Guest views are now limited to 12 pages. If you get an "Error" message, just sign in! If you need to create an account, click here.

Jump to content

Slaydadea

Members
  • Posts

    1,316
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Slaydadea

  1. Dr Musa A Keilani: The facts that fabricatedFebruary 19, 2011print_icon.jpg Print send2friend_icon.jpg Send to FriendIt is ludicrous to see former US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld trying to promote his memoirs, Known and Unknown, as an accurate account of what was going on behind the scene during the era of George W Bush’s presidency, particularly in regard to the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

    The contents of his book and the answers he provided during interviews promoting the work are a rerun of the lies the Bush administration told the Americans at large and the rest of the world to sell the Iraq war.

    Now the world is fully aware of the deception that the Bush administration resorted to in order to justify the invasion of Iraq, starting with linking Saddam Hussein with Osama Bin Laden, alleging that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he posed a threat to everyone on the face of this earth and contenting that it was the duty of the world’s sole superpower to put an end to Saddam’s autocratic rule and democratise Iraq.

    The Bush administration had no hesitation to fabricate and doctor intelligence reports to support its allegations against Iraq. Many in this part of the world could clearly see through those despicable manoeuvrings, but their voices were no match to the hype created by the US corporate media.

    And now Rumsfeld is out on a venture to promote his book, which, in itself, does not seem have much in the department of credibility when seen against the backdrop of other factors that were at play in the run-up to the Iraq war.

    For one thing, Rumsfeld’s declarations about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were very resounding as if he had no doubts whatsoever that Saddam had such weapons and would not hesitate to employ them against US interests.

    In January 2003, Rumsfeld said: “We know where (Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction) are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.”

    And how does he now explain such an affirmative statement that was later proved to be totally unfounded?

    It is easy. As far as Rumsfeld is concerned, such lies are minor deviations and oversight. It is laughable that he says that he should have used the term “suspected” weapons of mass destruction. Well, what was the suspicion when he could pinpoint the locations where the weapons of mass destruction were stored?

    Every charge he made involving Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction sounded as if it were an established fact.

    For purposes of record, it has to be stated that the US-led invasion of Iraq was planned years ago and the Sept.11 attack provided a justification for the action.

    We cannot but laugh out loud when Rumsfeld refuses to accept any responsibility for deception that served to promote the war against Iraq. Indeed, he acknowledges that “the intelligence (about weapons of mass destruction) was certainly wrong,” but he fails to acknowledge that some of his deputies, led by Douglas Faith, were involved in fabricating intelligence reports that damned Iraq and trashed genuine reports which cast doubt whether Saddam had any WMD at all.

    As to Iraq’s alleged links with the Sept.11 attacks, Rumsfeld borrowed generously from Faith’s artificial intelligence and claimed, in September 2002, that Mohammed Atta, the purported leader of the suicide hijackings, had met an Iraqi intelligence agent in mid-2001. Rumsfeld declared that there was no doubt whatsoever about this finding. However, he could not subsequently explain how Atta could have met anyone in Europe in June 2001 when he was actually living in the US at that time.

    Rumsfeld’s claim did not take into consideration a Defence Intelligence Agency finding in July 2002 that there was no evidence of any direct co-operation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda.

    Well, the tale of lies linked to the US-led war against Iraq is too long, and Rumsfeld was a party to the run-up to and execution of the deceptive war as anyone else in the Bush administration.

    The US violated every rule in the international code of conduct by invading Iraq and then engaged in gross violations of human rights, including summary killings of Iraqis and despicable actions of torture and humiliation of Iraqi detainees.

    The torture was not limited to Iraqis; every detainee around the world in the US-led “war against terror” was subjected to such treatment, either by Americans themselves or agents of host governments under the so-called “rendition” programme.

    In his capacity as defence secretary, Rumsfeld was a direct party to authorising such actions. He cannot expect himself to be exonerated by limping suggestions and assertions such as those contained in his memoirs.

    The book, Known and Unknown, is yet another attempt at confusing the issues surrounding the war and at establishing that the Bush administration acted in good faith, based on information that it believed was true when it led the invasion of Iraq.

    Well, as far as we know, the Bush administration knew well that the information was false (since it created it itself), and there is no ground for the argument of good faith.

    The US had wanted “regime change” in Iraq and set up an advance American military base there. But it failed to prepare the right ground for its goals in Iraq and its plans have gone awry.

    What we witness today in Iraq is a desperate effort by the US to maintain its military presence there by renewing the status of forces agreement that calls for the departure of all US forces from the country by the end of 2011.

    US President Barack Obama might want to have nothing to do with Iraq, but the establishment surrounding him has restricted his options.

    In the meantime, “memoirs” like that of Rumsfeld seek to prove how right the Bush administration was in invadin Iraq. It might work in some self-elusive circles in Washington, but it would not draw any water in the Middle East.

    Linked dropped out, sorry, here it is. I didn't write it just passing it along. This is the mentality we're dealing with. News in the ME. Feel free to move on.

    http://www.newsnow.co.uk/A/476848366?-1377

  2. Dr Musa A Keilani: The facts that fabricatedFebruary 19, 2011print_icon.jpg Print send2friend_icon.jpg Send to FriendIt is ludicrous to see former US secretary of defence Donald Rumsfeld trying to promote his memoirs, Known and Unknown, as an accurate account of what was going on behind the scene during the era of George W Bush’s presidency, particularly in regard to the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

    The contents of his book and the answers he provided during interviews promoting the work are a rerun of the lies the Bush administration told the Americans at large and the rest of the world to sell the Iraq war.

    Now the world is fully aware of the deception that the Bush administration resorted to in order to justify the invasion of Iraq, starting with linking Saddam Hussein with Osama Bin Laden, alleging that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and that he posed a threat to everyone on the face of this earth and contenting that it was the duty of the world’s sole superpower to put an end to Saddam’s autocratic rule and democratise Iraq.

    The Bush administration had no hesitation to fabricate and doctor intelligence reports to support its allegations against Iraq. Many in this part of the world could clearly see through those despicable manoeuvrings, but their voices were no match to the hype created by the US corporate media.

    And now Rumsfeld is out on a venture to promote his book, which, in itself, does not seem have much in the department of credibility when seen against the backdrop of other factors that were at play in the run-up to the Iraq war.

    For one thing, Rumsfeld’s declarations about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were very resounding as if he had no doubts whatsoever that Saddam had such weapons and would not hesitate to employ them against US interests.

    In January 2003, Rumsfeld said: “We know where (Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction) are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.”

    And how does he now explain such an affirmative statement that was later proved to be totally unfounded?

    It is easy. As far as Rumsfeld is concerned, such lies are minor deviations and oversight. It is laughable that he says that he should have used the term “suspected” weapons of mass destruction. Well, what was the suspicion when he could pinpoint the locations where the weapons of mass destruction were stored?

    Every charge he made involving Iraq’s non-existent weapons of mass destruction sounded as if it were an established fact.

    For purposes of record, it has to be stated that the US-led invasion of Iraq was planned years ago and the Sept.11 attack provided a justification for the action.

    We cannot but laugh out loud when Rumsfeld refuses to accept any responsibility for deception that served to promote the war against Iraq. Indeed, he acknowledges that “the intelligence (about weapons of mass destruction) was certainly wrong,” but he fails to acknowledge that some of his deputies, led by Douglas Faith, were involved in fabricating intelligence reports that damned Iraq and trashed genuine reports which cast doubt whether Saddam had any WMD at all.

    As to Iraq’s alleged links with the Sept.11 attacks, Rumsfeld borrowed generously from Faith’s artificial intelligence and claimed, in September 2002, that Mohammed Atta, the purported leader of the suicide hijackings, had met an Iraqi intelligence agent in mid-2001. Rumsfeld declared that there was no doubt whatsoever about this finding. However, he could not subsequently explain how Atta could have met anyone in Europe in June 2001 when he was actually living in the US at that time.

    Rumsfeld’s claim did not take into consideration a Defence Intelligence Agency finding in July 2002 that there was no evidence of any direct co-operation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda.

    Well, the tale of lies linked to the US-led war against Iraq is too long, and Rumsfeld was a party to the run-up to and execution of the deceptive war as anyone else in the Bush administration.

    The US violated every rule in the international code of conduct by invading Iraq and then engaged in gross violations of human rights, including summary killings of Iraqis and despicable actions of torture and humiliation of Iraqi detainees.

