Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kay on Today: "It Was Absolutely Prudent to Go to War Against Saddam" (Remarkable New Info)
The Today Show

Posted on 01/27/2004 5:24:28 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest

If one reasonably fair-and-balanced Today Show interview is a fluke, could two be a trend?

Back on January 15th, I reported on Katie Couric's interview with Ted Kennedy in which she had been remarkably tough on the senior splasher from Massachusetts regarding his speech on Iraq.

This morning, it was Matt Lauer's turn to offer, dare I say it, a thoroughly fair performance in his interview of former chief US weapons inspector in Iraq David Kay.

From a national security and political perspective, what was much more important than the tone of Lauer's questions was the substance of Kay's remarks. Democrats looking to exploit Kay's earlier remarks to accuse the Bush administration of misleading the American people will come away from this interview bitterly disappointed, their arguments in tatters.

For on every issue down the line, Kay forcefully made the case that the Bush administration acted in good faith, that Saddam was indeed a threat, and that war against him was absolutely justified.

Began Lauer: "Some people have relied on your earlier statement to say that the US misled the American people into war on the basis of a claim that Saddam had WMDs. Do you think the US misled the American people?"

Kay: "It wasn't only the US who came to that conclusion. The French, Germans, and UN all thought Saddam had WMDs."

Lauer: "If you didn't find WMDs, does that mean they never existed, or could they have been moved prior to war?"

Kay: "We looked at that possiblity but we didn't find evidence that there were large stockpiles prior to the war."

Lauer than ran a clip from Pres. Bush's State of the Union Address from one year ago, in which he stated that Saddam had been employing huge resources to develop WMDs and had built up a large stockpile.

Lauer: "Was that inaccurate?"

Kay: "It was inaccurate in terms of the reality we found on the ground now, but it was accurate in terms of the intelligence at the time.

"It was also accurate in the sense that Saddam did spend large sums of money trying to get WMDs but he simply didn't get what he paid for.

"There was lots of corruption in the Iraq WMD development program."

Lauer: "So scientists lied to Saddam, they told him they could develop WMDs, took huge sums of money and didn't deliver?"

Kay: "Right. There was widespread corruption, lots of money wasted. People were concerned about the money, not about working."

Lauer: "But the intent to develop WMDs was there?"

Kay: "Absolutely, Saddam surely wanted to get WMDs and spent a lot of money trying to do so."

Lauer then showed a clip from Colin Powell at the UN saying Saddam had at least 500 tons of WMDs. Again, Kay explained that Powell was not being intentionally misleading and that his statement was based on the best intelligence available at the time.

Added Kay, responding to what some of the Dems are alleging: "To say there must have been pressure from the White House on the intelligence community is wrong. We've also been wrong about Iran and Libya. We clearly need better intelligence."

Lauer then quoted from Kay's earlier interview with Tom Brokaw in which Kay had said that "if anyone was abused (by faulty intelligence) it was the President of the US rather than the other way around."

Kay confirmed the accuracy of that remark.

Lauer: "Is it true that in 2000 and 2001 Saddam was pushing his nuclear progarm?"

Kay: "Yes, he was pushing hard for nuclear and long range missiles. Look, it's clear the man had the intent. He simply wasn't successful."

"He clearly lied to UN and was in material brach."

In a key moment in the interview, Lauer asked: "Based on everything you now know, was it prudent to go to war against Saddam?"

Kay: "It was absolutely prudent to go to war. The system was collapsing, Iraq was a country with desire to develop WMDs, and it was attracting terrorists like flies to honey."

Lauer: "Are your earlier comments being exploited for political reasons?"

"Inevitably yes, but what we have is a national security issue that shouldn't be exploited as a political issue."

Lauer: "Should we continue to search for WMDs as VP Cheney has suggested?

Kay: "Absolutely."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: 2004; davidkay; iragiwmds; iraq; iraqifreedom; justwar; katiecuric; kay; mattlauer; todayshow; waragainstiraq; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-239 next last
To: governsleastgovernsbest
Kay interview JUST starting here...
101 posted on 01/27/2004 6:35:36 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 93 | View Replies]

To: InShanghai
Is there actually a play book for this? The media does seem to have patterns in reporting, but has anyone done a study or ...?

Chuckle. No idea. Reporters naturally observe (always adding a tincture of poetic license) the arc of an unfolding story. We know that Spinmeisters want to get all the bad news out first, not let it dribble out because the dribbling out pattern creates the appearance of a downward spiral. We know the DNC faxes talking points to Big Media outlets each and every morning. So I just put all these three together for my own nutty theory.

102 posted on 01/27/2004 6:38:10 AM PST by NutCrackerBoy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 86 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
I found a posting of the Kay/Brokaw interview but it didn't get much attention.

David Kay: Exclusive interview Chemical, biological, nuclear programs ‘rudimentary’

EXCERPT:

TB: The president described Iraq as a gathering threat — a gathering danger. Was that an accurate description?

DK: I think that’s a very accurate description.

103 posted on 01/27/2004 6:39:08 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Have I told you lately that you're wonderful? Well, YOU ARE!

Your Today Show reports are beyond excellent. You needn't worry about losing your "job" --- leopards don't change spots, they just get out of the cross-fire once in a while.
Truth is hard to refute.

