Thanks to Greenspan Tim Russert now owes Kucinich apology

[lovuian]

Alan Greenspan's new book, The Age of Turbulence, has one terse sentence that is shaking Washington:


I am saddened that it is politically inconvenient to acknowledge what everyone knows. The Iraq war is largely about oil.


On CNN’s Late Edition, Wolf Blitzer was shocked by the simple truth. But House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Tom Lantos (D-CA), largely agrees:


LANTOS: To a very large extent I agree with him, and I think it is very remarkable that it took Alan Greenspan all these many years and being out of office for stating the obvious. It is self-evident that this administration would not have taken the position it has had it not been for the oil issue.


Before the invasion of Iraq, many of us insisted Bush's motive for invading Iraq was for its oil. And one Democrat actually dared to say this on TV on Feb 23, 2003, three weeks before the invasion - Rep. Dennis Kucinich.

Transcript

MR. RUSSERT: Congressman, you made a very strong charge against the administration and let me show you what you said on January 19. “Why is the Administration targeting Iraq? Oil.” What do you base that on?

REP. KUCINICH: I base that on the fact that there is $5 trillion worth of oil above and in the ground in Iraq, that individuals involved in the administration have been involved in the oil industry, that the oil industry certainly would benefit from having the administration control Iraq, and that the fact is that, since no other case has been made to go to war against Iraq, for this nation to go to war against Iraq, oil represents the strongest incentive.

MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe the president of the United States would risk the lives of American men and women for oil?

REP. KUCINICH: I think that to answer that question would be to put a focus on a person, and I think the policy is what we have to talk about, that this policy to go against Iraq was promulgated even before 9/11, and the day after 9/11, the secretary of Defense in a meeting of the National Security Council said we could use this moment to go after Iraq, even though there was no connection. I think that when a president commits the young men and women of this country to battle, that it should only be when there is an imminent threat to this country, and that—I believe most sincerely that one of the motivating factors involved in this effort to strike against Iraq is the desire on the part of some to be able to control the oil interests in Iraq. I believe that.


Russert was shocked and outraged that Kucinich would dare suggest such a thing.

But look who said it - not only the man regarded as The Oracle, The Knower Of All Known Things - but also the husband of Russert's own NBC News colleague Andrea Mitchell!

I think Dennis needs apology too don't you
this research was done by blogger
by Bob Fertik on September 16, 2007

[liberalnurse]

1. Send Mr. Russert

a copy of this! :yourock:

[poverlay]

2. Please send a copy of that to Russert. I will too. n/t

[BridgeTheGap]

3. Did Russert not know about the Project for a New American Century?

The neo-con front group listed oil as one the three objectives for invading Iraq. These MSM shills must not being doing their homework.

[rucky]

4. Start holding your breath in 5...4...3...2... n/t

[hvn_nbr_2]

10. Don't you mean 5,000,000,000... 4,999,999,999... 4,999,999,998... ? nt

[redqueen]

5. How many candidates STILL won't risk telling the people the truth?

Or maybe, just MAYBE, now that Greenspan said it... more will.

[superkia]

8. They dont speak it because they are a part of the problem!

If Americans weren't so blind, they would see that Kucinich is very different than the other candidates but in a good way. He continues to be the candidate for the people of this country and the country ignores him just like the media ( which is controlled ) has done from the beginning. The man went out on a limb back then because he felt the people should know the truth and he continues to speak the truth about the attack on our constitution. I wish people would think to themselves and wonder why it is that no other politicians are taking the strong stands on important issues like Dennis Kucinich, what does that say about them and what is their true agenda?

[Rydz777]

6. Kucinich speaks a lot of hard truths that few want to hear. n/t

[Marr]

7. The only thing more galling than Greenspan's late admission of the obvious, is

the punditocracy's breathless attempts to appear shocked by it.

[followthemoney]

9. And we should expect what from the Official News of the U.S. ?

The ONUS is on us.

Whenever I watch the Official News of the U.S., I feel the onus just dripping of me like some excrement fresh from both wings of the Economic Royalist party of the U.S.

[John Q. Citizen]

11. Come on Tim, fess up! Dennis told you a truth in a place you are trained not to go.

Everybody knew it. Everyone knew deep down that oil played a central role.

But some were to timid to say it, much less think it.

And some got all bent out of shape when the truth was told.

Nobody gave you the news, Tim? Go figure....

[lovuian]

12. it would be so cool to see

you this is the same Tim Russert who testified in the exposure of Valerie Plame

[Martin Eden]

14. Russert has been trained not to go other places as well

I remember when he had Rumsfeld on in 2003, Russert did not ask a him single question about the Office of Special Plans.

Russert pretends to be a tough interviewer but doesn't go near the truth when it hurts his masters, and other times he denigrates the truth (as when told to him by Dennis).

[slipslidingaway]

13. And this is just too logical...thanks for posting.

"MR. RUSSERT: Congressman, you made a very strong charge against the administration and let me show you what you said on January 19. “Why is the Administration targeting Iraq? Oil.” What do you base that on?

REP. KUCINICH: I base that on the fact that there is $5 trillion worth of oil above and in the ground in Iraq, that individuals involved in the administration have been involved in the oil industry, that the oil industry certainly would benefit from having the administration control Iraq, and that the fact is that, since no other case has been made to go to war against Iraq, for this nation to go to war against Iraq, oil represents the strongest incentive."


October 3, 2002

http://www.wagingpeace.org/articles/2002/10/03_kucinich_vote-no.htm

"The American people deserve to know that the key issue here is that there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States of America. I will repeat: there is no proof that Iraq represents an imminent or immediate threat to the United States. A continuing threat does not constitute a sufficient cause for war. The administration has refused to provide the Congress with credible evidence that proves that Iraq is a serious threat to the United States and that it is continuing to possess and develop chemical and biological and nuclear weapons.