Posted on 11/02/2005 10:09:28 AM PST by Xanadu2112
The indictment of Lewis Libby on charges of lying to a grand jury about the outing of Valerie Wilson has focused attention on the lengths to which the Bush administration went in 2003 to try to distract the public from this central fact: American soldiers found a lot of things in Iraq, including a well-armed insurgency their bosses never anticipated, but they did not find weapons of mass destruction.
It's clear from the indictment that Vice President Dick Cheney and his staff formed the command bunker for this misdirection campaign. But there is a much larger issue than the question of what administration officials said about Iraq after the invasion - it's what they said about Iraq before the invasion. Senator Harry Reid, the minority leader, may have been grandstanding yesterday when he forced the Senate to hold a closed session on the Iraqi intelligence, but at least he gave the issue a much-needed push. President Bush, Vice President Cheney, Condoleezza Rice, Donald Rumsfeld, Colin Powell and George Tenet, to name a few leading figures, built support for the war by telling the world that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling chemical weapons, feverishly developing germ warfare devices and racing to build a nuclear bomb. Some of them, notably Mr. Cheney, the administration's doomsayer in chief, said Iraq had conspired with Al Qaeda and implied that Saddam Hussein was connected to 9/11.
Last year, the Senate Intelligence Committee did a good bipartisan job of explaining that the intelligence in general was dubious, old and even faked by foreign sources. The panel said the analysts had suffered from groupthink. At the time, the highest-ranking officials in Washington were demanding evidence against Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
This article and your general disposition towards the administration is why your profits are down 52% and why your company and subscriptions continue to shrink. Let's go back a couple of years before George Bush was elected and see what the people in charge were saying about WMD in Iraq why don't we?
When Bill Clinton was the president, it was he who established regime change as the policy of the United States, he was quoted as saying, "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 and "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
President Clinton's National Security Advisor, Sandy Berger and his Secretary of State, Madeline Albright are quoted as saying about Saddam and his WMD aspirations, "Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998 and "Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 also, "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998.
As far as Congress goes this is what some of the your favorite senators were saying, "[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998 as well as, "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
Here are some other quotes from some more of your favorite Liberal politicians, "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002.
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime . He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction . So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003. No offense, but you must think we forgot all of these statements? If you guys want to open the ball on this then so be it. If civil war is what you want then bring it.
The problem with the Times is that your time is over and you just don't know it yet. You and the Democrat's that you carry water for lost the Supreme Court, the Congress, the Executive branch, Governorships, and just about every other battle you have fought. That is why Harry Reid pulled his little crying jag yesterday because he knows the game is over. Do you think that we forgot that every intelligence agency in the world was saying Saddam had WMD! I know that you people at the NYT think you know everything about everything but we are watching and listening out here in our pajamas.
Blaming the President but none of these others just shows what everyone already knows...that you are openly advocating the defeat of this administration and the US in Iraq. The only problem with your agenda of abortion, socialism, and surrender is that it isn't happening. What you are doing now is coming suspiciously close to sedition. You and the Democrats have no ideas, no vision, no power and we know that that chaps your hide. It will be fun to watch when you open this box and many of the people who are listed above start to come under the spotlight, including your favorite Senator from NY, Hillary Clinton! So if that is the way you want to go then lets get it on!
Thanks and have a nice day!
You might as well talk to the wall.
Well met indeed.
"Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons."
For all you 911 Commission fans: Is that Wall - as in Jamie Gorelic?
Seriously - the left wing lives in some kind of alternate universe - so spend your efforts on those not already over the edge.
Why oh why do I here the "we did not find WMDs" crap when they actually found WMDs ... 52 in all ... that were reported including the sarin gas exploding shell ....
For the life of me this is but one of many reasons that we went to war.
It was like listening to Chretein last night on the news saying he saved Canada from not going into the Iraq war. Yet we fought and are still fighting in the Afganistan war, did sea missions during the Iraq war, directed coalition aircraft during the war in theatre and we sent at least 34 troops on exchange with the American military into the Iraqi theatre.
I feel like I am in a different universe.
Looks like ElRushbo found your post. He just read it on air. Congrats!
but they did not find weapons of mass destruction.
And let's not forget the 1.7 tons of enriched, weapons grade uranium. But we know Saddam was just gonna use that to give X-rays to poor kids.
Owl_Eagle(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
great response...post an e-mail address and fax numbers and I'll send them out all feggin day...
I believe the justification was their non compliance with UN inspections. If you don't let us in to look for WMD, we will break down your door and take a look. If we didn't find any, good, but you should have just let the inspections happen and you could have avoided the whole thing.
Excellent post. Thank you.
bttt
"And let's not forget the 1.7 tons of enriched, weapons grade uranium."
Can you give me a link for this? I have heard this several times, but can't find anything on it.
thanks.
A big part of the problem is that Bush has not been using the Bully Pulpit on at least a monthly basis to update the American public on the facts and progress of the war
He is a WAR TIME LEADER and should act accordingly
Really? That's cool! I know he has been saying things along the same line.
They want you to return to the home as soon ass possible to take your meds.
They found 24 airplanes buried in the sand in Iraq a year after tens of thousands of coalition soldiers were there.
How hard do you think it would be to hide a half dozen nukes or other WMDs either domestically or in Syria, seeing that we had the Keystone Kops as weapons inspectors and telegraphed our moves a half-year in advance?
I wish I had that pic of the MIG-25 buried in the sand!
Hawk,
Can you send me the link to the WMDs they found?
Thanks,
Scott
The ultimate source is both Kay and Dulfer's reports, but it's fresh in my mind from hearing Richard Miniter twice in the last couple of days talking about his new book Disinformation. For some reason I'm not able to pull up either of the reports from the CIA page, but that's probably my crappy P.C.
Owl_Eagle
(If what I just wrote makes you sad or angry,
thanks...
Sad to say, but to me when I hear WMD, I think of Colin Powel giving his presentation to the UN showing all of the pics and diagrams and vials. THOSE are the WMD's that were never found, and the reason that so few people trust W.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.