October 26th, 2005
I’ve been thinking about Donklephant’s post by Callimachus this morning called “______ Lied”. The post itself has a liberal-biased tilt, but the original column, It Wasn’t Just Miller’s Story seems to be straight reporting to me and I think it’s something that many of us die-hard anti-Iraq-War-Bill-Clinton-loving liberal try very, very hard to ignore or forget.
The truth is that the fear of Suddam Huissen’s potential to wage nuclear destruction on his neighbors and the world didn’t start in January 2001 or even after September 11, 2001.
Here are a few past headlines from The New York Times:
- “Iraq Has Network of Outside Help on Arms, Experts Say”(November 1998)
- “U.S. Says Iraq Aided Production of Chemical Weapons in Sudan”(August 1998)
- “Iraq Suspected of Secret Germ War Effort” (February 2000)
- “Signs of Iraqi Arms Buildup Bedevil U.S. Administration” (February 2000)
- “Flight Tests Show Iraq Has Resumed a Missile Program” (July 2000) [“It Wasn’t Just Miller’s Story”]
It’s important to note here that despite recent accusations and theories that Judith Miller single-handedly convinced the American public that an invasion of Iraq was not only necessary but the right thing to do, she shared a byline on only one of these articles, the rest were written by others. Also, The New York Times wasn’t the only paper making these Clinton-era claims; The Washington Post’s archives contains similar articles.
Clinton administration officials, intelligence officials, U.N. weapons inspectors, and international analysts at the time claimed that Iraq would be “capable within months — and possibly just weeks or days — of threatening its neighbors with an arsenal of chemical, biological and even nuclear weapons;” it was believed that Iraq was “still hiding tons of nerve gas” and was “seeking to obtain uranium from a rogue nation or terrorist groups to complete as many as four nuclear warheads.” It was believed that Hussein spent $120 billion in oil revenue and “devoted his intelligence service to an endless game of cat and mouse to hide his suspected weapons caches from United Nations inspections.” He was reportedly “scouring the world for tools to build new weapons” and there were concerns that he was closer to building a nuclear weapon than he was in 1991.[“It Wasn’t Just Miller’s Story”]
Heck, the Clinton administration was so worried about Iraq’s growing nuclear program, that they bombed Iraq for four days in 1998 .
From 1998 through 2000, the Times editorial page warned that “without further outside intervention, Iraq should be able to rebuild weapons and missile plants within a year” and that “future military attacks may be required to diminish the arsenal again.” Otherwise, Iraq could “restore its ability to deliver biological and chemical weapons against potential targets in the Middle East.” “The world,” it said, “cannot leave Mr. Hussein free to manufacture horrific germs and nerve gases and use them to terrorize neighboring countries.”
[…]
The Times was not alone, of course. On Jan. 29, 2001, The Post editorialized that “of all the booby traps left behind by the Clinton administration, none is more dangerous — or more urgent — than the situation in Iraq. Over the last year, Mr. Clinton and his team quietly avoided dealing with, or calling attention to, the almost complete unraveling of a decade’s efforts to isolate the regime of Saddam Hussein and prevent it from rebuilding its weapons of mass destruction. That leaves President Bush to confront a dismaying panorama in the Persian Gulf,” including “intelligence photos that show the reconstruction of factories long suspected of producing chemical and biological weapons.”
[…]
As we wage what the Times now calls “the continuing battle over the Bush administration’s justification for the war in Iraq,” we will have to grapple with the stubborn fact that the underlying rationale for the war was already in place when this administration arrived.[“It Wasn’t Just Miller’s Story”]
If the danger from Hussien and Iraq was so immenent, why did we as a nation wait so long?
If the danger from Hussein and Iraq was so real, why did we struggle to find allies to back us up?
If Hussein really is the insane dictator, willing to use chemical warfare on his own people — which we know is true — why then did he not use these weapons of mass distruction on American troops marching toward Baghdad? One argument the right likes to give is that Hussein shipped them to other countries to hide them, but I question why he would make WMD and then not use them during a time of war?
If there were WMD and real proof of them, why did the Bush administration try to discredit Joseph Wilson, a retired diplomat, when he refuted their claims of evidence that Iraq had bought uranium from Nigeria? Why would they need to if the evidence was so strong?
I have a lot of questions, but somehow I don’t think we’ll ever know the whole truth.
Tags: Judy Miller, Saddam Hussein, Bill Clinton, Iraq, George W. Bush, politics, WMD, Joe Wilson
October 26th, 2005
One of the things I find fascinating as I watch the whole PlameGate story unfold is the focus of Main Stream Media and most blogs on the lies told to cover up that the CIA leak actually came from the White House, from near the top. No one in MSM and very few bloggers are publically questioning why Valerie Plame’s identity was leaked.
Oh, yes, I know they’re reporting that her identity was leaked in retaliation for her husband’s, Joe Wilson’s, public statements refuting their so-called evidence that Iraq had bought uranium from Nigeria.
The question people should be asking is why did they feel the need to retailiate? Wasn’t their evidence strong enough to withstand the criticism of one retired diplomat?
It just seems to me that they went to a lot of trouble just to discredit someone politically just because he said their information was wrong. Wouldn’t it have made more sense to prove their evidence was correct?
Unless that wasn’t possible; in which case, why not admit they were misled then?
The sad part is that if they had stepped up then and admitted that the information was questionable, they could have avoided a lot of things, not just the whole PlameGate thing but all the speculation that there was a conspiracy by the White House to take us to War in Iraq for their own nefarious reasons.
