and disarm, or face serious consequences, he refused to take that final opportunity." "Which isn't true," observed Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a scholar of presidential rhetoric at the University of Pennsylvania. But "it doesn't surprise me when presidents reconstruct reality to make their policies defensible." This president may even have convinced himself it's true, she said. Americans have heard it. A poll by Kull's WorldPublicOpinion.org found that seven in 10 Americans perceive the administration as still saying Iraq had a WMD program. Combine that rhetoric with simplistic headlines about WMD "finds," and people "assume the issue is still in play," Kull said. "For some it almost becomes independent of reality and becomes very partisan." The WMD believers are heavily Republican, polls show. Beyond partisanship, however, people may also feel a need to believe in WMD, the analysts say. "As perception grows of worsening conditions in Iraq, it may be that Americans are just hoping for more of a solid basis for being in Iraq to begin with," said the Harris Poll's David Krane. Charles Duelfer, the lead U.S. inspector who announced the negative WMD findings two years ago, has watched uncertainly as TV sound bites, bloggers and politicians try to chip away at "the best factual account," his group's densely detailed, 1,000-page final report. "It is easy to see what is accepted as truth rapidly morph from one representation to another," he said in an e-mail. "It would be a shame if one effect of the power of the Internet was to undermine any commonly agreed set of facts." The creative "morphing" goes on. As Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerrillas battled in Lebanon on July 21, a Fox News segment suggested, with no evidence, yet another destination for the supposed doomsday arms. "ARE SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WMDS NOW IN HEZBOLLAH'S HANDS?" asked the headline, lingering for long minutes on TV screens in a million American homes.

Hmmm, I'm not a fan of that video for Starlight....the Knights Of Cydonia video is very good though.

Yeah, well done to him. It's the only race I've missed all season and Jenson goes and wins his first race....typical. Guess I'll be watching the ITV highlights later then.

Sorry...you're right. I'm wrong. I'd read this story on Teletext (lol) as it was announced and it had failed to mention that detail in the draft of the story.

Reuters. Yep. What about all those here who say that "would rather trust Reuters on this topic"??? I said it before, Reuters is full of sheer spin and this one is so obvious it's laughable.....

I really can't believe you 'don't think/won't see' that the Government covered up the facts.......it's not even a very good cover-up....it's a second rate attempt.

:) Good use of text though. Exactly.......War? That's just the kind of mindless horse shit that comes out of the neo-cons mouths and it's getting us nowhere. Being told to "understand the situation" from someone who knows very little and who also avocates war as the only option is utterly laughable. I was on the streets of London today, along with around 100,000 others, on a protest march to put pressure on our Government to back an unconditional ceasefire. It was amazing to see the amount of Isreali's and Lebonese folk out there.....all wanting the same outcome.

It was the Lebonese Police, yes. But guess people can say the same about the other side....that the Israeli officials could be lying about where the soldiers were actually taken from....... I know it's a tough one to see what exactly went on there.

The Police said that the two soldiers were captured as they "infiltrated" into the town of Aitaa al-Chaab inside the Lebanese border.

Well, let me know what you think of it ^

What???....... Where do you get your news from then....I get mine from more than one source.....and not just from Fox News. Look at all the articles I posted links to! And there's even more than this actually. The Associated press reported this, The AFP reported this, the Hindustan Times reported this, the Bahrain News Agency reported this, The Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported this, The Asia Times reported this, voltairenet reported this. In fact every foreign media outlet reported this, yet the US media reports that the exact opposite happened. What do you need? A statement from Olmert saying "yes, we went into Lebanon before this started and our soldiers were captured there"....?? Coz I tell you, that just aint going to happen.

Yeah, this film looks Bad, very bad. And as anniep_93 said....it won't show the true events that were covered up. Shame Oliver Stone didn't have the balls to expose the lies this time.

Listen here Israel illegally sent troops over the Lebanese border into the South of the country and then claimed the captured invaders were "kidnap victims" in Isreal and launched their attacks. Reports about this kidnapping were actually in the news before the story became twisted by the Isreali Government and now seemingly the US/UK and all the media.....crazy. The Associated press reported this, The AFP reported this, the Hindustan Times reported this, the Bahrain News Agency reported this, The Deutsche Presse-Agentur reported this, The Asia Times reported this, voltairenet reported this. In fact every foreign media outlet reported this, yet the US media reports that the exact opposite happened. It has also now been revealed that Israeli spy networks, long in operation in Lebanon, were on alert, scoping out targets to be destroyed four days before the two Israeli soldiers were captured in Lebanon.