Tuesday, June 13, 2006

Question not being asked

One question that not many people have touched conserns the forged documents linking Nigera and Iraq.

These documents were badly forged.

My theroy is this: American Neo-Cons drew up a draft of a document they would have liked to have found. They didn't know or really attempt to forge the document, they didn't know key factors such as does Nigera month-day-yar or do they day-month-year. They didn't know what typical headers one would find on a secure document such as this.

The American Neo-Cons (Dickhead) gave the document to the Italian Mafia/Government. They had hoped that the Italians would sign the document or at least pretend to have reveived the document - either way. The Italians not being complete dumbasses decided to pass on the secret mission. They agreed that they would pass off the document but they wanted no part of forging a real looking document. Instead they passed off the draft thinking that it would be quickly rejected by the public. No one looked in to it - so things were looking good. The Italians and Dickhead were hoping that the little fact that the documents were forged would be forgotten.

They were caught, the Italians went quiet, Bush got his war anyway.

The documents were so badly forged that one ponders George Bush's own computer skills. Microsoft Word really isn't that difficult. If George Bush can't use MS Word then maybe we should consider a manidatory IQ test prior to running for office (just kidding, I really don't think that is a good idea).

I am just kidding. The problem with the documents were not that they were badly printed or spelled they were inconsistant. Any one of us could have given these documents to our children and asked them to spot the inconsistancies, they would have got half the mistakes right off the bat, comare the fake ones to real looking ones and any 8 year old could have spotted the flaws. It's just like one of thoes puzzles in a Highlights magizine.

The forged document's flaws were the as follows: the letter was sent to the person it was sent from, (this person was the president who would not have actually done the spying), the minister of Niger mentioned in the document was not in office for the past 11 years, use of an obsolete letterhead, use of incompatible dates, poorly forged signatures, use of the wrong symbol for the president's office (something like this: letters to the presidnet are marked "P", whereas this document was marked "Pres"), in consistant use of date format (something like: mm/dd/yy and sometimes dd-mm-yy and sometimes YYYY MM DD hh:mm), in correct use of grammatical tenses refering to a future date as having occured in the past (something like: "back in 3008 I discovered"). The documents claim to have been created in 1999 but they refer to 2000 as having occured in the past. Actually the documents were created in 2001.

In Fact you really have to question Bush's sanity. His willingness to believe anything anyone hands him. The only way to believe this paper is not forged would be in the following scenerio.

Recieve letters. Huh, it seems the president of Italy sent himself a letter that he mis-addressed while attempting to send this letter to himself. Open letters. Huh, it seems the president must have picked up the old letter head. Huh, it seems the president forgot the date numbering convention multiple times while writing this letter to himself. Huh, it seems the president must have been advised by their spys and wrote this letter to himself speaking on behalf of the spy agency instead of just having the spy agency sending the letter. Huh, it seems the president became confused about what dates occur in the present and what dates occur in the past, he must not know what year it is now. Huh, it seems the president must have had someone else sign his name on these papers that he wrote and sent himself.

Only under that sceniro is the document believable.


Post a Comment

<< Home