104 posted on 01/27/2004 6:39:30 AM PST by onyx (Your secrets are safe with me and all my friends.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
I just saw a clip of this interview....you were right. Kay said Iraq could be more dangerous than we even thought. Terrorist's were flocking to Iraq.
105 posted on 01/27/2004 6:39:34 AM PST by Dog ("America will never seek a permission slip to defend the security of our Country")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: prairiebreeze
And...

I think Baghdad was actually becoming more dangerous in the last two years than even we realized.

(I'm hearing Kay on Today and just heard the "flies to honey" about terrorists/Iraq business)

106 posted on 01/27/2004 6:41:47 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: cyncooper
The above in italics is from the Brokaw interview...
107 posted on 01/27/2004 6:42:38 AM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 106 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Lauer then quoted from Kay's earlier interview with Tom Brokaw in which Kay had said that "if anyone was abused (by faulty intelligence) it was the President of the US rather than the other way around."

This bears repeating.

108 posted on 01/27/2004 6:44:29 AM PST by petitfour
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
In two major stories the plot turns to corrupt scientists and sinister markets for WMD expertise. Pakistan scientists are seling nuclear designs, and Iraqi scientists are stealing funds from under the nose of Saddam Hussein. Folks, the story is far from over. Why should we believe that Iraqi scientists, who admit to being dishonent and greedy, spent their days filling out crossword puzzles. A sophisticated black market for WMD is available. Why wouldn't these men sell their services.
109 posted on 01/27/2004 6:45:11 AM PST by reed_inthe_wind (I reprogrammed my computer to think existentially, I get the same results only slower)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thesummerwind
Over here for more info
110 posted on 01/27/2004 6:45:17 AM PST by Mo1 (Join the dollar a day crowd now!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: 4ConservativeJustices
That, or a really off the wall theory, they saw what their liberal cohorts were willing to do to a fellow media personality - Rush -, and didn't like it. Maybe a wake up call? I hope.
111 posted on 01/27/2004 6:46:56 AM PST by FreeAtlanta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
for later
112 posted on 01/27/2004 6:47:04 AM PST by luckydevi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Not fair to say Bush misled us.Saddam did spend enormous amounts of money,,scientists report success that didn't exist.He definitely sought to develop these weapons.Fraud and waste,lack of organization, all were a problem

Not pressure from the President that caused the misinformation..we've been wrong about a lot of things.
Missile program was a clear violation of UN resolutions.

I was impressed tha Lauer asked if he felt he was being misrepresented in reports.Yes,Kay said.

Absolutely prudent to go to war ,the country was a mess and ripe for more terrorist takeover or mischief.
113 posted on 01/27/2004 6:47:49 AM PST by MEG33 (America will never seek a permission slip to provide for the security of our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 100 | View Replies]

To: onyx
Have I told you lately that you're wonderful? Well, YOU ARE!

Hmm, I wonder if I could get you to send that in writing to a certain young lady in upstate NY who apparently is not entirely convinced! In any case, thanks very much [inserting blushing emoticon . . . ]

114 posted on 01/27/2004 6:48:02 AM PST by governsleastgovernsbest
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Thanks so much for the thread! I heard Kay's going to be up on the Hill tomorrow. Anyone know if the hearing's going to be open and televised?
115 posted on 01/27/2004 6:49:25 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Thanks for the ping. I think if this keeps up you may be able to discontinue the Nexium....

I saw/heard most of the interview. I tend to agree with you - Lauer was amazingly not biased in this interview. I kept waiting for him to slant the questions to make Bush look bad and he really didn't. And he gave Kay the time to say things like, "not just the US was misled," "Saddam really was a threat," etc. Maybe Matt has finally grown up... You know what Winston Churchill said, "if you're not a liberal when you're young, you have no heart. If you aren't a conservative when you're older, you have no wisdom."

Now, if al-Katie had done the interview, it probably would've gone down the usual DNC-inspired, left-leaning, Bush-bashing fiesta.
116 posted on 01/27/2004 6:50:07 AM PST by iceskater (....and when h*ll freezes over, I'll skate there, too.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: reed_inthe_wind
He found no evidence of production and movement to another country but did not say it absolutely did not happen.The expertise can easily be shared,sold.
117 posted on 01/27/2004 6:50:36 AM PST by MEG33 (America will never seek a permission slip to provide for the security of our country)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 109 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
LOL, Yes it will be sad news for them, but I'm sure they will eat up the Dem talking points or focus on one word in a paragraph. It must be hell to root against your own country?
118 posted on 01/27/2004 6:51:04 AM PST by MJY1288 (WITHOUT DOUBLE STANDARDS, LIBERALS WOULDN'T HAVE ANY !)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
And, FWIW, I can't believe 100% of the scientists were fooling Saddamn 100% of the time. And if they weren't, we need to find any small stockpiles since they can still be very deadly.
119 posted on 01/27/2004 6:51:07 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: governsleastgovernsbest
Excellent synopsis!

This is one report that didn't make me furious.

Thanks for keeping us informed.
120 posted on 01/27/2004 6:51:52 AM PST by RottiBiz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 221-239 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson