WoW! Bolton Stopped UN WMD Inspectors Going to Iraq!

[whatelseisnew]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x1523137

John R. Bolton flew to Europe in 2002 to confront the head of a global arms-control agency and demand he resign, then orchestrated the firing of the unwilling diplomat in a move a U.N. tribunal has since judged unlawful, according to officials involved.
A former Bolton deputy says the U.S. undersecretary of state felt Jose Bustani "had to go," particularly because the Brazilian was trying to send chemical weapons inspectors to Baghdad. That might have helped defuse the crisis over alleged Iraqi weapons and undermined a U.S. rationale for war.

[whistle]

1. John Bolton needs to be on trial for crimes against humanity...

....and put away in prison for life, not given a promotion as highest diplomat.

[whatelseisnew]

3. This ties in to the Downing Minutes

[Blue Belle]

17. Let's hope Kerry ties the two together on Monday...

The Bush Administration is a house of cards - once the information gets out (therein lies the problem).

[rog]

52. A couple of very good articles I had bookmarked, re: Bustani

... and Bolton, at the time this all went down in '02.

.rog.

A Coup in The Hague
http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2002/06/bustani_profile.html

Excerpt (great article):

Bustani says the first indications of Washington's displeasure became evident near the end of 2001. While he says US delegates never bothered to expand on their concerns, Bustani traces the shift to the influence of several hawkish officials in the Bush State Department, particularly Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton.

Bolton, who has in the past argued that the U.S. should exit the United Nations, was also one of the administration's most vocal critics of the International Criminal Court. His staunch opposition to virtually every major recent arms control initiative -- including the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty -- and his enthusiastic endorsement of Washington's problem-plagued Star Wars missile defense system led Ian Williams of Foreign Policy in Focus to argue that putting Bolton in charge of disarmament is akin to letting "a pyromaniac have the run of a fireworks factory."

Bustani says US delegates and other officials from Washington had become increasingly frustrated by his insistence that the OPCW remain truly independent.

With Bolton's arrival at the State Department last year, those frustrations suddenly boiled to the surface.

"I therefore fell from grace with Washington," Bustani says. "And when dealing with people like Bolton, there is no room for dialogue. You just have to go."

"I was being expected to take orders from the US delegation, and to customize the implementation of the convention to the US demands," says Bustani from his home in The Hague. "I was expected to consult Washington on every single issue, which I refused to do."

Two articles by George Monbiot:

Chemical coup d'etat
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0%2C3604%2C685123%2C00.html

On Sunday, the US government will launch an international coup. It has been planned for a month. It will be executed quietly, and most of us won't know what is happening until it's too late. It is seeking to overthrow 60 years of multilateralism in favour of a global regime built on force.

The coup begins with its attempt, in five days' time, to unseat the man in charge of ridding the world of chemical weapons. If it succeeds, this will be the first time that the head of a multilateral agency will have been deposed in this manner. Every other international body will then become vulnerable to attack.

-----snip-----

This is, then, one of those rare occasions on which our government could make a massive difference to the way the world is run. It could choose to support its closest ally, wrecking multilateralism and shutting down the alternatives to war. Or it could defy the United States in defence of world peace and international law. It will take that principled stand only if we, the people from whom it draws its power, make so much noise that it must listen. We have five days in which to stop the US from bullying its way to war.

Diplomacy US style (followup to previous article ... "behind the scenes of the coup")
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists/Column/0%2C5673%2C689141%2C00.html

A week ago, the Washington Post revealed that the Pentagon had told the Central Intelligence Agency to investigate Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, in the hope of undermining his credibility. When the CIA failed to discover any evidence of wrongdoing, the deputy defence secretary is reported to have "hit the ceiling".

-----snip-----

Yesterday evening, after a week of arm-twisting and secret meetings, the US government forced the departure of Jose Bustani, director-general of the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. As this column predicted last week, this is the first time that the head of an international organisation has been dismissed during his term in office. The tactics the US has deployed in the past few days to oust Bustani offer a fascinating insight into the way its diplomacy works.

