Re: [Phys-l] scientists are wimps

[Bernard Cleyet <bernardcleyet@redshift.com>]

On 2012, Apr 14, , at 18:39, Ze'ev Wurman wrote:

> instead of maligning Rumsfeld for what every western intelligence 
> service believed at the time, I would find the humor easier to notice.


Ze'ev!


It's rather hard to believe that the services believed that when ignorant me knew otherwise.


1. at least one case of sexing up the intelligence  not iron clad, but look at the expected biases of those concerned.


The Butler Enquiry
A later official enquiry into the government's use of intelligence, conducted by the former head of the civil service Lord Butler of Brockwell, found that "more weight was placed on the intelligence than it would bear", that the dossier "put a strain on the Joint Intelligence Committee in seeking to maintain their normal standards of neutral and objective assessment", and that the judgments in the dossier went to the "outer limits … of the intelligence available."
On the 45-minute claim, Butler endorsed the concerns of the Defence Intelligence Staff and said they should have been heeded. The 45-minute claim should not have been included in the form it took, and there were "suspicions that it had been included because of its eye-catching character". He did not, however, conclude as Gilligan had originally claimed that "the government probably knew it was wrong."
It also emerged that some of the intelligence underpinning the dossier, based on reporting from a new and untested source, had been withdrawn by MI6 as unreliable. Lord Butler of Brockwell revealed that much of the remainder of the intelligence was described by MI6 as "patchy" and "fragmentary", contrary to the characterisation of it by the Prime Minister as "detailed, authoritative and compelling". However, Lord Butler of Brockwell cleared both the Prime Minister and the chairman of the JIC, John Scarlett, of bad faith or dishonesty.
[edit]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Gilligan

2.   The wilson -- Plame affaire



The NIE contains no references to Valerie Plame or her CIA status, but the Special Counsel has suggested that White House actions were part of "a plan to discredit, punish or seek revenge against Mr. Wilson."[40] President Bush had previously indicated that he would fire whoever had outed Plame.[38]
A court filing by Libby's defense team argued that Plame was not foremost in the minds of administration officials as they sought to rebut charges – made by her husband – that the White House manipulated intelligence to make a case for invasion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Valerie_Plame




IIRC, I knew both the claim that Iraq had sought yellow cake and the Al tubes were for centrifuges were false before the commencement of the war.



3 IEAE reports --  Here's an example of one that confirms the above Wilson contention.  [not in quote, in the report --use the URL]

After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq. We intend to continue our inspection activities, making use of all the additional rights granted to us by resolution 1441 and all additional tools that might be available to us, including reconnaissance platforms and all relevant technologies. We also hope to continue to receive from States actionable information relevant to our mandate. I should note that, in the past three weeks, possibly as a result of ever-increasing pressure by the international community, Iraq has been forthcoming in its co-operation, particularly with regard to the conduct of private interviews and in making available evidence that could contribute to the resolution of matters of IAEA concern. I do hope that Iraq will continue to expand the scope and accelerate the pace of its co-operation.


http://www.iaea.org/newscenter/statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml


4  Scott Ritter:


There's no doubt Iraq hasn't fully complied with its disarmament obligations as set forth by the Security Council in its resolution. But on the other hand, since 1998 Iraq has been fundamentally disarmed: 90-95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capacity has been verifiably eliminated ... We have to remember that this missing 5-10% doesn't necessarily constitute a threat ... It constitutes bits and pieces of a weapons program which in its totality doesn't amount to much, but which is still prohibited ... We can't give Iraq a clean bill of health, therefore we can't close the book on their weapons of mass destruction. But simultaneously, we can't reasonably talk about Iraqi non-compliance as representing a de-facto retention of a prohibited capacity worthy of war. (page 28)
We eliminated the nuclear program, and for Iraq to have reconstituted it would require undertaking activities that would have been eminently detectable by intelligence services. (page 32)
If Iraq were producing [chemical] weapons today, we'd have proof, pure and simple. (page 37)
[A]s of December 1998 we had no evidence Iraq had retained biological weapons, nor that they were working on any. In fact, we had a lot of evidence to suggest Iraq was in compliance. (page 46)[11]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter


5 Finally:

A weapons inspector presented a colloquium (at UCSC Physics) on his team's work finding hidden (buried in the desert sand) calutrons.  That they found them is an indication of the thoroughness of their work.  I left w/ the impression that the Iraqi WMD programme had been completely destroyed.


Conclusion:   No intelligence service believed Saddam had an ongoing WMD programme in 2003-- instead their lying was to justify his illegal overthrow.



bc thinks either Ze'ev is either joking or duped.








_______________________________________________
Forum for Physics Educators
Phys-l@carnot.physics.buffalo.edu
https://carnot.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l