    The torture was not limited to Iraqis; every detainee around the world in the US-led “war against terror” was subjected to such treatment, either by Americans themselves or agents of host governments under the so-called “rendition” programme.

    In his capacity as defence secretary, Rumsfeld was a direct party to authorising such actions. He cannot expect himself to be exonerated by limping suggestions and assertions such as those contained in his memoirs.

    The book, Known and Unknown, is yet another attempt at confusing the issues surrounding the war and at establishing that the Bush administration acted in good faith, based on information that it believed was true when it led the invasion of Iraq.

    Well, as far as we know, the Bush administration knew well that the information was false (since it created it itself), and there is no ground for the argument of good faith.

    The US had wanted “regime change” in Iraq and set up an advance American military base there. But it failed to prepare the right ground for its goals in Iraq and its plans have gone awry.

    What we witness today in Iraq is a desperate effort by the US to maintain its military presence there by renewing the status of forces agreement that calls for the departure of all US forces from the country by the end of 2011.

    US President Barack Obama might want to have nothing to do with Iraq, but the establishment surrounding him has restricted his options.

    In the meantime, “memoirs” like that of Rumsfeld seek to prove how right the Bush administration was in invadin Iraq. It might work in some self-elusive circles in Washington, but it would not draw any water in the Middle East.

    • Upvote 6
    • Downvote 3
  3. OPITO Wins Iraqi Oil Training Contract

    Posted on 02 February 2011. Tags: jobs in Iraq, OPITO

    British training body OPITO has signed a landmark memorandum of understanding with the Iraq Ministry for Oil, Training and Development Directorate to help the war-torn country develop the

    skills and training necessary to enable exploitation of its hydrocarbon resources.

    With Iraq gearing up to produce 12 million barrels of oil per day, OPITO estimates they will require a skilled workforce of around 600,000.

    A unique, not-for-profit organisation, OPITO is wholly owned by the

    oil and gas industry and responsible for ensuring it has a safe, skilled and competent workforce. With operations in Aberdeen, Dubai and Kuala Lumpur, OPITO delivers standards, qualifications and workforce development frameworks used by employers in 30 countries.

    Under the terms of the agreement signed in Amman, OPITO will work with the Ministry to understand the skills needs and provide specialist guidance and support to help the country build a world-class learning infrastructure. This will ensure that the people of Iraq can obtain the skills, knowledge and qualifications needed to access jobs in the country’s oil and gas industry for now and in the long-term future.

    OPITO will also establish a fit-for-purpose workforce development framework for Iraq based on the global OPITO standards and qualifications. Initially the organisation will work on the development of four national oil training institutes in Baghdad, Tikrit, Kirkuk and Basrah.

    David Doig, OPITO group chief executive, said: “This is an exciting opportunity for OPITO and acknowledgement of the high regard in which our standards are held globally. But more importantly this is a major step forward for the people of Iraq, who if they are to successfully re-build their country must create a safe, sustainable and profitable oil and gas industry.

    • Upvote 1
  4. Kurdish Oil Production Reaches 80,000 bpd

    Posted on 18 February 2011.

    Crude production from oilfields in Iraqi Kurdistan has reached about 80,000 barrels per day, but only about 50,000 bpd are being exported, sources at Iraq’s North Oil Company said on Friday.

    “We have between 45,000 and 50,000 barrels per day being pumped from the Tawke oilfield to the export pipeline, while crude from Taq Taq is transported by tankers to Kirkuk and used for domestic needs only,” a senior NOC official told Reuters.

    Norwegian oil company DNO said on Thursday it had boosted exports from Tawke to a test level of 50,000 bpd.

    Reuters reports that an NOC engineer confirmed the production figures, saying crude from Tawke was being pumped to the Kirkuk-Ceyhan pipeline at an average of 50,000 bpd, while around 30,000 to 33,000 bpd from Taq Taq was being used for domestic refinery needs.

    Dow Jones’ source puts the export figure at 75,000 barrels per day [we believe they meant 'production' rather than export] with an expected average export for the month of 40,000 bpd.