On Friday, the US ambassador to the OPCW organised an illegal meeting with American members of the organisation's staff. He explained that he had arrived late as he had been trying to find a replacement for Mr Bustani (this is also an illegal manoeuvre). He told the meeting that the US had been encountering "great difficulty finding people of the right calibre" because no one wants "to be associated with a dying organisation". This was news to the staff, who had previously been told by the US that sacking Bustani would revive the OPCW. But the ambassador explained that if the replacement is "like Bustani we will say 'screw the organisation'. We'll dismantle our weapons independently and monitor them ourselves".

The US had promised that the directorship would pass to another Latin American. But the ambassador was kind enough to note that "Latin Americans are so characterised by sheer incompetence that they won't be able to make up their minds". He warned the meeting "if any of this gets out of this room, I'll kill the person responsible".

LOTS more in the articles above, and very interesting (and damning) in light of the Downing St. Minutes.

.rb.

[whatelseisnew]

65. thank you , rog

[firefox]

6. Agreed

Criminals in need of conviction are now running/ruining the country.

Those in Congress that do not speak against the Iraq war and our War for Global Domination are conspirators in the criminal ruining of the country and the world.

[Karenina]

21. Thank you, Firefox!

Bullseye! :toast:

[Zhade]

30. Damn, when you're right, you're right.

NT!

[Media_Lies_Daily]

20. Here's a lengthy Bolton biography by Wikipedia....read & learn.

John R. Bolton
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_R._Bolton>

QUOTE:

A member of the Project for the New American Century, Bolton was also one of the signers of the January 26, 1998 PNAC Letter sent to President Clinton urging him to remove Saddam Hussein from power using US diplomatic, political and military power. The letter also stated "American policy cannot continue to be crippled by a misguided insistence on unanimity in the UN Security Council."

[Double T]

2. Downing Street Memogate may be just around the corner.....

..the Bush Administration inches closer and closer to a huge scandal. None of us will be surprised.

[salin]

4. disturbing how the msm doesnt tie the stories together

as in:

DSM claim: us was manipulating intell

Bolton stories: demonstrates how intell was manipulated.

[whatelseisnew]

7. That is straight up propaganda in action

we could play 'guess the headline spin' for print editions

[salin]

8. agreed

as I said elsewhere, for the stories never to be mentioned together... has to be intentional (since they are so directly linked).

[salin]

11. that should be a thread, in and of itself...

"Bolton attempted to save the lives of Weapons Inspectors..." :shrug:

[leftchick]

15. US bombing campiagn in 2002

and all of the first hand accounts from Clarke, O'Neill and others stating it was IRAQ in the crosshairs for bush from day ONE!!!

It all pieces together perfectly. If only we had a journalist willing to connect the DOTS that are sitting right fucking There!!

:banghead:

[salin]

19. sorta like the "energy crisis" in California

esp as Enron tanked... all of the pieces were there, in plain view... but it took a long, long, long time for the story to come out in a way that the public finally "saw" and accepted - that there was no crisis and it had all been corporate manipulation.

There is no way - that in the long haul - the obvious links between all of these stories does not eventually spike through to the public psyche.... too much info in too many mainstream places... no longer just us following it closely see the obvious.

No way of predicting what will finally be the culminating point - but we are not there yet. But it will become common knowledge/accepted. What will be the fallout? Who knows.

[whatelseisnew]

5. what will we tell the children?

[Double T]

9. We have to tell the children that their president was a lier and a crook

[Media_Lies_Daily]

18. He's a dictator that was appointed by the US Supreme Court....

...our last legally elected president was Al Gore.

[leftchick]

34. I tell my children that every damn day!

They are probably the most jaded 8 and 10 year old boys you would ever meet!

;)

[mwb970]

63. I talk to my 11-year-old niece about politics all the time.

Her family is rich, all Extra Crispy Bucket-O-Republicans, but SHE is on our side!

