Why haven't those Dems who voted for war demanded release of misleading intel

[babylonsister]

that convinced them to cast that vote? I think that's a valid question and would go a long way towards silencing the critics.

Senators and Congress Members Made Speeches for War When They Voted for it 5 Years Ago
Submitted by davidswanson on Fri, 2007-10-12 06:08. Congress

By Stephen Zunes

I think you can find the speeches online in the Congressional Record. There were only something like two days of debate in each chamber, so it should be easy to track down. I've quoted a couple of dozen senators in several of my articles since then, a few of them (like Kerry, Edwards and HRClinton) in detail. If you want me to dig up something on anybody in particular, let me know.

You may remember I was the author of the cover story "The Case against War" in The Nation, which came out a few weeks before the vote and every member of Congress received multiple copies as well as a series of rather prescient policy briefs for FPIF.

One thing that's bugged me, and it might be something worth pushing at press conferences by those who voted for the war: Except for a summary of the 2002 NIE on Iraq that was released in July 2003 (which was widely ridiculed at the time it was released and was far less convincing than what people like me had provided them), the intelligence reports these Democrats have since claimed "misled" them are still classified. Given that the information in these reports is dated, was false to begin with, and the government in question no longer exists, there is no apparent national security rationale for keeping them classified, however.

It raises the question, then, why hasn't the Democratic majority made demanding the release of these misleading intelligence reports to the public a priority? Presumably, it would be to the Democrats' advantage: their release would likely embarrass the administration (or even help unveil deliberate deceptions which could conceivably lead to impeachment) and would help vindicate pro-war Democrats from accusations that they conspired with the Bush administration to mislead the country into war. Yet they have not done so.

One possibility as to why they haven't pushed this is that by making the intelligence reports presented to them available to the public, it would reveal that the intelligence reports were so transparently weak that these Democrats must have already had a strong pre-disposition to go to war prior to seeing it. (Otherwise they would not have been very believable.) Whatever the reason for the Democrats' reluctance, it would mark a very dangerous precedent if an administration could defraud Congress by presenting it with phony evidence in order to get their authorization to go to war and to then have Congress not even demand that that phony evidence be made available to the public.

http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/27647

[MannyGoldstein]

1. DingDingDing! We Have A Winner!

However, since MOST congressional democrats voted against war, we already have good evidence that the war hawks were either stupid or evil.

[annabanana]

2. You are right. They should be attending the committee hearings.

They should be throwing light on the criminal stalling that the malAdmin is doing.

[jmp]

3. You know why.

They weren't lied to at all. We were lied to.

[babylonsister]

4. I think you're wrong. There were some very bright people who voted

for the IWR. I want to know what they heard to convince them.

[babylonsister]

5. What, no response from Clinton supporters, or anyone? Is this a good

or bad idea? :freak: