 |
|
Add to My Group
|
December 17, 2008 at 06:23:30
by David Swanson Page 1 of 1 page(s) 
|
|
 
|
As George Bush prepares to leave office, he and his aides are trying desperately to rewrite history, especially on Iraq. Nearly six years after invading Iraq on the basis of lies that were manufactured inside the White House, the Bush Administration adamantly insists the lies were all innocent mistakes. Were they?
Originally, the invasion of Iraq was justified primarily on grounds that Iraq had substantial quantities of chemical and biological weapons and had "reconstituted" its nuclear weapons development program, and that it could give terrorists "weapons of mass destruction."
But there was no actual evidence Iraq had such weapons, and the White House knew it.
In 1995, Saddam Hussein's son-in-law Hussein Kamel informed U.S. and British intelligence officers that all Iraqi biological, chemical, missile, and nuclear weapons had been destroyed under his direct supervision. After U.N. inspectors left Iraq in 1998, Scott Ritter wrote, "The chemical, biological, nuclear, and long-ranged missile programs that were a real threat in 1991, had by 1998 been destroyed or rendered harmless." Ritter's conclusion was confirmed by the DIA in September 2002: "A substantial amount of Iraq's chemical warfare agents, precursors, munitions and production equipment were destroyed between 1991 and 1998 … [T]here is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and stockpiling chemical weapons."
In September 2002, CIA Director George Tenet personally told President Bush that Iraq's Foreign Minister Naji Sabri - whom the CIA had recruited and persuaded to remain in place - said Iraq had no WMD. That fall, the CIA sent Iraqi-Americans to visit Iraqi weapons scientists, and they reported all weapons programs had ended. In January 2003, Iraq's intelligence chief Tahir Jalil Habbush told British intelligence the same thing.
Thus the evidence against Iraq's possession of WMD's was overwhelming. What was the evidence for WMD's?
The source for biological weapons was the German informant "Curveball," whose interrogators informed the Bush Administration that Curveball was not "psychologically stable," was a heavy drinker, had had a mental breakdown, was "crazy," and was "probably a fabricator."
One source for nuclear weapons was a letter about an attempted Iraqi purchase of uranium from Niger that was given to the CIA in Rome in 2001, but the CIA quickly rejected it as a forgery. Ambassador Joe Wilson visited Niger in early 2002 and further discredited the claim of an Iraqi uranium purchase. The other source was the capture of aluminum tubes in Jordan in 2001, which Bush administration hardliners claimed were intended for uranium-enriching centrifuges. But experts in the Energy and State Departments insisted the tubes were for conventional battlefield rocket launchers.
Thus the weight of evidence was solidly against Iraq WMD's; the evidence for WMD's lacked credibility. So who is responsible for the lies - the intelligence agencies or the White House?
In June 2008, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence blamed the White House and said the statements about WMD's made by Bush, Cheney, and Rumsfeld were not substantiated by evidence. According to Chairman Jay Rockefeller, "In making the case for war, the Administration repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent."
Moreover, the White House directly pressured intelligence agencies to twist the evidence. Cheney made several visits to the CIA to pressure analysts. Numerous intelligence officials have testified about White House pressure, including Robin Raphel and David Dunford of the State Department, Richard Kerr and Paul Pillar of the CIA, and former national security official Kenneth Pollack.
The elaborate White House scheme to manufacture WMD lies was best summarized by Sir Richard Dearlove, the head of Britain's MI6, upon his return from meeting with CIA director George Tenet in Washington in July 2002. According to minutes of Prime Minister Blair's cabinet meeting on July 23, Dearlove reported "Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."
The invasion of Iraq was a catastrophe of historic proportions. George Bush and senior White House officials may never admit they deliberately lied about Iraq's weapons, but history has already concluded otherwise.
--
Bob Fertik is president of Democrats.com. David Swanson is Washington Director of Democrats.com.
Take action -- click here to contact your local newspaper or congress people:
Prosecute Bush
Click here to see the most recent messages sent to congressional reps and local newspapers
The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author
and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.
 Contact Author |
Contact Editor |
 View Authors' Articles |
|
|
|
|
| 11 comments |
|
How History Will VIew BUsh/Cheney
History will be written to make icons out of Bush and Cheney much as it has done to Reagan. Bush has already received the International Medal of Peace and there will be buildings and monuments named in his honor much like Reagan and Bush's daddy. No, history will carve Bush to be an icon. by Dennis Kaiser (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 730 comments [137 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:49:07 AM  (0+)
|
|
Reply: Are You Kidding?
International Medal of Peace? Who in the world could possibly justify that distinction for our pResident? Please enlighten me... I think the sheer volume of newsreel tapes and books to the contrary will prevail. by Judy Ramsey (4 articles, 0 quicklinks, 2 diaries, 93 comments [3 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:01:48 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Pastor Rick
Pastor Rick Warren awarded Bush the first annual International Medal of Peace for his work in the AIDS pandemic....OUCH!!!! by Dennis Kaiser (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 730 comments [137 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 12:31:31 PM (0+)
|
|
Doubtful
"No, history will carve Bush to be an icon." No way; right after his death, Stalin was still seen by lots of people as a hero of WWII, father of his people and great communist leader. Then little by little, the truth seeped out. Nowadays, nothing remains of this pile of lies, historians dug out the dirt, it's out there for all to see. Same will happen to Bush; and please do not compare Bush with Reagan, the latter was a genius and an inspired politician compared to the Chimp. by francine (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 385 comments) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:21:18 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: The Latter Was
The handlers of Reagan had to tell us what he meant to say after each of his speeches. Reagan was only an icon in the minds of the historians. by Dennis Kaiser (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 730 comments [137 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:23:23 AM (0+)
|
|
The whole story has yet to be told
How the Bush invasion of Iraq will be judged is yet to be told. Bush is an oil man and oil is critical to our civilization. Those who understand that oil production has not kept up with world demand know that wars will be fought over oil. Bush preemptively gained control over Iraq's oil resource. Once the historians understand the importance of oil to our nations ability to survive in a world in chaos he might be judged as a bold visionary leader who caught the rest of the world off guard. by Philip Pease (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 209 comments [11 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 11:54:38 AM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Civilization?
I don't consider it a 'civilization' when a nation pre-emptively invades another, kicks down doors, terrorizes children, arrests randomly, imprisons without trial, tortures, rapes, murders, employs prohibited weapons such as DU, white phosphorus, thermobaric devices, uses snipers against civilians, deliberately bombs water and electricity infrastructure and hospitals, etc. 1.2 million innocents dead, maybe four million displaced. No one could measure the misery. You say it's about oil? Maybe, but it is NOT about civilization. That's for sure. by John S. Hatch (10 articles, 12 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 136 comments [162 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:15:42 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Civilization?
I don't consider it a 'civilization' when a nation pre-emptively invades another, kicks down doors, terrorizes children, arrests randomly, imprisons without trial, tortures, rapes, murders, employs prohibited weapons such as DU, white phosphorus, thermobaric devices, uses snipers against civilians, deliberately bombs water and electricity infrastructure and hospitals, etc. 1.2 million innocents dead, maybe four million displaced. No one could measure the misery. You say it's about oil? Maybe, but it is NOT about civilization. That's for sure. by John S. Hatch (10 articles, 12 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 136 comments [162 recommended, 2 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 7:17:10 PM (0+)
|
|
Reply: Bush will be remembered as a war criminal.
"There is no longer any doubt as to whether the current administration has committed war crimes. The only question that remains to be answered is whether those who ordered the use of torture will be held to account" –Former US General Taguba by William Whitten (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 4880 comments [1686 recommended, 28 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 9:50:22 PM (0+)
|
|
Bold My Ass
History may be rewritten to show Bush as being bold, but in reality he is nothing more than a war criminal. One doesn't invade other countries for simply wanting what they have. Wanting what they have is not a reason to kill people. Justify what you will. Murder is still murder. by Dennis Kaiser (20 articles, 0 quicklinks, 35 diaries, 730 comments [137 recommended, 0 rejected]) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 3:47:54 PM (0+)
|
|
THE "DUCKER"
by James McMillin (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 19 comments) on Wednesday, Dec 17, 2008 at 10:31:25 PM (0+)
|
Want to post your own comment on this Article? 
|
||||
|
||||||||||||||
Must Read (0) 
Well Said (0) 
News (0) 
Touching (0) 
Funny (0) 
Supported (0) 
Interesting (0) 
Inspiring (0) 
Valuable (0)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tell a Friend:
|
Copyright © 2002-2009, OpEdNews |
