Re: Powell's Exquisite Evidence: Internet Plagiarism

Carl may be onto something if this article in the London Independent is
anything to go by.

"Mr Blair is facing an unprecedented, if covert, rebellion by his top spies,
who last week used the politicians' own weapon - the strategic leak -
against him. The BBC received a Defence Intelligence Staff (DIS) document
which showed that British intelligence believes there are no current links
between the Iraqi regime and the al-Qa'ida network."

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=376732

----- Original Message -----
From: "Carl Nordlund" <carl.nordlund@humecol.lu.se>
To: <wsn@csf.colorado.edu>
Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2003 10:34 PM
Subject: Re: Powell's Exquisite Evidence: Internet Plagiarism


> Just sketching up a conspiracy thought here, for the fun of it. Moderator:
> if irrelevant, please refrain from posting to WSN!
>
> Remember the paper that leaked from the UK Ministry of Defence a couple of
> weeks ago where it clearly was stated that there are no links between Iraq
> and al-Qaeda?
>
(http://europe.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/05/sprj.irq.blair.alqaeda.ap/inde
> x.html) Such leaks are, as I understand it, not that very common.
>
> Well, what if this latest intelligence scandal, with Powell using a MI6
> report based on outdated academic journal stuff, which is such an
incredible
> stupid way of conducting intelligence, had as its intention just what has
> happened now? I can't believe MI6 or the UK intelligences in general can
> have overseen the possibility that at least someone did recognize the
> report's text!
>
> So: perhaps the Xeroxing done by MI6, as well as the previous leaking of
the
> Ministry of Defence report to Channel 4, both were intentional?
>
> Why? There are perhaps a number of motives in this 'intentional' scenario:
> UK showing a firm committment to the USA and its war drums, while at the
> same time de facto undermining the arguments for going to war, thus
perhaps
> not following Blair's own personal committment (who, if I remember
> correctly, was prepared to 'risk it all' on this issue, 'all' here
referring
> to his position as PM) but still following UK, not to mention European,
> public opinion. Intelligence organizations are built up over quite a long
> time frame - perhaps there are internal political motives behind
committing
> these two blunders?
>
> /Carl Nordlund
>
> -----Ursprungligt meddelande-----
> Fran: wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu [mailto:wsn-owner@csf.colorado.edu]For
> John Leonard
> Skickat: den 8 februari 2003 00:35
> Till: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
> Amne: Re: Powell's Exquisite Evidence: Internet Plagiarism
> Prioritet: Hog
>
>
> What might be amazing, if one hasn't yet realized how twisted US media
are,
> is how completely the bogus report has been hushed up in the US media -
> especially the fact Powell relied on it.
> Even the UK press mostly ignores that the original report was about Iraq
> 1991, not Iraq 2002. It is on Skynews,
> http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30800-12241954,00.html , and in Mike
> Ruppert's piece, at
> http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/020603_plagiarized.html
>
>
> At 16:34 7.2.03 -0500, you wrote:
> >What is equally amazing is the alacrity with which the plagiarism has
been
> >uncovered!  Eternal vigilance has perhaps never been more important or as
>
>