Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Study: Bushies Lied 935 Times to Sell Iraq Invasion

By Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith, The Center for Public Integrity. Posted January 24, 2008.


Bush and his top officials waged a campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.

On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.

It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.

In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Not surprisingly, the officials with the most opportunities to make speeches, grant media interviews, and otherwise frame the public debate also made the most false statements, according to this first-ever analysis of the entire body of prewar rhetoric.

President Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with 14).

The massive database at the heart of this project juxtaposes what President Bush and these seven top officials were saying for public consumption against what was known, or should have been known, on a day-to-day basis. This fully searchable database includes the public statements, drawn from both primary sources (such as official transcripts) and secondary sources (chiefly major news organizations) over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001. It also interlaces relevant information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches, and interviews.

Consider, for example, these false public statements made in the run-up to war:

  • On August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of the Veteran of Foreign Wars, Cheney flatly declared: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." In fact, former CIA Director George Tenet later recalled, Cheney's assertions went well beyond his agency's assessments at the time. Another CIA official, referring to the same speech, told journalist Ron Suskind, "Our reaction was, 'Where is he getting this stuff from?' "
  • In the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote fast approaching on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, Bush told the nation in his weekly radio address: "The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year." A few days later, similar findings were also included in a much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction -- an analysis that hadn't been done in years, as the intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House hadn't requested it.
  • In July 2002, Rumsfeld had a one-word answer for reporters who asked whether Iraq had relationships with Al Qaeda terrorists: "Sure." In fact, an assessment issued that same month by the Defense Intelligence Agency (and confirmed weeks later by CIA Director Tenet) found an absence of "compelling evidence demonstrating direct cooperation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda." What's more, an earlier DIA assessment said that "the nature of the regime's relationship with Al Qaeda is unclear."
  • On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish TV, President Bush declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories." But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to examine the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field report that the labs were not for biological weapons. The team's final report, completed the following month, concluded that the labs had probably been used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons.
  • On January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement "probably is a hoax."
  • On February 5, 2003, in an address to the United Nations Security Council, Powell said: "What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence. I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources." As it turned out, however, two of the main human sources to which Powell referred had provided false information. One was an Iraqi con artist, code-named "Curveball," whom American intelligence officials were dubious about and in fact had never even spoken to. The other was an Al Qaeda detainee, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, who had reportedly been sent to Eqypt by the CIA and tortured and who later recanted the information he had provided. Libi told the CIA in January 2004 that he had "decided he would fabricate any information interrogators wanted in order to gain better treatment and avoid being handed over to [a foreign government]."

Digg!

See more stories tagged with: neocons, bush, iraq, lies

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Lying Liars
Posted by: Tom Degan on Jan 24, 2008 1:51 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
As Dennis Kucinich said on the floor of the house yesterday (in words that were later stricken from the record - I'm serious!) "The truth shall set you free".

All of the evidence is there! The smokng guns are so numerous, they've blotted out the sun. Never before in the history of this once-great nation has there been more than enough evidence to proceed with the Constitutionally mandated process of impeachment. So, what are these stupid fucking Democrats telling us? "Impeachment is off the table."

Here's the funny thing: They really think that 2008 is going to be a Democratic year. So convinced are they of this notion, they don't dare show some profiles in courage. That's why they will more-than-likely face another third party uprising at the polls next November. We - "the base" - are sick and tired of these timid, gutless and pathetic assholes.

John Edwards is the only candidate who is talking like the political heir of Franklin Delano Roosevelt. So what are these foolish Democrats about to do? They're about to hand the nomination over to the Goldwater Girl!

I'm not making this stuff up!

Tom Degan
Goshen,NY
COUNTDOWN: ONE MORE YEAR!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Are We Going to Make It? Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Lying Liars Posted by: monkeywrench
» RE: Lying Liars - IMPEACH !!!! Posted by: cybertigress
But Powell and Rice each spoke the truth!!!
Posted by: Earthian on Jan 24, 2008 4:13 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Ah, but the article failed to reveal two truths told by Colin Powell and Condi Rice in early 2001.

