Teller Report

Now you can see non-English news...

"Official Secrets" .. US film refutes Biden's lies about not supporting the invasion of Iraq

2019-09-21T22:09:10.385Z

The recent efforts of former US Vice President and current presidential candidate Joe Biden to deny his record of supporting the Iraq war have been a marvel of evasion, while his lies have refuted several well-documented assessments, one after another. During this month, he claimed


The recent efforts of former US Vice President and current presidential candidate Joe Biden to deny his record of supporting the Iraq war have been a marvel of evasion, while his lies have refuted several well-documented assessments, one after another. This month, Biden claimed that his vote for the war in Congress was somehow not to wage war. Ironically, while immersed in this verbal dodgy, all cinemas across the United States have shown a film, revealing Biden's deceptive approach to the Iraq war.

The film, titled "Official Secrets," focuses on historical facts and the humanitarian consequences of evading disclosure. Catherine Gun, played by Keira Knightley, works for the British intelligence agency GCQ, where she risks jail for several years because she has done everything she can to prevent the Iraq war. But Biden has done all he can to facilitate the Iraq war, and he is shirking his responsibility.

Nearly 16 years ago, Biden and Gunn worked for two contradictory goals as the war in Iraq was approaching. Openness versus resourcefulness, deception versus honesty, war versus peace. Today their voices are starkly contradictory.

Gan recalls that former US President George W. Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair were "hungry for UN cover" for their imminent invasion of Iraq in early 2003. On the last day of January, she saw A note from the US National Security Agency shows that the governments of the two countries were working together to eavesdrop and monitor diplomats of other countries serving as members of the UN Security Council to blackmail them, with the aim of forcing them to vote alongside the US invasion of Iraq.

Gan disclosed the memo to the British Observer newspaper in London. "I meant to prevent the war," she said in a recent interview with the salon news website. "I felt that this information was definitely very important. It could stop the rush to war, and I felt that people had the right to see it."

But Biden, who played a pivotal role in the rush to war, as chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, thought people had no right to see it. He excluded critical voices and background information from the committee's important meetings in mid-summer 2002, showing by deception that there was consensus in Congress on the war. He voted for the war in mid-October. Five months later, this war broke out.

Right now, with this election campaign, Biden seems eager to rewrite history. It shows a disregard for the facts that paved the way for the invasion of Iraq from the start. The fundamental flaw in Biden's elusive recent speech on Iraq relates to a reversal of realistic timing. Either he cannot remember when the Iraqi government agreed to allow UN weapons inspectors back into Iraq, or he is eager to keep lying about his real record about the Iraq war, so that he cannot hold himself to be honest again.

Biden claims to have voted for the war to boost the likelihood of UN inspectors returning to Iraq. In a television interview last week, Biden said he had voted in favor of the invasion "to allow inspectors to return to Iraq to determine whether the Iraqi government has changed anything on the subject of chemical and nuclear weapons."

On September 16, 2002, the Iraqi government announced a letter to UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan confirming that it would allow the inspectors to return "unconditionally," the New York Times reported. This was 25 days before Biden voted on the war in Iraq. How would Biden vote for the return of inspectors on October 11, if the Iraqi government had previously announced their unconditional return.

A few hours after Baghdad announced its agreement to accept the unconditional return of nuclear weapons inspectors, there was no longer any excuse for the war resolution before Congress. But excuse Biden shook off the dust, and pushed him towards use, after he changed the schedule of the sequence of events.

Four months later, in February 2003, as Catherine Gunn waited anxiously to see what the NSA document leaked to a British newspaper had already been made public, Biden openly declared his support for the planned US invasion of Iraq. "I support the decision to go to war," he said at a meeting of the Delaware Chamber of Commerce. "I am not opposed to war to remove weapons of mass destruction from Iraq."

After the US invasion of Iraq, Biden continued to support the war. At the end of July 2003, four months after the war began, Biden said in a speech at the Brookings Institution: “Nine months ago, I voted with my colleagues to give the president of the United States the mandate to use force, and I will vote again today. It was the right vote at the time, and it will be today too. ”

Norman Solomon is an American journalist

Acknowledge the mistake and blame President Bush Jr.

Biden shuns his vote for the invasion of Iraq with the war. AFB

Biden wrote an article in a magazine criticizing how this war was waged, while defending his role in helping it. "A year and a half ago, I voted to give President Bush a mandate to use force in Iraq," he said. I still think that my vote was fair and right. "But the president's use of this power was unwise, in ways I never imagined."

"Until November 2005, Biden admitted that his vote was a mistake," the Washington Post said recently. "Even then, Biden tried to blame President Bush, because it turned out to be untrustworthy." His interlocutor asked him, “Now that you realize that the weapon of mass destruction does not exist, was your vote wrong?” He replied, “It was wrong. "It was a mistake to assume that the president would use the authority we gave him properly."

One person, Biden's opponent in the Democratic nomination for the US presidency in 2020, was a member of Congress during the vote on the Iraq war, Bernie Sanders, who did not vote for the resolution.

This summer, Biden began spreading his new lies about the invasion of Iraq. During a debate at the end of July, Biden postponed his new lies about the invasion of Iraq. At the end of July, the level of lying increased, when he claimed that "from the moment the war (shock and awe) began, I was opposed to the war effort, and I was more outspoken in my criticism, than anyone in Congress." For the mind perfectly.

The United Nations is the best way to "legitimize" war

Exhumation in the past is not the main problem in the claim of former US Vice President and current presidential candidate Joe Biden that he voted for the war resolution, to increase the likelihood of UN inspectors returning to Iraq. A key problem with his current rhetoric is the fact that going to the UN Security Council to authorize a war on Iraq has always been the berry card in which the US wants to cover up its naked aggression plans.

The famous New York Times journalist, Thomas Friedman, was unusually outspoken on November 13, 2002, a month after Biden voted to accept the war decision. “The Bush team discovered that the best way to legitimize his excessive power,” he wrote. His war on Iraq, not by imposing it, but by directing it through the United Nations, and make it consistent with international legitimacy ».

It was this false move, through the United Nations, to legitimize the planned invasion of Iraq, which made Catherine Gun risk her career, to tell the world about the Bush administration's move to get the blessing of the UN Security Council to invade Iraq. “What Gan revealed, he showed the world that the governments of the United States and Britain have always been lying to invade Iraq. Invasion ».

Overall, as Biden continues his presidential campaign, he persists in demonstrating his innovations to falsify his record of the Iraq war. During this process, he behaves in contradiction to what "Official Secrets" says, as confirmed by Catherine Gunn.

The film focuses on historical facts, and the human consequences of evading disclosure.

Bush and Blair were "hungry for an international cover" for their invasion of Iraq.

Source: emara

You may like

News/Politics 2019-10-07T16:23:31.332Z
Life/Entertain 2019-08-27T11:35:02.674Z

Trends 24h

Latest

© Communities 2019 - Privacy