Talk:Nurse Nayirah

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information and associated task forces: This article is not currently associated with a task force. To tag it for one or more task forces, please add the task force codes from the template instructions to the template call.

Contents 1 Copied from Reference? 2 $14 million? 3 Repetition 4 Consequences 5 Congress 6 "there were laws against lying to Congress" 7 Prosecuted but not for lying to Congress 8 HBO reference

[edit] Copied from Reference?

Check out the cited external link- http://www.visualstatistics.net/East-West/Nurse%20Nayirah/Nurse%20Nayirah.htm much of that is word for word what is on the Wikipedia article. So which came first?

The extlink seems to have shown up in early 2006 [1] while the Wikipedia article is much older. 67.117.130.181 11:28, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] $14 million?

I thought the figure H&K was paid to convince the American public that the Kuwaiti emir was worth dying for was $11 million, not $14 million. --csloat 22:59, 16 August 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Repetition

The new material added in the last few days is just a repeat of what was already in the article- along with some choice POV additions such as: The United State’s real purpose for going to war was to protect our oil supply in Kuwait. The new links added are non-working. The photo is probably copyrighted. I'm therefore reverting to Gamaliel's version. --JJay 04:22, 15 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Consequences

Did anyone get prosecuted for these lies? Last time I looked, there were laws against lying to Congress. Yes, if she has diplomatic immunity, I can see her getting away with it, but what about Lauri Fitz-Pegado, or Hill & Knowlton?
Septegram 21:58, 23 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Congress

I doubt anyone was prosecuted. They were not presenting in a court of law, nor any place that that she would have to swear to tell the whole truth.

[edit] "there were laws against lying to Congress"

Only if the witness is under oath. And, only committees have subpoena power. Nayirah "testified" before the "Human Rights Caucus." A caucus is an informal group of members of Congress. Any two members of Congress can call themselves a Caucus.

The caucus meeting was dressed up to appear on TV as if it were a an official, committee hearing. It was not. It was all PR. That was a part of the scam.

[edit] Prosecuted but not for lying to Congress

SF Chronicle Jul 8, 1992. pg. A.1, "Ex-Envoy Faces Charges Over Helping Kuwait / 3 indicted for secret roles in propaganda campaign":

A former U.S. ambassador to Bahrain in the Reagan administration and two former executives of a conservative journal have been charged with taking $7.7 million from Kuwait in secret payments to push for U.S. intervention in the Persian Gulf war.

Apparently these guys took $7.7 million from the Kuwaiti government but spent only $2 million of it on the Nayirah hoax and pocketed the other $5.7 million. They were charged with acting as secret agents for Kuwait and with evading taxes.

It looks like there's also a book about the incident, John R. MacArthur, "Second Front: Censorship and Propaganda in the Gulf War". Might be worth looking at. 67.117.130.181 12:21, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

It's a great book; there's a chapter on the incident, but the book is about much more than that. csloat 16:54, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] HBO reference

The article states:

Home Box Office (HBO) presented Nayirah's story as truth in their 2002 Live From Baghdad. HBO eventually added, after the final credits, that the incubator "allegations were never substantiated."

However, in the movie, the incubator story is presented as an allegation that could potentially be a story. At the end of the movie along with several other historical notes, they also add that the incubator story is unfounded. I believe that the above characterization paints the HBO movie unfairly and could be changed to:

The 2002 HBO movie, Live From Baghdad, included several scenes dealing with the incubator allegations, but not presenting that story as truth. In that movie, several characters try to determine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the story, not able to draw any conclusions. After the final credits, a note stated that that the incubator "allegations were never substantiated." —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DaveFS (talk • contribs) 05:17, 7 April 2007 (UTC).

I've effected this change... The misleading text was up there for 8 months, however, since this advice was offered here! DBaba (talk) 04:47, 3 January 2008 (UTC)