Powell said on a visit to Egypt, that Saddam Hussein:

“has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.”
2-24-01 in Egypt

Rice said of Saddam:
“We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”
7-29-01

From this timeline:
http://www.motherjones.com/bush_war_timeline/

This article failed to mention these two truths that Rice and Powell spoke so bravely. Where is the balance?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» In case you hadn't noticed... Posted by: leafsong1
If This is True, Its Worse Than I Thought
Posted by: Sissy on Jan 24, 2008 4:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Then where were they when it mattered? If this is true when The Texas Turd and 5-deferment Cheney brought up their war talk, think what lives would have been saved, literally millions, had they said "This is wrong Mr. President, we don't need to go to war. If you continue down this path, my resignation will be on your desk in the morning". If their resignations were taken, then a little trip to the press room would have been in order.

Again, if this is true, how can they sleep at night?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

For goodness sake America!
Posted by: montims on Jan 24, 2008 5:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is not just an interesting story for dinner parties, and people doing their "told you so" dance. This is a scandal, and if it had been Russia or China or France or Iraq revealed as telling this many lies in a 2 year period before going to war, America would be up in arms (literally)...

What the hell are American citizens going to do about this?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» nothing Posted by: dover23
» RE: For goodness sake America! Posted by: blitzmesser
» RE: For goodness sake America! Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN
» RE: For goodness sake America! Posted by: runningfortheborder
» RE: For goodness sake America! Posted by: Cybershaman
» RE: For goodness sake America! Posted by: JSquercia
Does this......
Posted by: ptoddchesser on Jan 24, 2008 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
really surprise anyone? I'm sure it doesn't to most who read Alternet. The people who support this president,and from his approval ratings that number is declining, seem to think that stories like this are false.
When this man (I use that term loosely) was put into office I told my older brother(career Army) to keep his head up because this guy would have him in Iraq within a year. I was wrong, it took 3. I felt that we would be there by hook or by crook because this simple little man has a penchant for holding grudges. When G.H.W.Bush ran Hussein out of Kuwait and thought it prudent not to continue into Baghdad it put "Dubya's" panties in a wad. When he realized that he would be president he was already conniving and planning what he and his cronies could do to "Avenge my Daddy!".
I was told in 2000 that I was an idiot to think that Bush would take us into the Middle East. I am just ashamed that so many were so blind for so long. I guess what really gets to me is the fact that we will still be embroiled in the mess in Iraq long after this dumbass has retired to Crawford to cut brush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Does this...... Posted by: dfish
» RE: Does this...... Posted by: Cybershaman
Hans Blix, Scott Ritter, Chomsky, journalists around the world, and
Posted by: Ydotheyhateus on Jan 24, 2008 6:35 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
many, many other progressives in the alternet media in the US were saying that Bush regime was making up a bogus case against Iraq.

Yet, NYT, WaPo, and the rest of MSM in America actively promoted Bush's version. Why? 'cause media in US is owned by a handful of corporations that push their neoliberal/neocon economic agenda.

Americans should have known better, and they chose to wrap themselves up in the flag which has choked the blood-flow to their brains necessary for clear, objective thinking.

So this analysis is too late. We are deaf, dumb, and blind. And we deserve Bush for many more years

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Back to Business as Usual
Posted by: Whistler on Jan 24, 2008 6:40 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The truly sad thing about the United States of America is that the royal family - or the "royal fuckups" (whichever you prefer) - are above the law, a situation made possible in major part by the Democratic party which is nothing more than a bunch of yes men and women. Supreme crimes hasve been committed and the Dems are still dancing around it. Just think: Manson, Gacy, McVeigh, Jack the Ripper, Berkowitz, Ramirez all combined do not come close to the enormity of the crimes of the Bush family and his retinue of butt-lickers. Not even close. Yet, they all get promoted, are allowed to steal elections and the Democrats go on as if its business as usual.

Last but not least are the people. They shrug their shoulders, shake their heads and continue with business as usual when their representatives betray and poke them up the whazoo. They're still clucking over which yes-man/woman they're going to vote for. They're still giving credence to TV ads created by the same companies that promote Republican lies. The candidates with an ounce of integrity are considered a joke by the masses.

So screw them. In short, the USA has the government it deserves and it is only when the entire thing collapses, fascism reigns, treasury is completely looted, then - and ONLY then - will people get interested in politics, only then, it will be too late.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» YOU ARE RIGHT Posted by: shd1230
Now That We
Posted by: Candleinheart on Jan 24, 2008 6:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
know the truth, (I've sensed it from Day one of his presidency). When he talked about yellow Cake etc. I could SEE as plain as day he was lying. That he was a 'juvenile.' that others were the real power. So why are they still in office? Geez, Martha gets 6 months for her inside trading. I just read someone may get 100 years for money laundering. I've seen pediphiles and rapists get off in 8 years only to repeat their offenses again. Yet, over and over and over again these moraless people who stole our highest office to do their own money grabbing, like the Ever Ready battery keep on ticking and doing damage. Both should retire in disgrace and then offenses and crimes brought to light and send these two to prison. Why don't we have MILLIONS marching to the White House! Only The People can take charge. Kucinich, Paul, Edwards are the real truth seekers and have the courage to 'tell it like it is". Now that the entire public knows about the 900 plus lies, perhaps now some outrage will occur. The poor families who lost loved ones in this horrid, illegal invasion. Honestly, that we really needed to take SH out? PULEEEZE!!!! We have worse leaders around the world. Why not take them out? What about the atrocities in Africa??? Why aren't we in there protecting all those innocents and destroying the rapists, murderers? What is the difference? Ahhhh, no oil in Africa? No need to control Africa? There are military bases built in iraq, another now being built, a 590 million dollar embassy being built. That's where all our money has gone. None of iraq has anything to do with 'terror' or Democracy. More lies. SHAME on these moraless creatures. This has opened a can of worms, slugs, and maggots we cannot even foresee yet. Demand resignation. Punish later. Besides Kucinich others have filed papers for Impeachment.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

String 'em up
Posted by: truthteller on Jan 24, 2008 7:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
More evidence that EVERY senior official of this illegitimate, criminal cabal of an administration should hang for treason against the American people and crimes against humanity. EVERY one of them - Condi, Christy, Colin, all of them!

When are we going to learn that the fix is in, not just on elections, but just about every other part of life in the U. S.? The only way we are ever going to get back - or maybe just get for the first time - control for the people is to TAKE IT! Obviously, asking the "opposition" to take action is not working. They have shown their true colors - yellow - and are not worth supporting. Do not compromise. Nader WAS right. There is not a dime's worth of difference between the Rethuglicans and the Defeatocrats on what truly matters to the vast majority of people in the World. They are all corporatists that use social wedge issues to distract us from the military and economic skulduggery they engage in Worldwide.

Barring an electoral miracle that makes my man, Dennis Kucinich a realistic candidate, vote for the probable Green Party nominee, Cynthia McKinney.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lies: Pre-war, War, and Occupation
Posted by: Roy Eidelson on Jan 24, 2008 8:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Such lies have been a key part of the White House’s manipulation of public sentiment throughout the Iraq war/occupation enterprise. In particular, many of the fabrications have been designed to activate our core concerns about issues of vulnerability, injustice, distrust, superiority, and helplessness. I’ve recently completed a 10-minute online video entitled “Resisting the Drums of War” that examines these warmongering appeals and offers suggestions for how to counter them. It’s available for viewing HERE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Grasping the full scope of Cheney's deceptions
Posted by: SevenStarHand on Jan 24, 2008 8:39 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Greetings Class,

Please be seated and listen up! The lectures will now commence...

