What's da matta witchu, Italy?

[DapperDiverge]

Have you heard about Italy's new law about owning a pet? If you don't take your dog for a walk or neglect them any another way, you'll be fined $600 dollars. And that involves cats, rabbits, whatever....

Oh yeah, and you can't keep your goldfish in a round bowl anymore because some "expert" says it'll makes your fish blind, and you'll get fined too, cause it's also against the law

What do you expect, this is coming from a country that elected a pornstar to parliment

[guerillaGardner]

I think this is a good thing. Good on them. People shouldn't have pets if they can't attend to their basic needs. It will stop people taking on animals if they don't know how to care for them.

[Ali]

It wasn-a me-a! (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4402594.stm)

Bet you'd all forgotten about those documents claiming that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger? They basically clinched the deal for Bush.

Pity they were forged (http://www.sundayherald.com/35264).

And now the US claims that they never existed (http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1275365)!!!

After Mr Bush's January 2003 address, US National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley - then a deputy national security adviser - took responsibility for the mistaken inclusion of the Niger uranium claim and offered to resign.

US officials confirmed on Wednesday that Mr Hadley did meet Mr Pollari in September 2002.

But Mr Hadley said nobody involved in the meeting "has any recollection of a discussion of natural uranium, or any recollection of any documents being passed".

Mr Hadley said the documents containing the uranium claims had emerged via the US State Department and then the CIA, but had not directly come to the National Security Council (NSC).

The UK government also used the Niger claim in making the case for the war. It said it had received the information independently from an unnamed intelligence source.

An Italian journalist, Elisabetta Burba, has previously said she received a copy of the dossier in 2002 from a man she knew as a security consultant and passed it to the US embassy in Rome for verification.

Prior to Mr Bush's address, the CIA had sent former ambassador Joseph Wilson to investigate the Iraq-Niger link and he reported that no such attempt to buy uranium - which can be used to make nuclear weapons - was likely to have taken place. What is with this sudden amnesia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair#Discovery_and_scandal) that Republicans get whenever they get nabbed?

Maybe the US, British and Italian intelligence services should try to align their lies before they continue with this farce?

Surely, if 55% (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=1278080) of the country now believe that the Bush administration intentionally misled the American public in making its case for war, that means that they believe he LIED.

Wasn't another US president impeached for lying?

Maybe he should have said that he couldn't remember getting that BJ. He's have gotten off scott free and had a State Funeral to boot!

If the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld crew don't all Swing from the nearest tree after this, then the American People are truly, truly powerless to control their leaders.

[TonsOfFun]

Have you heard about Italy's new law about owning a pet? If you don't take your dog for a walk or neglect them any another way, you'll be fined $600 dollars. And that involves cats, rabbits, whatever....

Oh yeah, and you can't keep your goldfish in a round bowl anymore because some "expert" says it'll makes your fish blind, and you'll get fined too, cause it's also against the law

What do you expect, this is coming from a country that elected a pornstar to parliment

The amount of people I've told to change their friggin goldfish bowl because it's cruel on the fish is unreal. Good on Italy. All good laws in my opinion! If you cannot be bothered to look after a pet properly, then you shouldn't have a pet!

[DapperDiverge]

Why is that governments can give a damn about an animal so much, but when it comes to a fellow human being, they disregard them. I understand cruelty to animals is wrong but so is prejudice towards people. When I see a dog getting better healthcare than an ex-veteran I just want to scream! Where are the government's priorities, here and abroad?

[sam i am]

It wasn-a me-a! (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4402594.stm)

Bet you'd all forgotten about those documents claiming that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger? They basically clinched the deal for Bush.

Pity they were forged (http://www.sundayherald.com/35264).

And now the US claims that they never existed (http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=1275365)!!!

What is with this sudden amnesia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran-Contra_Affair#Discovery_and_scandal) that Republicans get whenever they get nabbed?

Maybe the US, British and Italian intelligence services should try to align their lies before they continue with this farce?

Surely, if 55% (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/PollVault/story?id=1278080) of the country now believe that the Bush administration intentionally misled the American public in making its case for war, that means that they believe he LIED.

Wasn't another US president impeached for lying?

Maybe he should have said that he couldn't remember getting that BJ. He's have gotten off scott free and had a State Funeral to boot!

If the Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld crew don't all Swing from the nearest tree after this, then the American People are truly, truly powerless to control their leaders.

This is some good, solid fact-finding, thus far, ali.

My only confusion comes as thus : were there two or more lines of faulty intelligence, then, streaming into the US & British intelligence communities? This whole disaffected Niger official / Italian military intelligence linkage is interesting and, possibly, damning, but it doesn't entirely explain the mess. Do you have links to the IAEA's findings and how they came to the conclusion about the falsity of the inital claims?

I know there's been a ton of analysis after the fact of the letterheads and the dates of service of certain Nigerian officials, but how much of this was known/revealed prior to the State of the Union speech and the actual invasion? How much was deliberate and how much was just inane follow-up by those supplying the faulty information?

All good questions that still need answers....

[TonsOfFun]

Why is that governments can give a damn about an animal so much, but when it comes to a fellow human being, they disregard them. I understand cruelty to animals is wrong but so is prejudice towards people. When I see a dog getting better healthcare than an ex-veteran I just want to scream! Where are the government's priorities, here and abroad?


Yeah, why bother investigating Rape when so many murders are unsolved :rolleyes:

Your comparision is bullshit. It ALL should be sorted. You know little things lead to a long way. If my car stop getting broken into maybe then I would beat the shit out of my dog every night in anger. Stopping something like you started in the thread is easy, which is why they've done it. It's out of the way. The next fucker to abuse an animal gets $600 to help pay for better health care and such like. Dogs get good health care because those that are lucky enough to have dogs getting health care are rich and thus do. So many dogs are left to die. Veterans get healthcare, but it's poor. Some get none which is wrong. Some get great health care. There is injustice all over the place. But you've gotta give credit when a good idea is a good idea. Just because that doesn't solve world peace doesn't mean it's a load of rubbish.

I know some fucker will read this and say 'why do you hate veterans'. I don't, it's just that the person who says that cannot understand what I'm trying to say. Neither can I but I find your statement immature or something :p

I'm in a mood over nothing tonight, no offense!

[Ali]

I know there's been a ton of analysis after the fact of the letterheads and the dates of service of certain Nigerian officials, but how much of this was known/revealed prior to the State of the Union speech and the actual invasion? How much was deliberate and how much was just inane follow-up by those supplying the faulty information?

All good questions that still need answers....The main point being, why was this document not properly checked by those who used it to justify war?

Was it because it served a purpose as it was?

[hellojello]

The main point being, why was this document not properly checked by those who used it to justify war?

Was it because it served a purpose as it was?
Isn't that question kind of redundant?

Unless it's meant to be rhetorical...

[sam i am]

The main point being, why was this document not properly checked by those who used it to justify war?

Was it because it served a purpose as it was?

I know what you are implying, but I guess my questioning nature still has the question :

If the original documentation was fake or faulty, and those who were SUPPOSED to check authenticity, etc., also missed their bets as far ensuring accuracy, etc., how could the top people who eventually made the case be accountable on the same level as those who originated the false/faulty/incomplete information?

I mean, there seems to be a long couple of strings from the original documentation to the eventual speeches and/or declarations that brought about the war. And, weren't the "oppositions" in many countries also privy to the same info. and came to same conclusions?

So.....who is ultimately responsible, or does it really matter anymore as the US cannot simply walk away at this point?