[Lars39]

10. He's a doer, a 'fixit' guy, that's why they want him at the UN

to make 'changes'. Can't wait to see what those entail. :eyes: :scared:

[whistle]

14. Well, for starters, probably two jet airliners flown into the....

....the UN headquarters building in NYC.

[Lars39]

22. I honestly do not put anything past them.

They are trying to expand and consolidate world power at the same time they are wrapping up the US.

[Benhurst]

12. Another war criminal. Cancel his ticket to the UN and reissue

it for the Hague.

[lonestarnot]

13. So dats what this freak is hiding... and there's more...I'm waiting!

[annabanana]

31. (gots to keep this kicked for the Monday am cube rats)

nt

[DistressedAmerican]

16. Just Take A Look At This And You Will Understand All!

It is a "management style"! :puke:

[FloridaPat]

23. This was one of the reasons I knew that the claims of WMD in

Iraq was a lie. * cut off any help in stopping an invasion. I had not tied Bolton into it at the time. Time for lots of impeachements. Like any senator who votes for Bolton for UN.

[leftchick]

61. Wasn't he involved with The Office of Special Plans?

I need to find that OSP graphic. I believe he was in there with the rest of the neo-freaks fixing intel for war.

On Edit: From Mother Jones" The Lie Factory....

~snip~

As the momentum for war began to build in early 2002, Wolfowitz and Feith beefed up the intelligence unit and created an Iraq war-planning unit in the Pentagon's Near East and South Asia Affairs section, run by Deputy Undersecretary of Defense William Luti, under the rubric "Office of Special Plans," or OSP; the new unit's director was Abram N. Shulsky. By then, Wurmser had moved on to a post as senior adviser to Undersecretary of State John Bolton, yet another neocon, who was in charge of the State Department's disarmament, proliferation, and WMD office and was promoting the Iraq war strategy there. Shulsky's OSP, which incorporated the secret intelligence unit, took control, banishing veteran experts‚ -- including Joseph McMillan, James Russell, Larry Hanauer, and Marybeth McDevitt‚ -- who, despite years of service to NESA, either were shuffled off to other positions or retired. For the next year, Luti and Shulsky not only would oversee war plans but would act aggressively to shape the intelligence product received by the White House.

http://motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_405.html

Perhaps I should send this to some "journalists" to help them connect the dots right in front of their faces!

[me b zola]

24. hidden in the middle of the article

they do connect the dots:

<snip>

The Iraq connection to the OPCW affair comes as fresh evidence surfaces that the Bush administration was intent from early on to pursue military and not diplomatic action against Saddam Hussein's regime.

An official British document, disclosed last month, said Prime Minister Tony Blair agreed in April 2002 to join in an eventual U.S. attack on Iraq. Two weeks later, Bustani was ousted, with British help.

<more>

http://www.newsday.com/news/politics/wire/sns-ap-bolton-un-firing,0,7826877.story?coll=sns-ap-politics-headlines



Ladies and Gentlemen, hold on to your seats, it's going to be a bumpy ride!!!!




nominated

edited to provide link :)

[seemslikeadream]

25. An official British document

YEP

[me b zola]

28. I caught the correct use of language, too

I'm sitting here with a ear to ear grin :)


OFFICIAL BRITISH DOCUMENT

OFFICIAL BRITISH DOCUMENT

OFFICIAL BRITISH DOCUMENT

OFFICIAL BRITISH DOCUMENT




:toast: :woohoo:

[Zhade]

32. "An official British government document" would have been tighter.

But this is a good start.

[salin]

26. also in the article (at the end) the date of the bullying phone call

June 2001. (Supports O'Niell's claims of plans to invade and divide up Iraq pre 911). The reason for the bullying? Bolton wanted Bustani to exclude certain findings of US Weapons Inspectors ... and wanted him to hire some specific individuals. (The manipulation trend, and the fill the house with ideologues/yes-men trend).

[bvar22]

27. This also explains WHY bushco* was in...

...such a GODDAMNED hurry to invade Iraq. bush* KNEW there were NO WMD. The reports from the Inspectors on the ground in Iraq were saying that Saddam did NOT have WMDS. The Inspectors asked for 30 more days and bush* refused because he couldn't afford to let the World know that there were NO WMD!!!

The bush* obsession to Invade and Occupy Iraq cost so far:

1,700 Americas KILLED,............. no WMD

40,000 Americans maimed for life.....NO WMD

over 100,000 INNOCENT Iraqis MURDERED....NO WMD

over $200Billion .......................NO WMD

over 400,000 INNOCENT IRAQIs MAIMED for LIFE...NO WMD

[annabanana]

29. How can we get this to Kerry for his Monday trip to work?

If he's going to bring up the DSM, he ought to be able to tie it DIRECTLY to Bolton's ass!!

[wallwriter]

33. I hope Kerry can emphasize this connection in a clear way.

[applegrove]

35. He is an enforcer. He should be nowhere near any top job. He should

be selling cars.

[ninkasi]

57. He should be in prison

for the rest of his stinking, evil life. Just like the rest of them, from Bush, to Cheney, to Rumsfeld, to...well, you all know the ones. The GWB crime cartel.

[applegrove]

59. Let's go halvesies: he should run an impounded car lot. n/t

[susu369]

64. Repo man more like it

*nt*

[Bouncy Ball]

36. Oh my God.

Kicked and nominated.

BIGGEST bunch of criminals to ever hold high offices in the history of the United States, hands down.

Makes the Nixon bunch (and I know some are the same people) look like amateur night.

[G_j]

37. Rove & Bush are pulling out the stops for Bolton

They are investing quite a bit in him, all the more reason that he MUST be not approved!

[Bouncy Ball]

38. Hey guys this needs more votes, please.

This thread needs as many eyes as it can get. This is stunning.

[BrklynLiberal]

39. Wasn't Bolton supposed to be working on limiting nuclear proliferation?

Wasn't part of his assignment supposed to be getting rid of the known atomic weapons in the former Soviet Union countries?
He had done the worst possible job in that area as well!

A Nuclear Blunder?
Critics say U.N. Ambassador-designate John Bolton didn’t properly prepare for a key nonproliferation conference, which could be a serious setback in U.S. efforts to isolate Iran.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7817986/site/newsweek/


Two Republican Senators Suggested John Bolton Not Up to His Previous Job. . .
<snip>
Fitzgerald was not the only Republican Senator asking this question. In June 2004, Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico, Chair of the Energy Committee, took the unusual step of requesting to testify before Senator Richard Lugar's Foreign Relations Committee. Domenici was concerned that progress was not being made on the liability dispute that now impairs US-Russian cooperative disposition of excess weapons plutonium, a key part of that G-8 Global Partnership Bolton trumpeted in his acceptance speech.
<snip>
Bolton has muddled through or actively opposed some important agreements that work toward a real proliferation solution. He scuttled the Fissile Materials Control Treaty, which would have strengthened export restrictions on dual use materials. He made a mess of the efforts to secure Russia's nuclear materials. He's molly-coddled AQ Khan. He's done exactly nothing to advance America's long-term security interests.
<snip>
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000408.html

There is much much more if you spend the time to look.

[seemslikeadream]

40. Bolton Pushed Niger Yellowcake Story

March 14, 2005
JOHN BOLTON PUSHED NIGER-URANIUM FIASCO AT STATE -- Then Tried to Hide his Tracks and Staff Lied to Congress

I just received this March 1, 2005 letter written by House Government Reform Committee Ranking Member Henry Waxman to Representative Christopher Shays who chairs the Government Reform Committee's Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats, and International Security.

Waxman is basically blowing the whistle on the administration's extravagant use of "sensitive but unclassified" designations on official acts to block public access to and transparency of government policymaking.