The combination of the Center for Public Integrtity's "Irag: The War Card" research, George Tenet's book, At the Center of the Storm, Eisner & Royce's The Italian Letter and the books and research of many others in recent years now provides enough of a foundation for everyone to finally discern that 9:11 was a "false flag" operation against both the American public and the Muslim world.

Likewise, the uncanny synchronicity of Al Qaeda's videos and other activities, perfectly timed to reinforce and support the Bush/Cheney administration's political needs, coupled with the actions of the Bush admin actually serving to strengthen Al Qaeda's position, now makes perfect sense. The apparent mistakes and chaos that have characterized the Iraq war, the easily prevented resurgence of the Taliban, and permitting Bin Laden to escape Tora Bora to a safe haven in Pakistan all fit the same pattern.

It's hard to maintain a state of continuous war if you allow your made-to-order enemies to be defeated too early. It is likewise hard to remain a "war president" if your wars end too soon!

What they knew and when they knew it!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Still, They Lie -- Fun With Lies
Posted by: QQOblivion on Jan 24, 2008 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And they still are lying. They are lying about Iran. They are lying about the "need" for warrantless domestic surveillance. They are still lying about Iraq. They are lying about health-care, the economy, the environment, about so very much. Heck, they even lie about their own lying.
So many reasons to impeach. So little time. I have a hard time believing in Hell. But if it exists it was made specifically for monsters that start wars based on lies. Eternal damnation, anyone?

Switching gears:
I suggest that we all have a good time with the fact that Bush lies, and lies often about the most important of topics. I heard somewhere the idea for a drinking game that can be played during the upcoming State of the Union speech. Every time Bush says something that is provably a lie, take a swig of alcohol (or of whatever concoction you wish). That is A LOT of drinking, however. (Maybe this game isn't safe.)
I personally can't listen to the man-demon, however, even as an excuse to drink alcohol.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

935 lies = 600,000-plus crimes.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Jan 24, 2008 8:58 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Isn't deliberately putting someone in harm's way out of gross disregard for their safety, or because of incompetence, or by false pretense, resulting in that person's death, a crime?

That's nearly 4,000 counts of negligent homicide against George Bush and Dick Cheney –– with over 600,000 counts pending in the Iraqi court.

I wonder if the courtroon in Nuremberg is still available?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

redroadtraveler@yahoo.com
Posted by: redroadtraveler on Jan 24, 2008 9:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So what else is new? You wanna actually DO something about it, impeach the SOB's instead of just wringing your hands and moaning.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: redroadtraveler@yahoo.com Posted by: bohemian
Sad to watch the denial, even now.
Posted by: fanny666 on Jan 24, 2008 9:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
link

people simply do not want to accept that they have been lied to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I was struck by that one, too. Posted by: fanny666
» Bush has ALWAYS been a liar Posted by: Ellie1
» RE: Bush has ALWAYS been a liar Posted by: JSquercia
All these lies
Posted by: Chloe2005 on Jan 24, 2008 10:00 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
have caused so much death and destruction. Why couldn't the chimp in charge lie about sex just one time so we could impeach?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

False Statements ARE LIES
Posted by: dannrusso on Jan 24, 2008 10:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So...why is it that when Bill Clinton is talking about an extra-marital affair, he is LYING and when Bush et.al. are talking about how they threw this country into a world war, they are "speaking false statements?" talk about SPIN - its like the whole world is so caught up in this silliness of either not admitting the president is wrong, or just so in awe of his power? prestige? something? to not use proper language!

its not like the FCC will fine you for using the L-word when it comes to the President, will they?

"blessed are the peacemakers, for they shall inherit the earth"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: False Statements ARE LIES Posted by: blitzmesser
» RE: False Statements ARE LIES Posted by: peacefullaim
A Clean Break
Posted by: Forrest on Jan 24, 2008 1:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why did the Bush administration invade Iraq?

After it became apparent that the Bush administration was preparing to attack Iraq,
We decided to research the hawks promoting the invasion of Iraq. At this point we were
interested in uncovering the motivation since it was obvious that any threat that Saddam Hussein's Iraq posed to the United States was clearly exaggerated to the point of deception. In 1981 Israeli IDF destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear plant at Osiraq and the Americans again obliterated the site in 1991. In 1998, the IAEA concluded: "There were no indications that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical significance."
http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Programmes
/ActionTeam/nwp2.html#weapon

In researching the hawks promoting the invasion of Iraq, we found a policy paper written by Richard Perle et al for the state of Israel in 1996: (A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm): http://www.israeleconomy.org/strat1.htm
"This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq —
an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions."

And in 1998 Richard Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, and notably Donald Rumsfeld (and others) wrote a letter to then President Bill Clinton calling on him to remove ".... Saddam Hussein's regime from power."
http://newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

What is especially significant is the fact that the people who signed this letter back in 1998
entered the Bush administration after the presidential election of 2000.

After the terror and confusion of 9/11 in 2001 (which had nothing to do with Iraq),
they were able to implement their planned invasion of Iraq using the deception of
WMD's and non-existent links between Iraq and al-Qa'ida.

And in the last past 5 years since 9/11, the evidence, the facts, all support the conclusion
that Jane's Intelligence Digest hints at in the following report:
http://www.janes.com/regional_news/
africa_middle_east/news/fr/fr030416_1_n.shtml

"All of this lends weight to the theory that Bush's war is part of a master plan to reshape the Middle East to serve Israel's interests."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Will The Democratic 'Leadership' Grow A Spine?
Posted by: left_libertarian on Jan 24, 2008 2:47 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will they - and impeach these criminals?

Sadly, I fear not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If Congress Fails To Impeach, It's Time For The Public To Impeach!
Posted by: gazooks on Jan 24, 2008 3:26 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We have the indictment, a forum, could have have an online jury, Alternet could perhaps host an Impeachment trial replete with a panel of enlightened, respected critics with very public discussion and very public results.

If Congress doesn't have the will, and it appears it does not, despite the above, then "the people" need to be heard on the specific articles of offense and a public condemnation by as many citizens as possible.

Let's try the bastards here.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is just the tip of the iceberg...
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Jan 24, 2008 3:58 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
How is a PR campaign run these days?

First, you have some "official spokespeople" - the statements of the officials are what this study covers.

That alone isn't enough to propagate the message, however - you need experts to get the message out.

This is coordinated by PR firms - in the case of OIL, Operation Iraq Liberation (I mean Freedom, OIF!) that was done by the Rendon Group and it's sister corporation, the Lincoln Group.

They have contacts within the corporate press that they feed the press releases to (Judith Miller and Michael Gordon at the New York Times are notable examples, but there were many, many others).

Then, you need some "independent third-party experts" - get them to write books and articles. Notable examples there include Ken Pollack, the ex-CIA, ex-NSA author of "The Gathering Storm", now at the Brookings Institute.

Then, you need to publicize the book, which the folks at Random House "bent over backwards" to do. You need to have briefings and meetings focused on the book and the "independent experts" at the think tanks.

Then, get the television press involved. Dress up some reporters in chemical weapon rubber bug suits and have them parade around in front of the cameras. Show clips of exploding nuclear weapons. Run footage of Hitler non-stop, interspersed with images of Saddam Hussein.

That's how you sell a war!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

No wonder Rudy Ghouliani said Bush is a great president!!!
Posted by: xvictor on Jan 24, 2008 7:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Criminal minds think alike!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

there one thing cheney hasn't lied about.....peak oil
Posted by: Missing Piece on Jan 24, 2008 7:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This story and all alternet stories are a waste of time. Why doesn't alternet ever talk about the false flag committed on 9/11 and peak oil?

People, the time to wake up was in the 70's and if you want to survive in the future you need to mentally prepare. Google 9/11 truth, peak oil, and remember the two are directly related, something neither side will admit too.