    (Sources: Reuters, Dow Jones)

  5. Drake & Scull Eyeing Tenders in Iraq

    Posted on 18 February 2011. Tags: Drake & Scull, tenders

    Dubai contractor Drake & Scull International is eyeing project tenders in Iraq in the second half of 2011 as it looks to break into new markets and diversify its income.

    Drake, whose biggest market is Saudi Arabia, is also keeping a close eye on political unrest in Egypt, where it is bidding for $200-300m worth of projects, chief corporate affairs officer Zeina Tabari told Reuters in an interview.

    Drake, which specialises in mechanical, engineering and plumbing businesses (MEP), won a $126.6m contract in Egypt in January, and the project is on track, Tabari said.

    “The majority of our contracts this year will be from the GCC,” she said, adding: “We have a business development team in Iraq, but it is a new market for us and will take some time to start tendering. Probably in Q3 and Q4.”

    Gulf Arab companies see growing opportunities to invest in Iraq in sectors including energy, telecoms, finance and infrastructure, as the war-torn nation battles to recover from years of bloodshed.

    Drake has been rapidly expanding its operations outside Dubai, where house prices have plunged some 60 percent since their peaks in 2008 as a result of the financial crisis.

    (Source: Reuters)

  6. Arab League Summit in Baghdad Going Ahead

    Posted on 16 February 2011. Tags: Arab League, Arab League Summit

    Iraq will host its first Arab League Summit in two decades on March 29 despite ongoing unrest in the Middle East, a foreign ministry official said.

    The summit is seen as crucial for Iraq’s reintegration into the Arab world and comes at a critical time in the region following popular protests that have unseated Tunisia and Egypt’s presidents, reports Reuters.

    “March 29 is the date set for the Arab League Summit to be held in Baghdad,” Deputy Foreign Minister Labeed Abbawi told the agency.

    He said that he expected the summit to last for two days, although an agenda had not yet been agreed.

    Iraq’s main aim at the summit will be to reassure its neighbours. Many Sunni Arab-dominated governments view the rise of Iraq’s Shi’ite majority with suspicion and fear the growing influence of Shi’ite power Iran.

    A successful summit would help Iraq to reassert itself as a major Arab nation and could lead to reduced tacit support in some Arab countries for a weakened but still lethal insurgency.

    Arab League secretary-general, Amr Moussa, warned the region’s leaders in January to pay attention to economic and political problems, saying Arab citizens’ anger had reached an unprecedented level.

    The Arab world has been rattled by recent uprisings which started in Tunisia and spread to Egypt, emboldening activists throughout the region to express their anger over economic hardship and authoritarian leaders clinging to power.

    Widespread public protests in Tunisia toppled its president of 23 years, Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali, while Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak stepped down after 30 years in power on Friday following an 18-day revolt.

    For Iraq, the summit is also seen as a major test of the readiness of its army and police to defend the country as U.S. troops prepare to fully withdraw by the end of this year.

    (Source: Reuters)

  7. Hyundai Power Station Deal Signed

    Posted on 16 February 2011. Tags: Electricity, Hyundai, Quds

    The Iraqi Ministry of Electricity said on Tuesday it had signed a contract with Hyundai, of South Korea, for the construction of four new power generating stations at the al-Quds [al-Qudus] Gas Plant.

    Musaab Mudarris, the spokesman for the ministry, said the construction of the four new stations with a capacity of 125 megawatts (MW) each, 500 MW in total, is expected to get underway immediately. The project, valued at $219m [264 billion Iraqi dinars], is to be completed within 18 months.

    Turbines for the project have already been bought by the Iraqi government from General Electric (GE).

    The al-Quds plant, north of Baghdad province, currently produces 900 MW.

    Iraq suffers from electricity deficiency, despite the many contracts signed to improve the condition. The lack of basic services, including electricity, has led to public demonstrations recently.

    (Source: AKnews

  8. Nice job Heavy! A green 1 from me!

    Great......couldn't agree more. But I hope you aren't talking about people who want to dispute or question posters facts. Calling some one an idiot or moron is completely ouit of line. But calling some one out on their facts or unproven intel is not belittling them....it's debating or discussing with them. Am I on target here or am I out of line?

    I think you're dead on target! Remember Ron White in debate class? Yea, Yea, well F YOU! It got real quiet. "I thought I won"! That's not the sort of thing we need here. Thanks.

    • Upvote 1
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.