Skip to main content

Sat Jun 25, 2005 at 12:34 PM PDT

The War of the Chickenhawks

by dr z

Dear young chickenhawks,

You, as a supporter of the war in Iraq, ask why you should feel the need to become a soldier and support the war on the frontlines when the army service is voluntary.

In any unavoidable war, you would be right. This war, however, is different. It was not necessary. It was not needed. It was not unavoidable.

As the Downing Street Memo minutes and other evidence continue to unravel the lies of this administration, it is becoming more and more obvious that the Iraq war was elective and avoidable.

This war was optional. It was voluntary.

And there it is - because you support a voluntary war, you HAVE to go fight it yourself. Now.

You can no longer hide behind the voluntary nature of the army. This voluntary army was meant to only fight wars that are absolutely necessary. Get it?

So, guess what, chickenhawks. It is time.

You can volunteer or not for a war that absolutely has to be fought.

But you HAVE TO FIGHT in your voluntary war.


Sat Feb 12, 2005 at 05:47 AM PST

Roses for Boxer!! REMEMBER?

by dr z

Roses for Barbara Boxer - deadline is tomorrow/today!
Please visit this diary by hyperbolic pants explosion for the details on how to do it. The diary didn't get much attention earlier, so please recommend it to push it into the Fabulous 8.
Continue Reading

Wed Oct 20, 2004 at 05:03 PM PDT

"Stolen honor" - TRANSCRIPT

by dr z

Please note: this is a rush transcript. I would edit the diary and fill in the few words I missed and/or misheard as time permits. As it stands right now, though, I think it is substantially accurate. Expect only very minor updates, if any.


SHERWOOD: In other wars, captured Americans, subjected to the hell of an enemy prison, were considered heroes. In other wars, they were not abandoned. In Vietnam, they were betrayed.

    FILM TITLE ("Stolen Honor")

[more after the fold]

Continue Reading

Wed Oct 20, 2004 at 03:41 PM PDT

I have the TRANSCRIPT to "Stolen Honour"

by dr z

It's lies, smears, and more lies. If anyone thinks that this thing is somehow balanced, think again.

They are going for the jigular with this - it ranges  from "traitor" and goes further from there.

Please let me know if you want the transcript posted here. I think people need to debunk it NOW, and also get worked up BEFORE it airs so that the efforts regarding Sinclair continue and get stronger.

Shame, shame on Sherwood and the POWs who participated in this. Shame.

Update [2004-10-20 20:42:39 by dr z]: Transcript is posted here.

Please let me know what you think about my article/diary named Fitting the pieces: the bogus Iraq-Niger uranium link

My conclusion is that all known intelligence reports appear to be traced back to 4 separate pieces of intelligence plus the forged documents. All of these disintegrate upon close inspection and do not point to any Iraq-Niger uranium link.

I foolishly posted it in the dead of night (1:30am EDT last night) and it also got pushed out of the diary stream by early morning. I spent a non-negligible amount of time on it, so I will take the risk of incurring someone's wrath for this shameless attempt at correcting my bad timing.

You can rate the original diary at the link above. Thanks!

This is an examination of the puzzle pieces of the Iraq-Niger uranium story.

My conclusion is that all known intelligence reports appear to be traced back to 4 separate pieces of intelligence plus the forged documents. All of these disintegrate upon close inspection and do not point to any Iraq-Niger uranium link.

The "several" sources the British claim to have appear to be only two, one of which appears linked to the forged documents and thus debunked already. The second is likely to be one of the four discussed and debunked in what follows.

Update [2004-7-21 14:59:15 by dr z]: The section on intel piece (1) was updated adding a paragraph about IAEA's own investigation of the Feb 1999 visit by al-Zahawie; their conclusion: no uranium link. Also updated was the section on intel piece (2) to clarify Niger PM's statements. There have been other minor updates since this was first posted.

Continue Reading

Mon Jul 19, 2004 at 04:58 PM PDT

Why Iraq wouldn't have needed uranium

by dr z

There is a lot of ruckus these days about Iraq and Niger and uranium. What is not mentioned often, if at all, is that such a deal would have been quite improbable to begin with since Iraq would really not have needed to import uranium. Iraq already had some 550 metric tons of it in the country. This was more than enough for several nuclear devices, if Iraq wanted to produce them or had the means to do it.

Here is how this is referenced, ready for use in an argument (in the extended entry):

Continue Reading
You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.


Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site