The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] inconsistencies in the Galloway case?



As Dan O'H says, there don't seem to be any more inconsistencies than there
are in any news story (if examined with a sufficiently powerful microscope).

Morris, Norton-Taylor and Whitaker in the Guardian today point out

"But even if the documents are genuine it must be remembered that the
information they contain may be false. Middlemen or Iraqi intelligence
officers might have used Mr Galloway as an excuse to pocket money
themselves.

A classic scam by intelligence officers is to explain the need for money by
pointing to the demands of an innocent third party."

As to Galloway being an idiot, I couldn't possibly comment.

AG


on 23/4/03 3:22 pm, Daniel O'Huiginn at do227@hermes.cam.ac.uk wrote:

>
> According to the original telegraph articles
> [www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/22/ngall122.xml] he
> went through piles of documents with a translator in situ, which seems
> like the obvious way to go about it.
> There may be different accounts in other media - I'd put this down to
> journalistic incompetence; there are plenty of journalist who can't copy a
> story without introducing mistakes
>
> I don't find it too likely that the documents were planted - I'm sure if
> US generals wanted to discredit Galloway they could just announce
> 'intelligence information' and 90% of the USA would believe them. So why
> go to the trouble of forging documents, planting them, and hoping they
> will be found? I've become far more willing to believe conspiracy theories
> over the past few months, but I've not yet seen any convincing evidence
> that this is one of them. It seems far more likely that Galloway, or
> somebody acting on his behalf, was being an idiot.
>
>
> Dan


_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]