Unless, it was a conspiracy all along.
Tags: politics, PlameGate, CIA, Joe Wilson, Iraq
October 25th, 2005
This morning, listening to an NPR story about Chenney’s denial that he even knew who Joseph Wilson was before the newspaper article revealing Wilson’s wife’s identity was published and I suddenly flashed back to the Vice Presidential debate last fall:
I’m up in the Senate most Tuesdays when they’re in session. The first time I ever met you was when you walked on the stage tonight.
– Vice President Dick Chenney to then-Senator Edwards, September 30, 2004 [“2004 Vice Presidential Debate”]
Of course, they’d met before…
Addressing the National Prayer Breakast, Cheney said: “Thank you. Thank you very much. Congressman Watts, Senator Edwards, friends from across America and distinguished visitors to our country from all over the world, Lynne and I honored to be with you all this morning.” [FDCH Political Transcripts, Cheney Remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast, 2/1/01] [“Cheney LIES LIES LIES (Daily Kos)”]
Really that was a childish tactic on Chenney’s part. But apparently, it’s one he’s used to using.
I don’t know Joe Wilson. I’ve never met Joe Wilson.
– Vice President Dick Chenney, September 14, 2003 [“Meet the Press”]
Lawyers involved in the case, who described the notes to The New York Times, said they showed that Mr. Cheney knew that Ms. Wilson worked at the C.I.A. more than a month before her identity was made public and her undercover status was disclosed in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak on July 14, 2003.
Mr. Libby’s notes indicate that Mr. Cheney had gotten his information about Ms. Wilson from George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, in response to questions from the vice president about Mr. Wilson. [“Cheney Told Aide of C.I.A. Officer, Notes Show”]
It’s not a warm-fuzzy feeling to know that your Vice President has a history of lying and denying. If he lies about “small stuff” like this, how can we trust anything that comes out of his mouth?
Tags: Dick Cheney, Joe Wilson, lie
July 25th, 2005
The following comes from democrats.gov’s website where they currently have a clock tallying the number of days, hours, minutes and seconds that the Republican’s have not spent investigating the CI Leak case. (Currently it is over 742 days as of this posting.)
As Earl Pitts, Redneck American, has been known to say, “Wake up, America!“
Number of days after the article outing Ambassador Wilson’s wife appeared that the White House required its staff to turn over evidence relating to the leak: 85
Approximate hours between then-White House counsel Alberto Gonzalez’s advance notification to White House Chief of Staff Andy Card that he would require staff to turn over evidence relating to the case and formal notification to staff of that requirement: 12
Minimum number of times an Administration official leaked classified information about the identity of Ambassador Wilson’s wife: 11
Minimum number of times after the beginning of the Justice Department’s investigation that White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan claimed Karl Rove was not involved: 5
Minimum number of times since evidence linking Karl Rove to the leak was made public that Press Secretary McClellan has refused to comment on the case, citing an ongoing investigation: 7
Minimum number of hearings held by Senate Republicans to investigate accusations against President Clinton involving the “Whitewater” case: 20
Total hearings held by Senate Republicans to investigate the leak of the covert identity of Ambassador Joseph Wilson;s wife: 0
Tags: PlameGate, Democrats, Joe Wilson, Republicans, politics, Conspiracy Theories, Andrew Card, Alberto Gonzales, Scott McClellan, Karl Rove, Bill Clinton, Senate
July 21st, 2005
So Molly Ivins wrote a brilliant editorial at freepress.org about how Americans seem to be missing the point with this whole Karl Rove thing. We’re focusing on who the leak was and whether or not it was a criminal act and losing site of the fact that it was done as political payback to a man who disagreed with President Bush’s so-called evidence of WMD in Iraq.
Actually, we are missing the point here. The point being that Joseph Wilson is merely one of the many people who provided one of the by now innumerable pieces of evidence that this administration lied about why we went to war in Iraq. When former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill wrote that Bush planned to invade Iraq from the day he took office, the administration went after O’Neill. When Richard Clarke disclosed that the Bushies wanted to use Sept. 11 to go after Saddam Hussein from Sept. 12 on, they went after Clarke. They went after Gen. Zinni, they went after Gen. Shinseki and everyone else who opposed the folly or told the truth about it. After they got done lying about weapons of mass destruction and about connections to Al Qaeda, they switched to the stomach-churning pretense that we had done it all for democracy. Urp.
She also talks about how the Bush administration has set the FBI on the ACLU:
The ACLU works solely through the legal system: It does not advocate violence, terrorism or any other damn thing except the Bill of Rights. Since when is that extremist? Why in the name of heaven are we wasting the FBI’s time on this idiocy? I don’t pretend to be an expert on counter-terrorism, but if it were up to me, I wouldn’t start looking for the violence-prone in pacifist groups either…
…We are living in a time when our government is investigating an organization that stands for the highest and best American ideals. And claiming the mantle of patriotism while they are about it. This is cuckoo — and such an idiotic waste of the FBI’s time and the taxpayers’ money that whoever thought up this idiocy should be fired yesterday.
And I love this line:
If you support someone politically, you are not required to believe they are perfect.
I wish all of those people who voted for Bush or even Kerry would take a moment and really think about that one. Your candidate is not God. Take a step back and really look hard at what’s happing in American and the world. I don’t understand how two groups of people can hear the same news and only hear what they want even if what they want completely conflicts with the facts presented.
Tags: Molly Ivins, Karl Rove, Joe Wilson, Iraq, FBI, ACLU, George W. Bush, politics