On pages 5-7, Waxman reveals that John Bolton promulgated the Niger-Uranium fiction at the State Department despite rejection of this claim by State Department and CIA intelligence analysts.

Waxman then argues that not only did Bolton and his people then try and conceal Bolton's role in pushing the Niger-Uranium agenda by marking the material "sensitive but unclassified" and blocking it in case of a Freedom of Information Act request, the State Department actually LIED TO CONGRESS about John Bolton's role.

I think Senator Hagel might want to reconsider his support for the Bolton nomination now. . .

http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/archives/000370.html

Waxman letter

Concealment of a State Department Official's Role in the Niger Uranium Claim

In April 2004, the State Department used the designation "sensitive but unclassified" to conceal unclassified information about the role of John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control, in the creation of a fact sheet distributed to the United Nations that falsely claimed Iraq had sought uranium from Niger.

On December 19, 2002, the State Department issued a fact sheet entitled "Illustrative Examples of Omissions from the Iraqi Declaration to the United Nations Security Council." (9) The fact sheet listed eight key areas in which the Bush Administration found fault with Iraq's weapons declaration to the United Nations on December 7, 2002. Under the heading "Nuclear Weapons," the fact sheet stated:

The Declaration ignores efforts to procure uranium from Niger.
Why is the Iraqi regime hiding their uranium procurement?

It was later discovered that this claim was based on fabricated documents. (10) In addition, both State Department intelligence officials and CIA officials reported that they had rejected the claim as unreliable. (11) As a result, it was unclear who within the State Department was involved in preparing the fact sheet.

On July 21, 2003, I wrote to Secretary of State Colin Powell, asking for an explanation of the role of John Bolton, Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, in creating the document. (12) On September 25, 2003, the State Department responded with a definitive denial: "Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs, John R. Bolton, did not play a role in the creation of this document." (13)

Subsequently, however, I joined six other members of the Government Reform Committee in requesting from the State Department Inspector General a copy of an unclassified "chronology" on how the fact sheet was developed. (14) This chronology described a meeting on December 18, 2002, between Secretary Powell, Mr. Bolton, and Richard Boucher, the Assistant Secretary for the Bureau of Public Affairs. According to this chronology, Mr. Boucher specifically asked Mr. Bolton "for help developing a response to Iraq's Dec 7 Declaration to the United Nations Security Council that could be used with the press. According to the chronology, which is phrased in the present tense, Mr. Bolton "agrees and tasks the Bureau of Nonproliferation," a subordinate office that reports directly to Mr. Bolton, to conduct the work.

This unclassified chronology also stated that on the next day, December 19, 2003, the Bureau of Nonproliferation "sends email with the fact sheet, 'Fact Sheet Iraq Declaration.doc.'" to Mr. Bolton's office (emphasis in original). A second e-mail was sent a few minutes later, and a third e-mail was sent about an hour after that. According to the chronology, each version "still includes Niger reference." Although Mr. Bolton may not have personally drafted the document, the chronology appears to indicate that

he ordered its creation and received updates on its development.

The Inspector General's chronology was marked "sensitive but unclassified." In addition, the letter transmitting the chronology stated that it "contains sensitive information, which may be protected from public release under the Freedom of Information Act" and requested that no "public release of this information" be made. (15) In fact, however, the chronology consisted of nothing more than a factual recitation of information on meetings, e-mails, and documents.

This is not a constructive reformer out to promote American interests in a dignified manner in the world's most significant multilateral institution.

There are many administration jobs that John Bolton may be completely appropriate for -- but the one that he has been nominated for is not on that list



Also - State's Bolton Says Iran "Dead Set" on Building Nuclear Weapons


State's Bolton Says Iran "Dead Set" on Building Nuclear Weapons

Iran is continuing to pursue the production and possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to international treaties banning them, said Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security John Bolton.

In his prepared testimony before the House International Relations Committee June 24, Bolton said, "We cannot let Iran, a leading sponsor of international terrorism, acquire the most destructive weapons and the means to deliver them to Europe, most of central Asia and the Middle East, or beyond."

The under secretary presented evidence such as U.S. intelligence findings in the biannual "721 Report to Congress on the Acquisition of Technologies Relating to Weapons of Mass Destruction and Advance Chemical Munitions," reports from the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and statements by Iranian officials in order to back up his statements to the committee.

The under secretary described in detail the basis for the Bush administration's strong belief that Iran has a clandestine program to produce nuclear weapons, despite being a signatory to the Nonproliferation Treaty.
http://tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20040630-04.html

Was Bolton behind death of State Department official?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3525714

Is it at all possible that maybe, just possibly,... John Bolten
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x3519379

[indepat]

41. W knows the man he needs to implement his policies

[annabanana]

42. kickety kick

[Disturbed]

43. Any Dem that votes yes on Bolton...

should hang their head in shame and all Dems should put them on their shit list.

[bunny planet]

44. I just sent Kerry the link to this thread. I urged him to try and read it

before Monday. Not sure if he will see it before then but it was worth a shot.

[DearAbby]

45. Send it to all the Democrat Senators, they should be made aware of this

Also Conyers should have this information as well

[UrbScotty]

49. Not just Democrats, and not just Conyers.

Every member of Congress must see this!

[number6]

46. Bozo Bolton

why does someone want to work at a place
they say doesn't exist ....

[tavalon]

50. He doesn't want to work at the place

He wants to dismantle the place.

[spanone]

47. The Dems have to hold his fucking feet to the fire. This guys bad news.

[UrbScotty]

48. As your username says...

What else is new?

[bpilgrim]

51. nother WAR CRIME - will the M$MWs see it?

:popcorn:

peace

[AuntiBush]

53. Bushies Henchman "JR Bolton" sure does get around.

Mr. Chad-Inspector: Florida
Mr. Fix-the-details
Mr. LIAR

This guy's got one long-arm that seems to span the globe.

Where's our long-arm of the law?


http://images/globalfreepress.com/

May 20, 2005: Bush's Approval ratings are swirling rapidly downward much like our country.

[bloom]

54. kick

:kick:

[BurtWorm]

55. I remember that incident.

I didn't know Bolton was involved, but I'm not surprised.

[chknltl]

56. kicked and nominated nt

[Swamp Rat]

58. Spazito: "46. Whoa, here's a Mother Jones article from June 2002"

on this issue and naming Bolton:

A Coup in The Hague

On April 22 of this year, Bustani was ousted from that post after an unprecedented (and some say unsupportable) vote orchestrated by the Bush White House. Now, Bustani is saying that the implications of that vote should be clear -- and chilling -- for anyone committed to true multinational action.

snip

Bustani says the first indications of Washington's displeasure became evident near the end of 2001. While he says US delegates never bothered to expand on their concerns, Bustani traces the shift to the influence of several hawkish officials in the Bush State Department, particularly Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, John Bolton.

Bolton, who has in the past argued that the U.S. should exit the United Nations, was also one of the administration's most vocal critics of the International Criminal Court. His staunch opposition to virtually every major recent arms control initiative -- including the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, and the Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty -- and his enthusiastic endorsement of Washington's problem-plagued Star Wars missile defense system led Ian Williams of Foreign Policy in Focus to argue that putting Bolton in charge of disarmament is akin to letting "a pyromaniac have the run of a fireworks factory."

snip

"I therefore fell from grace with Washington," Bustani says. "And when dealing with people like Bolton, there is no room for dialogue. You just have to go."

more

http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2002/06/bustani_profile.html

[bklyncowgirl]

60. Bolton should be working for some bookie busting kneecaps.

This article explains alot.

The administration did not want UN weapons inspectors to get in there and do their job in any serious way because they knew damn well that Saddam Hussein did not have WMD and that credible UN reports confirming this would screw up their lovely little war.

Bolton was Bush's enforcer.

[annabanana]

62. yup.. one dangerous hombre..n/t