It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Leaked memo reveals Iraqi truth

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 20 2006 @ 03:34 PM
link   
A leaked memo dated June 6th 2006, signed by the U.S. Ambassador in Iraq, Zalmay Khalilzad paints a portrait of a disintergrating society in which the United States barely controls the perimeters of their own bases and the relible Iraqi forces that assist them are considered untrustworthy. A situition in which people lie about where they work (the green zone) and worry about what if any provisions would be made for them should the united States evacuate.
 



news.independent.co.uk
reveals plight of Iraqis
By Patrick Cockburn
Published: 20 June 2006

A leaked cable from the US embassy in Baghdad signed by the ambassador paints a grim picture of Iraq as a country disintegrating in which the real rulers are the militias, and the central government counts for nothing.

The cable, signed by the US ambassador Zalmay Khalilzad and sent to the State Department in Washington on 6 June, is wholly at odds with the optimistic account of developments given by President George Bush and Tony Blair in their recent visits to Iraq.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


While I guess this shouldn't surprise me by now, still I find myself appalled. The disconnect between how the Bush administration paints the situition in Iraq and the reality is so glaring that I am surprised that the press corp there, just doesn't come out and call Bush etal. what they are, a pack or amoral liars. As it stands now, our presence does nothing other than barely prop up a sock puppet government. It does not help anyone, muchless the Iraqi's, and it should be obvious by now that we aren't even preventing the disintergration into civil war. If there was any real hope that we could actually repair the country and do right by the people we chose to invade, I would say stay and do the right thing. But at this stage of the game, doing the right thing simply is not viable. All the Bush team is doing now is making more widows and widowers, parents without children and orphans, mangled bodies and mangled souls.

Related News Links:
www.truthout.org
www.commondreams.org

[edit on 20-6-2006 by UM_Gazz]




posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 06:46 AM
link   
AHH... The silence of the Bush/war supporters is deafening.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 06:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
AHH... The silence of the Bush/war supporters is deafening.


Many of the war supporters cant handel a little thing called reality. I guess there stance reflects that of there leaders. It just shows when the media cant be blamed many of the wars supporters dont have a leg to stand on.


We wont see any real improvement in Iraq untill the incomptant leaders who got us in this mess are out of office. Heres hoping the 2008 election will bring people to the Whitehouse who live in reality and hire/fire staff on the basis of performance. When I think about how badly the post war occupation of Iraq was bugled it makes my blood boil.


[edit on 22-6-2006 by xpert11]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:29 AM
link   
I can't say I disagree....just hope the democrats grow backbones before then and chose someone who can actually win, not Hillery for example.

Its depressing watching invertabrates try and stand up.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
I can't say I disagree....just hope the democrats grow backbones before then and chose someone who can actually win, not Hillery for example.

Its depressing watching invertabrates try and stand up.


You know Hilary will win the next election. She attended the Bildergerg meeting, as did David Cameron of the UK. He and the conservatives will win the next Uk election.

You heard it here first



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
AHH... The silence of the Bush/war supporters is deafening.



And I suppoes you will and do delight in the following quote from this thread's referenced article, hoping beyond all hope the US pulls out of Iraq, abandons the country to those who will force upon the populace this?

"As Islamic militancy increases, women find it increasingly dangerous not to wear a veil in Sunni and Shia neighbourhoods. One was warned not to drive a car. Others were told to cover their faces and to stop using mobile phones. Threats against women who do not accept this second class status have escalated in the last two months. It has also become dangerous for men to wear shorts or jeans in public or for children to play outside wearing shorts."

You and your anti-war crowd explain to me your understanding of the spread of Islamofacism?

Shall it be left to topple governments world wide?

Do you see it as a threat?

When the above referenced militancy establishes itself in your homeland will you be happy to live by it's dictates?

And you women of western culture who enjoy freedoms of expression, speech, dress, choice, what say you of the plight of women as described above?

Are you outspoken women prepared to enjoy "second class status"?

Are you willing to submit?



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:05 AM
link   
Until Ambassador Khalilzad steps up and confirms the legitimacy of the 'leaked' memo, I'll reserve any judgement.

No hint is given as to the source of the 'leak'. Was it a State Dept. employee? An Embassy employee?

The amount of propaganda, disinformation, and intentional 'leaks' flying around the world today, makes it virtually impossible to take a first report like this seriously until the players in question approach the podium and say, "Yes, I wrote that memo (or email, cable, telex, etc.).



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by smokenmirrors
You and your anti-war crowd explain to me your understanding of the spread of Islamofacism?

Shall it be left to topple governments world wide?

Do you see it as a threat?

When the above referenced militancy establishes itself in your homeland will you be happy to live by it's dictates?

And you women of western culture who enjoy freedoms of expression, speech, dress, choice, what say you of the plight of women as described above?

Are you outspoken women prepared to enjoy "second class status"?

Are you willing to submit?



What you seem to overlook is that it was the invasion of Iraq by the US/UK which is the root cause of this. Had Saddam not been toppled, then your "Islamofacism" would have no power vacuum to fill. Idiot short sightedness at it's best.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:09 AM
link   
The silence from the "pro-Bush" camp is deafening?

For the rest of "us," it's because arguing with you is a waste of time. This article is probably about as factual as the pro-Bush "leaks" posted by the Bushies.

It's an infowar.

And it's not like anyone will change grover's opinoin, or that grover will 'concede' anyone else's points.

Basically, it gets boring. ATS is less of a perspective-provider, and more of a mouthpiece for the mid-to-far left.

I don't argue politics here anymore. It's like arguing with your TV set. Nothing you say has any impact on the direction of debate.

.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   
It is terrible how inept our government has become.

IN 4 years FDR managed to beat back Japan and help allies win in Europe.

In 4 years GWBush went on vacation more than any other president, and cannot seem to find a 6 foot 2 diabetic islamic terrorist.


A record to be proud of



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by smokenmirrors
You and your anti-war crowd explain to me your understanding of the spread of Islamofacism?

Shall it be left to topple governments world wide?

Do you see it as a threat?

When the above referenced militancy establishes itself in your homeland will you be happy to live by it's dictates?

And you women of western culture who enjoy freedoms of expression, speech, dress, choice, what say you of the plight of women as described above?

Are you outspoken women prepared to enjoy "second class status"?

Are you willing to submit?



What you seem to overlook is that it was the invasion of Iraq by the US/UK which is the root cause of this. Had Saddam not been toppled, then your "Islamofacism" would have no power vacuum to fill. Idiot short sightedness at it's best.




What you seem to have done with your response is NOT answer one of my posted questions......




[edit on 22-6-2006 by smokenmirrors]



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by smokenmirrors

Originally posted by grover
AHH... The silence of the Bush/war supporters is deafening.



And I suppoes you will and do delight in the following quote from this thread's referenced article, hoping beyond all hope the US pulls out of Iraq, abandons the country to those who will force upon the populace this?

"As Islamic militancy increases, women find it increasingly dangerous not to wear a veil in Sunni and Shia neighbourhoods. One was warned not to drive a car. Others were told to cover their faces and to stop using mobile phones. Threats against women who do not accept this second class status have escalated in the last two months. It has also become dangerous for men to wear shorts or jeans in public or for children to play outside wearing shorts."

You and your anti-war crowd explain to me your understanding of the spread of Islamofacism?

Shall it be left to topple governments world wide?

Do you see it as a threat?

When the above referenced militancy establishes itself in your homeland will you be happy to live by it's dictates?

And you women of western culture who enjoy freedoms of expression, speech, dress, choice, what say you of the plight of women as described above?

Are you outspoken women prepared to enjoy "second class status"?

Are you willing to submit?



What arthors of simplistic sentiments fail to understand is that first off this is Bushes war, it is a war of choice, not necessity, not even by the standards of cold war necessity. It is driven by ego and greed, everything else is just rhetoric to justify its existance. Our men and women, God bless em, ARE DYING FOR NOTHING!!! Not weapons of mass destruction, not 9/11, not some neblious war on terrorism....NOTHING but a petty little man's (Bush) ego. Second of all...are you really so befuddled as to think that an Islamic/facaist state would overwhelm the west and take over? Oh come on now you have been listening to way too much mush loosebowels and talk radio. And finally When are you dittoheads gonna get it through your pea sized brains that opposition to Bushes splendid little war DOES NOT MEAN we support the terrorists...the with us or againist us rhetoric was just that, rhetoric. I love my country, but I love my planet more and I want to see all of us grow, develop and prosper, not just some corporate fat cats, which is all this damned misadventure is doing, fattening up the fat.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
For the rest of "us," it's because arguing with you is a waste of time. This article is probably about as factual as the pro-Bush "leaks" posted by the Bushies.

Agreed.

Had a supposed positive report been purported by a ‘leak’ the accusations naturally would have been about the suspicious timing surrounding the very recent ‘leak’ and today’s democratic party instigated senatorial debate concerning US pull-out (which has been defeated 86-13). Factual or not, the information reported concerning the alleged memo is not complete.

The “edited version of the memo” (as displayed by the cited links) brings some immediate questions to mind, primarily: Why not post the 'leaked' memo in its’ unedited entirety?

mg



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft


And it's not like anyone will change grover's opinoin, or that grover will 'concede' anyone else's points.

.


The exact same words could be used in conjuncture with Bush and war supporters with one little cavet...bush and war supporters are in the minority anymore and getting more minor everyday, and after we throw his enablers in congress out this fall, they will have to be put on the endangered species list.
and I for one won't even shed a crocadiles tear.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 11:47 AM
link   
I did post the entire article....one of the moderators edited it.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   
^^^^^^^^^^^^
I understand the original posted article is not shown in its entirety….


Originally posted by missed_gear
The “edited version of the memo” (as displayed by the cited links) brings some immediate questions to mind, primarily: Why not post the 'leaked' memo in its’ unedited entirety?


My reference was to this:


(This is an edited version of the memo)

A) from cited source
B) from supporting source




mg



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by dr_strangecraft
This article is probably about as factual as the pro-Bush "leaks" posted by the Bushies.

It's an infowar.



This it may be, but it doesn't mean that the facts in the alleged memo are not true. According to stratfor.com and juancole.com, who really know something about Iraq, all these facts are correct.


And it's not like anyone will change grover's opinoin, or that grover will 'concede' anyone else's points.


Grover and I had bitter arguments on the subject of illegal immigration. I believe he did a wrong thing when he hired illegals. Wrong on many levels. He's a fierce interlocutor at times.

However, in this particular case, you reluctance to argue with him is telling. You resign from the discussion because, I believe, you have nothing to say. And yes, the facts in the grover's post do provide a perspective on both Iraq and our sorry excuse of a President.


I don't argue politics here anymore. It's like arguing with your TV set. Nothing you say has any impact on the direction of debate.


Ouch. Maybe your arguments were shallow or simplistic, and were regarded as such by other participant.... . I just don't know.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by xpert11

Originally posted by grover
AHH... The silence of the Bush/war supporters is deafening.


Many of the war supporters cant handel a little thing called reality. I guess there stance reflects that of there leaders. It just shows when the media cant be blamed many of the wars supporters dont have a leg to stand on.


We wont see any real improvement in Iraq untill the incomptant leaders who got us in this mess are out of office. Heres hoping the 2008 election will bring people to the Whitehouse who live in reality and hire/fire staff on the basis of performance. When I think about how badly the post war occupation of Iraq was bugled it makes my blood boil.


[edit on 22-6-2006 by xpert11]


I'm slapping both of you in the back of the head right now. Hard.

how's that?

A "leaked memo". Whoa. How about ABC's recent sojourns into Iraq posted on their website over the last 3 weeks. I guess they're "pro-bush" though, right?

riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.




posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Silence from teh supporters? How about silence from the detractors?? This clearly shows that, if the US leaves, Iraq will descend into anarchy. The entire arguement for withdrawl is that Iraq is stable enough to suceed. This document argues against withdrawl.



posted on Jun, 22 2006 @ 12:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan
Silence from teh supporters? How about silence from the detractors??


Wait a second, I wasn't silent at all.


his clearly shows that, if the US leaves, Iraq will descend into anarchy. The entire arguement for withdrawl is that Iraq is stable enough to suceed. This document argues against withdrawl.


Come on. The damage is done. We simply can't afford to babysit this nation forever. Seriously. We shouldn't have gone there in the first place.

I would like to see liens against the members of congress who voted pro-war, so that they and their children are repaying the cost. All of Bush's posessions need to be confistated as restitution.




top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join