I suggest you read the latest from simmons and plan accordingly.


http://www.texasmonthly.com/2008-02-01/feature2.php

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

prilla
Posted by: prilla on Jan 24, 2008 8:57 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
WHILE I BELIEVE YOUR ANALYSIS IS CORRECT, WHERE IS THE SOURCE? WHO PREPARED THIS DATA BASE, WHERE IS IT, HOW CAN WE SEE IT? THE TWO LINKS IN THE ARTICLE SAID THE PAGE WAS NOT AVAILABLE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

God, Guns & Money
Posted by: onevoter on Jan 24, 2008 9:23 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
GOD, GUNS & MONEY (PT 1)
(RADIO EDIT)
GOD, GUNS & MONEY IS ALL SOME UNDERSTAND
BUT JESUS NEVER WALKED AROUND WITH A WEAPON IN HIS HAND
THE SCENE IS SCARY WHEN THE INSANE RULE THE DAY
GOD, GUNS & MONEY THE AMERICAN WAY

GOD, GUNS & MONEY EACH ONE TO REVERE
SAVE ME, FALSE PROTECT ME, BRING ON THEM LAZY YEARS
THE PICTURES CRAZY, COMPASSION’S IN THE GRAVE
GOD, GUNS & MONEY THROW YOUR HANDS UP AND RAVE

GOD, GUNS & MONEY CAN’T TAKE AWAY THE FEAR
OF SELF-CREATED NEURO-SPIN IN A LOCKED OUT HEMISPHERE
PSYCHIATRIST ARE RICHER, PHARMACEUTICALS PAVE THE WAY
GOD, GUNS & MONEY THE DRUGS THAT WE CRAVE

GOD, GUNS & MONEY ALL THREE WORK IN STRIDE
A DEADLY COMBINATION DESIGNED TO TURN THE TIDE
THE STORM IS BREWING, HEAT RISING HIGH
GOD, GUNS & MONEY WON’T SOMEBODY TELL ME WHY?

WE’RE DROWNING DEEP IN LIES
TO KEEP AN ILLUSION ALIVE
DARK CLOUDS HOVER IN THE SKY
WHERE BRAVE EAGLES USED TO FLY

GOD, GUNS & MONEY BRING A CHILL DEEP TO MY BONES
WHEN I HEAR INNOCENT VILLAGERS DIED IN A FREE FIRE ZONE
MIDDLE FINGER FOREIGN POLICY, DIPLOMACY EXTINCT
GOD, GUNS & MONEY HOW SICK CAN WE THINK?

GOD, GUNS AND MONEY, WHEN WILL THE BUBBLE BURST?
THEY’LL CUT THE TONGUE RIGHT FROM YOUR MOUTH, THE ARTISTS WILL BE FIRST
IF YOU VOTED FOR IT YOU SHOULD BE SENT OFF TO WAR
GOD, GUNS AND MONEY JUST WAIT FOR WHAT’S IN STORE

GOD, GUNS & MONEY GIVE THE RIGHT TO PLUNDER LAND
THOUGH THE CHICKENHAWKS CAN’T EVEN FIND THEIR ASS WITH
BOTH THEIR HANDS DOCTRINE’S IN MOTION, THE CRUSADES IN FULL SWING
GOD, GUNS & MONEY CROWN AMERICA KING

Words & Music by Brian Stoltz
© 2005 Long Overdue Music Co. (ASCAP)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Oil, Oil, Oil and Oil
Posted by: Jbuuty on Jan 24, 2008 10:52 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Most of us who have been reading AlterNet knew that Bush and his cronies were lying when they were doing so. This report and database is helpful for documenting it, and should be used for impeachment, though that won't happen.

However, lies are not the real issue here. Oil is the real issue. And it is because of oil that Hillary or Obama will also keep us in Iraq if they win. The oil barons and their politician servants know that 'peak oil' is coming. This war was about establishing US control over Middle Eastern oil reserves.

