SwiftVets.com

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[sparky]

I'm sorry, NNN, but its unproductive and pointless to bring Arabs into the OK City bombings unless you're just out to smear them as a people. They had nothing to do with that atrocity and those who investigated on those grounds almost let McVeigh get away.

Why bring it up?

From Mirriam Webster:
Evidence:
An outward sign : INDICATION b : something that furnishes proof : TESTIMONY; specifically : something legally submitted to a tribunal to ascertain the truth of a matter

The primary definitions, the first two, indicate "proof" of some kind. The third includes the caveat that it help establish truth. Suggesting that Arabs were behind the blast did the opposite: it detracted from the establishment of truth.
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=evidence

[carpro]

[sparky]

Gotcha!

[Greenhat]

[sparky]

I offered more than that. I can't believe you never read the conservative William Saffire's reporting on IraqGate.

Anyway, here's that link again for you for the Columbia Journalism Review:
http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/93/2/iraqgate.asp

And here's an article that appeared in a very reputable newspaper:

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution (Atlanta, GA), April 20, 2003 pA6

WAR IN THE GULF: OVERSEAS FINANCE: ATLANTA BRANCH BANK LOANED SADDAM BILLIONS. (News) Cameron Mcwhirter.


Byline: CAMERON MCWHIRTER; Staff

Saddam Hussein's war machine was bolstered by a small branch bank in Atlanta that loaned him billions of dollars for supplies and weapons before the first Persian Gulf War.

In 1989, the Atlanta branch of the Italian government bank Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, or BNL, was raided by federal officers as part of an investigation of alleged kickbacks and money laundering. The investigation focused on allegations of undeclared loans to Iraqi companies.

The day after the Persian Gulf War ended in 1991, the U.S. Justice Department indicted the BNL Atlanta branch manager, Christopher Drogoul, on charges of laundering money illegally to help supply and arm Iraq.

Peter Mantius, a former reporter at The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, covered the case and eventually wrote a book about the scandal called "Shell Game: A True Story of Banking, Spies, Lies, Politics --- and the Arming of Saddam Hussein."

In the book, Mantius cited documents showing the bank made available $4.5 billion in credits to finance Iraq's imports of food, machinery, chemicals and weapons in the 1980s. Many of the loans were guaranteed by the U.S. Agricultural Department. The money was channeled through various Iraqi-controlled banks and companies.

Mantius published U.S. intelligence documents stating that other loans by BNL --- some used to build weapons plants --- were sanctioned by the Central Intelligence Agency and other branches of the U.S. government.

Drogoul was convicted in 1993 on money laundering charges and sentenced to 37 months in prison. He died in 1999.

The scandal, labeled "Iraqgate" by the press, generated enough concern for President Clinton to launch an investigation into whether his predecessor, George Bush, had covered up government involvement in the loans. In 1995, Clinton's task force reported it had found no evidence that Bush and his top officials had sanctioned the loans. But the federal judge who presided over the BNL case, U.S. District Judge Marvin Shoob, said he continued to believe government agencies knew what was going on.

U.S.-based banks and other American companies' involvement with Saddam didn't end with the Persian Gulf War.

Treasury records examined this month by Reuters found U.S. companies have paid more than $700,000 in fines to the department for violating sanctions against Iraq. As recently as April 4, California-based oil company ChevronTexaco Corp. paid fines for violating the embargo against trade with Iraq in 2000. Other violators who paid fines include Chase Manhattan Bank and Tyson Foods.

------------ End article ----

Taxpayers footed $2 billion in defaulted loans. Next time you see those pictures of Rummy meeting with Saddam back in the 80's, think of that.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[Greenhat]

[sparky]

Spinning? Don't I wish! The US taxpayers had to recoup $2 billion of that money sent to Saddam that were guaranteed by Bush's Ag Department. I'd call that "support." Someone should have been horse whipped with a real horse.

