Worse, the Iraq described by the graduate student is not the Iraq of 2003 but the Iraq of 1991. So glaring was the theft of intellectual property that the official British document even cut and pasted whole verbatim segments of the research paper, including grammatical errors, and presented the findings as the result of intense work by British intelligence services.

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell both praised and quoted that same British report in his presentation at the United Nations yesterday.

It is important that readers see and understand the enormity of this violation of public trust for themselves. The story was first broken by Britain's Channel 4 today and it is appearing in more papers and web sites by the hour. The following links lead directly to the Channel 4 story, to the British "intelligence" report and to the original student paper.

What was also disclosed was that certain portions of the academic report were altered by the PM Tony Blair to make them more inflammatory. In one cited instance Blair changed "aiding opposition groups" to "supporting terrorists."

The Channel 4 story is at:

http://www.channel4.com/news/home/z/stories/20030206/dossier.html

The Official UK intelligence report is at:

http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page7111.asp

The original student research paper is located at: http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2002/issue3/jv6n3a1.html

In the context of merely preventing or slowing a war with Iraq this would be earth shattering news. But in a world that is slowly beginning to feel the pressure of and admit the reality of dwindling global oil supplies the fallout from the story may actually accelerate hostilities. British Prime Minister Tony Blair will be, by tomorrow, facing monumental challenges in both Parliament and from British public opinion that is overwhelmingly opposed to an Iraqi invasion. The event could be enough to topple his government and cause new elections which might well result in a new government that is not mind-melded with the Bush administration.

The Bush administration, faced with its own embarrassment over the issue, cannot wage a successful war without England. The first thought that came to my mind when I saw the story was that George W. Bush must pre-empt this story and make it moot to save not only Blair but himself as well. The only way to do that is to have the war begin before the justified outrage of the electorate which has been treated with utter contempt can make itself felt.

I noticed tonight that the Associated Press and Yahoo news had reported that the 101st Air Assault Division based at Ft. Campbell, Kentucky - the Army's premier "door kickers" - had been given their deployment orders for the Gulf this afternoon. As I have previously reported, the 101st, along with units like the 75th Rangers can be deployed and operational within 96 hours, anywhere in the world. When the 101st heads out you know the war is going to start very soon.

These are incredibly dangerous times, made more so because there is no turning back for the Bush administration. This story is incredible proof of the cynicism, dishonesty and callousness of the tyrants pushing the world toward destruction. And Iraq is merely the first stop on a sequential plan for control of the last remaining oil reserves on the planet. I encourage all who read the information contained in these links to spread it far and wide and also, by whatever means at their disposal, to tell the mainstream press, members of congress and the White House itself that we will not follow; we will not obey; and we will not kill on the orders of those who lie to us and who demonstrate the integrity of thieves and intellectual cowards.

This might be our last chance before the bombs start falling, before young American men and many innocent Iraqi civilians are reduced to blood and ash.

Here are a few links.

"Britain stands by Iraq report" (reuters uk)

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/030207/80/dsgz6.html

"UK defends 'copied' Iraq dossier" (bbc)

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/2735031.stm

"UK war dossier a sham, say experts

British 'intelligence' lifted from academic articles"

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,890916,00.html

"Number 10 has been accused of "scandalously" plagiarising data from 1991

for use in its latest dossier of evidence against Saddam Hussein."

http://www.itv.com/news/1894417.html

Thanks to the internet news development can occur quickly.

Do your part and contact local Newspapers and ask them when they plan to cover the story.

Right now, I have not found one source in the United States that has covered this information. The BBC printed it. reuters UK did too.

Will your paper be the first to publish in the US of A?



keep posting.

I suppose this wouldn't be a big deal if I created the report.

The worst that would happen to me is that the University would ban me from the halls of Academia for life.

Seeing how that isn't the case, and that the material was actually presented as "BRITISH INTELLIGENCE" (he-he) and not a post-grad's work on 1991 Iraq, I am left slightly at odds.

Does this mean if I say I compiled my paper from many different sources, and "it does not identify or credit any sources, but nor does it claim any exclusivity of authorship" am I off the hook? Any Instructors in the house? I just can't see this working, but I'll try, damn-it!

Yes, I'll try to live up to the role model's standing before us. Look, at this "fine paper" I found it., uh (cough) it was compiled by somebody here. But, I can't quite find him because I DoN't WaNt JEAPaRDiZE HiS SaFeTY!!

(snort-har-he)