Yes, there are some bizarre theories about peak oil, but it is a simple reality that oil is not a renewable resource. It will run out and as consumption rises rapidly around the world - think of China - oil reserves disappear more quickly. The theory is that once we have hit the midpoint (the peak) of all total historical oil reserves, the price of oil will increase dramatically and continuously until the oil is gone. Wars are thought to be likely as nations and people fight over access. We are most likely within a generation of peak oil: it could be sooner or slightly later, but we are most likely approaching it.

The Bush administration and the Democratic candidates know it. This war was a preemptive strike, not against WMDs or terrorists, but in the war for control of oil reserves. It established American dominance before possible conflicts due to peak oil.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yogendra2
Posted by: yogendra2 on Jan 25, 2008 11:29 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have been misinformed; I thought, instead of the Texas Turd and 5 Deferment Cheney, it is GOINGTOJAIL W. BUSH AND CHAINGANG CHENEY. What criminal assholes; why have we tolerated these criminals illegally in the office of our government, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. When are we going to stand and fight and demand that GOINGTOJAIL W. BUSH AND CHAINGANG CHENEY BE TRIED FOR WAR CRIMES A LA NURNBERG? If not now when? anand yogendra, tucson, ayogendra@yahoo.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm sorry...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Jan 25, 2008 10:44 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...but I've had enough with all this BS, mine included. Now I know what i'm gonna do in Nov: what I've heard so many say. I'm going to vote EVERY INCUMBENT OUT. Democrat, Republican, doesn't matter. If there's ANY of our people left in Iraq in November, I vote against EVERYBODY in CONGRESS and the SENATE. It's time to stop this endless crying and moaning about the shit this country's swimming in, and start bailing. That can only happen in November, and only if every single new (since '06) incumbent, starting with Pelosi and ending with Boehner, is gone the day after Election Day. Forget BushCo--get these people. They got into Congress & the Senate ON FALSE PRETENSES. We can always impeach BushCo after the fact. What'll really hurt those two is, when they're gone and it's too late for them to do anything about the evil they've done--they'll open schoolbooks and see that they're so low that they'd need a telescope pointing upward, to even catch a glimpse of Nixon.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Powell and Rice 2001 statements mean their later lies were intentional
Posted by: Earthian on Jan 27, 2008 1:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Here is Powell's comment in February 2001, contradicting his later lies:

www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/remarks/2001/933.htm

And more of the context of the remark:

"We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

And Powell's later big lie-fest before the UN: (Ironically labeled at the White House website "Denial and Deception" in large yellow block letters. It is a sight to behold.)

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/
2003/02/20030205-1.html

He tries to defend his other quote here (very badly):

http://www.state.gov/secretary/former/powell/
remarks/36331.htm

(The two links above are split due to AlterNet's word limit of 60 characters.)

Here is the source for Rice's truthful, contradictory statement about Iraq being contained, in July 2001:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0107/29/le.00.html

And the key text:

(Larry) "KING: Still a menace, still a problem. But the administration failed, principally because of objections from Russia and China, to get the new sanctions policy through the United Nations Security Council. Now what? Do we do this for another 10 years?

RICE: Well, in fact, John, we have made progress on the sanctions. We, in fact, had four of the five, of the permanent five, ready to go along with smart sanctions.

We'll work with the Russians. I'm sure that we'll come to some resolution there, because it is important to restructure these sanctions to something that work.

But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.

This has been a successful period, but obviously we would like to increase pressure on him, and we're going to go about doing that."

So . . .

For such contradictions via the later lies, Rice and Powell should be tried for lying to go to war. These statements by Rice and Powell mean that their later falsehoods were not bad intelligence estimates. The lies were intentional. With over 4000 American service people dead, over one million Iraqi civilians dead, and a nation destroyed, this has got to be a felony worth a very long jail term, for not only Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, but also for Rice and Powell.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

more fantasy vs. reality
Posted by: davidg on Jan 28, 2008 7:52 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dahr Jamail's note on the discrepancy between propagana about Iraq and truth in Iraq

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/012808G.shtml

The link underscores the images Fisk presented of that prep school doofus sauntering around with those smarmy Saudi absolutists--almost more than a stomach can bear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]