Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush admits misleading on WMD-Iraq has zero? most lethal weapons?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-04 03:42 PM
Original message
Bush admits misleading on WMD-Iraq has zero? most lethal weapons?
Edited on Tue Jan-27-04 03:47 PM by papau
http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=16074


BUSH ADMITS MISLEADING ON WMD

Less than a year after declaring there was "no doubt the Iraqi regime continues to possess the most lethal weapons ever devised,"President Bush and the White House began to openly "back away from its WMD assertions today." The New York Times reported, "White House officials are no longer asserting that stockpiles of banned weapons would eventually be found" aftertheir weapons inspector, David Kay said he "doesn't think existed" after the 1991 Gulf War.

The backtracking is reverberating throughout the Bush administration. While Secretary of State Colin Powell told the United Nations last year that "our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent," he said this weekend that it could actually be "zero tons." Powell told the United Nations in 2003 that Iraq "can produce anthrax," that it might "have produced 25,000 liters" and showed a video of an Iraqi plane that dumping "2,000 liters of simulated anthrax" as proof, but he now says they might have produced no anthrax at all.

Similarly, Vice President Dick Cheney, said before the war, "there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction...to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us," but now says the war was about Iraq's "efforts to acquire weapons of mass destruction." The vice president also cited a classified report his own Administration has labeled "inaccurate" as the "best source" of proof that Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda were linked.

In response, the Administration is beginning to blame the intelligence community for the WMD fiasco, and planning an internal "review of prewar intelligence." Administration ally Kay concurred, arguing "I think the intelligence community owes the president rather than the president owing the American people." Despite Mr. Kay's assertions, experts who knew the record of U.N. inspections knew that finding no WMD "was always a strong possibility...but Bush administration officials never acknowledged it."

Earlier reporting found that senior Administration officials deliberately "bypassed the government's customary procedures for vetting intelligence," and the White House set up a separate intelligence apparatus, the "Office of Special Plans," to "cherry-pick intelligence that supported its pre-existing position and ignoring all the rest." For example, the president's well-known
declaration in last year's State of the Union, asserting that Iraq "sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," remained despite CIA demands to remove such allegations from his speech.

http://daily.misleader.org/ctt.asp?u=1338421&l=16075

COMMENT: NO ONE IN MEDIA CARES ABOUT THE LIES - BUSH STILL HAS CREDIBILITY - WHY?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Jan-27-04 03:44 PM
Response to Original message
1. The media has been bought off
Viacom is case in point. They get goodies from the WH, and won't run the MoveOn ad. People are starting to get wise to this, though, and are getting information from more than just TV.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 07:20 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC