Troll Shoots Self While Playing with Taki’s Gun

For all of you out there who think G.W. Bush deserves to be impeached--I’m with you, of course--we may now have the “smoking gun” which would force the Democrats in Congress to act, even if they do not want to. This is a matter of principle, not politics. I believe a fair reading of Sidney Blumenthal’s investigative report on Salon.com of last Thursday, September 6th, provides that smoking gun. The title says it all; it is what many of us have suspected for years: “Bush Knew Saddam had No Weapons of Mass Destruction”. The story concerns the Foreign Minister of Iraq, Naji Sabri by name, who was in office at the time of the U.S. invasion, and who was passing “documentary intelligence” to the CIA about Iraq’s WMD--or more to the point, the complete lack thereof--in the months prior to the invasion. Sabri had become a CIA asset, a double agent, an informant from Saddam’s inner circle.

The story is not new. It was first broken by the CIA European Operations Chief, Tyler Drumheller, on CBS’s 60 Minutes in April of 2006, and was contained in his book On The Brink. It struck me as an amazing and important revelation at the time, but nothing happened in reaction to it. Cheney, Bush and their “neocon” brigades went on their merry way, undisturbed, with no investigation by Congress to find out the truth of Drumheller’s allegations, which were to the effect that Iraq had no WMD, Bush and Cheney knew it, but went ahead to invade anyway. “This isn’t about intelligence. It’s about regime change,” is the way a close aid to Tenet put it at the time, describing the White House obsession.

The general lack of interest by Capitol Hill as to how and why the Bush Administration, under the orchestration of Dick Cheney, railroaded this country into a war in Iraq is passing strange and appears to be puzzling, unless you accept the notion, as I do, that the bipartisan leadership on Capitol Hill was ”in on it” from the beginning for purely domestic political reasons unrelated to foreign policy per se, and so does not wish now, in the aftermath, to compromise and divulge its own involvement in the fraudulent enterprise.

Blumenthal’s piece is not an op-ed. He is not writing in his capacity as a Bill Clinton groupie, in an attempt to crucify Bush. It is an investigative report which seems to have come up with 3 new points to add to what Drumheller has already exposed months ago. In my opinion, these new points render Bush impeachable, and the Congress has little choice but to act, irrespective of what Nancy Pelosi thinks.

(1) Two former senior CIA officers have come forward to confirm Drumheller’s account that Bush was personally briefed by CIA chief George Tenet on September 18th 2002, and that Bush had no interest in hearing the good news that Saddam’s WMD had been destroyed under UN supervision, because it did not fit into the Administration’s carefully crafted, preordained plan to invade Iraq. “Bush didn’t give a f--- about the intelligence,” states one of the CIA officers.

(2) Tenet never shared the intel with Secretary of State Colin Powell, which information turned out to be on the money, and was 180 degrees at odds with Powell’s critical February 5th, 2003 speech to the UN Security Council, prepared by Tenet. Powell’s speech urged the UN to approve a U.S.-led invasion, based entirely upon bogus allegations about Iraq’s WMD. The UNSC declined. Was Tenet acting at the direction of Bush or Cheney?

(3) Tenet never shared the Naji Sabri intel with those who were putting together the National Intelligence Estimate for the Senate and Congress. Therefore, “Not a single senator...had an inkling of the Sabri intelligence.” According to one of the CIA officers, the Senate Intelligence Committee “never had the original memo on Sabri...the material was hidden or lost....”

This meant that the Senate voted to authorize Bush’s “preemptive” war based on fantasies of Iraq’s WMD, fabricated largely by the “neocons” at the Pentagon, while concurrently Bush and Cheney and Tenet withheld a credible, covert report from Saddam’s Foreign Minister, Naji Sabri, which indicated that Iraq possessed no WMD and was not a threat. In the words of one of the former CIA officers: “...there was nothing there, no threat.” Please note that Tenet does not even mention Naji Sabri in his memoir, At The Center of the Storm. Why not? What does that tell you?

The above scenario of malfeasance is similar to the prosecution deliberately withholding exculpatory evidence in a criminal case. That’s misconduct. The jury cannot consider all the evidence. The case is thrown out. Cheney and Bush--and their “neocon” operatives, Wolfowitz, Feith, and “Scooter” Libby, et al.--conned the Senate, the Congress and the country into a war on a premise they knew to be false, or at least highly suspect. Whom do these people think they are? What was their real motivation? Are we collectively going to allow Cheney and Bush to do it again, this time against Iran? Their deception in launching “Operation Iraqi Freedom” will cost the the U.S. Treasury well over a trillion dollars, has destroyed Iraq as a nation-state, and has killed and maimed thousands of Americans and many more Iraqis. What for?

It is up to the Democrats, now in control of both houses of Congress, to reach out to any sane Republicans left on the other side of the aisle, and draw up articles of impeachment against both President Bush and against the CEO of his Administration, Dick Cheney, for high crimes and misdemeanors. Again, this is a matter of principle, not politics. George Tenet, and his deputy director, John McLaughlin, and Drumheller and the two unnamed, former CIA officers quoted by Blumenthal, should be brought in to testify under oath, as well as the aforementioned “neocons”. In addition, the CIA should pick up Naji Sabri in Qatar, where he lives, and fly him to Washington, under FBI protection. Sabri should be placed under oath before a joint congressional committee as part of the Cheney-Bush impeachment inquiry, or otherwise. Let’s put Patrick J. Fitzgerald in charge of the overall investigation, to insure that it is honest and thorough. Let’s get to the bottom of this conspiracy, one way or the other.

“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

“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

“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

“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

“We 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 (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry ( D - MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

“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

“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

“There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated 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 an ilicit 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, December 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate 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

“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 weapon 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

“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.” < BR>- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 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

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.