Meanwhile, in non-Nobel-related news . . .
Oct. 9th, 2002 08:58 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
zotzThis article in (inevitably) today's Guardian alleges that the claims made by Li'l Shrub in his recent speech about Iraq's aims and acquisitions are disputed by US technical and intelligence experts - those who aren't leaned on to keep quiet, anyway:
"Basically, cooked information is working its way into high-level pronouncements and there's a lot of unhappiness about it in intelligence, especially among analysts at the CIA," said Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA's former head of counter-intelligence.
According to a letter from Carol Naughton of CND, the US Congressional Budget Office has produced a report estimating the cost of the potential war. This assumes a British contribution of "two-thirds of a heavy armoured division, two-thirds of an air wing and 21 ships."
So that's us told. Should the balloon go up, I may hold a sweep on our actual contribution - should I find anyone willing to bet that it'll be significantly different.
On the upside, The Prez did assure the world that nothing was "imminent or unavoidable", which is always nice to hear. Where there's a war involved, anyway. Imminent and unavoidable icecream and jelly would be different.
Apparently there are lesbians in corsets on the television.
That's nice for them.
"Basically, cooked information is working its way into high-level pronouncements and there's a lot of unhappiness about it in intelligence, especially among analysts at the CIA," said Vincent Cannistraro, the CIA's former head of counter-intelligence.
According to a letter from Carol Naughton of CND, the US Congressional Budget Office has produced a report estimating the cost of the potential war. This assumes a British contribution of "two-thirds of a heavy armoured division, two-thirds of an air wing and 21 ships."
So that's us told. Should the balloon go up, I may hold a sweep on our actual contribution - should I find anyone willing to bet that it'll be significantly different.
On the upside, The Prez did assure the world that nothing was "imminent or unavoidable", which is always nice to hear. Where there's a war involved, anyway. Imminent and unavoidable icecream and jelly would be different.
Apparently there are lesbians in corsets on the television.
That's nice for them.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Icecream and jelly
Date: 2002-10-09 02:35 pm (UTC)I've got 'Happy Birthday' in my head now. The Birthday Party version of course. Thank you.
I've noticed that practically every morning there seems to be a new news item that Bush has uncovered even more foul and dastardly things of which Saddam could be capable. It seems odd. Nothing for years, and now every day there's something new.
There was an interesting extract from a book written by an Iraqi weapons inspector in the Grauniad a few weeks ago, did you see that? I posted it to the_separatist so I can dig it out if not.
Re: Icecream and jelly
Date: 2002-10-09 03:17 pm (UTC)Re: Icecream and jelly
Date: 2002-10-10 01:37 am (UTC)Life is so difficult sometimes.
Nothing for years, and now every day there's something new.
Funny, that. Anyone would think that Iraq had been a western client state or something.
Re: Icecream and jelly
Date: 2002-10-10 04:16 am (UTC)Life is so difficult sometimes.
It's certainly an improvement on Avalanche (ole Nick's version) which has been my earworm for about a fortnight now. I love the song, but it's kind of depressing on repeat play in your head.
no subject
Date: 2002-10-09 02:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2002-10-09 04:37 pm (UTC)Or is that a bit too Benny Hill?
no subject
Date: 2002-10-10 01:35 am (UTC)