NNN, what dictionary provided your definition? I found a legal dictionary definition:

Evidence
Proof of fact(s) presented at a trial. The best and most common method is by oral testimony; where you have an eye-witness swear to tell the truth and to then relate to the court (or jury) their experience. Evidence is essential in convincing the judge or jury of your facts as the judge (or jury) is expected to start off with a blank slate; no preconceived idea or knowledge of the facts. So it is up to the opposing parties to prove (by providing evidence), to the satisfaction of the court (or jury), the facts needed to support their case. Besides oral testimony, an object can be deposited with the court (eg. a signed contract). This is sometimes called "real evidence." In other rarer cases, evidence can be circumstantial.

http://www.duhaime.org/dictionary/dict-e.htm#E

Another definition (partial quote):

Evidence must survive objections of opposing attorneys that it is irrelevant, immaterial or violates rules against "hearsay" (statements by a party not in court), and/or other technicalities.

http://dictionary.law.com/

The "evidence" that Arabs were involved in the OK City bombings wasn't "evidence" at all.

[Navy_Navy_Navy]

[Greenhat]

[sparky]

From the Columbia Journalism link I posted before, Carpo:

Much of what Saddam received from the West was not arms per se, but so-called dual-use technology -- ultra sophisticated computers, armored ambulances, helicopters, chemicals, and the like, with potential civilian uses as well as military applications. We've learned by now that a vast network of companies, based in the U.S. and abroad, eagerly fed the Iraqi war machine right up until August 1990, when Saddam invaded Kuwait.

Eventually, it would turn out that elements of the U.S. government almost certainly knew that Drogoul was funneling U.S.-backed loans -- intended for the purchase of agricultural products, machinery, trucks, and other U.S. goods -- into dual-use technology and outright military technology. And that the British government was fully aware of the operations of Matrix Churchill, a British firm with an Ohio branch, which was not only at the center of the Iraqi procurement network but was also funded by BNL Atlanta. (Precision equipment supplied by Matrix Churchill was reportedly a target this January when the Western allies renewed their attack on Iraq).

Nightline, which had been looking at Iraqgate for some time, hooked up with the Financial Times in an unusual and productive arrangement. On May 2, 1991, the team reported the secret minutes of the President's National Advisory Council, at which, despite earlier reports of abuses, an undersecretary of state declared that terminating Iraqi loans would be "contrary to the president's intentions."

Nightline/Financial Times also cited intelligence reports that Iraq was using U.S. government farm credits to procure military technology. On July 3, 1991, the Financial Times reported that a Florida company run by an Iraqi national had produced cyanide -- some of which went to Iraq for use in chemical weapons -- and had shipped it via a CIA contractor.

"Classified documents obtained by the Times show . . . a long-secret pattern of personal efforts by Bush -- both as President and as Vice-President -- to support and placate the Iraqi dictator," the paper reported. It cited a top-secret National Security decision directive signed by President Bush in 1989, ordering closer ties with Baghdad and paving the way for $ 1 billion in new aid. Although the directive had been briefly described in other publications, the Times put it in context. Assistance from Washington was critical for Iraq, Frantz and Waas pointed out, since international bankers had cut off virtually all loans to Baghdad because Iraq was falling behind on repayments -- precisely because it was busily pouring millions into arms purchases.

And it emphasized the striking fact -- buried deep in a 1991 Washington Press piece -- that Secretary of State James Baker, after meeting with Iraqi Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz in October 1989, intervened personally to support U.S. government loan guarantees to Iraq.

There's more here from that link:
http://archives.cjr.org/year/93/2/iraqgate.asp

This embarassment just never got much traction. Like it or not, the US funded Saddam's war machine.

[carpro]

[quote="sparky"]From the Columbia Journalism link I posted before, Carpo:
quote]


I must be tip-toeing around in your head for you to address this to me.

I'm not a part of this argument yet.
_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."

[Greenhat]

[carpro]

_________________
"If he believes his 1971 indictment of his country and his fellow veterans was true, then he couldn't possibly be proud of his Vietnam service."