Here's an Associated Press summary of the study:
It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.
"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "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."
Bush himself led with 259 "false statements." Obviously, they're being polite by calling it "false statements." They mean he lied. And, of course, this was no small matter. When Bush lied, people died. Over 150,000 Iraqis and nearly 4,000 Americans, to be specific.
Watch The Young Turks Here
Reader Comments ( Page 3 of 8)
31. thommy, as i recall, you can't tell the difference between a communist and a fascist.
You might as well be an islamorepublican for all your intellectual acumen.
Fascists according to the inventor of fascism, your darling little duce oppose socialism as it perpetually creates class struggle. Instead, he corporatized the entire nation.
You are for privatization of constitutionally ordained government duties. That makes YOU a fascist, but since you lack any grasp the reality of government, you come here and wet the bed some more.
You have one argument - you are me. that didn't work the first time, much less the thousands of times afterward.
Clif Kuplen at 3:26PM on Jan 23rd 2008
32. Clue: NO ONE, I repeat for liberal simpletons, NO ONE sells chemical or bio weapons. Why? Because you can get everything you need from a hospital or a hardware store.
You are an illiterate fool. Try to weaponize an anthrax spore with stuff you pick up at Ace, bucky.
>>>>
You idiot. Saddam used chem weapons, and had a bio program. NO one on this Earth has ever used weaponized anthrax on anyone. (now come back with the envelopes of anthrax to prove we sold Saddam chem weapons ... you frigin moron)
Thomas J Gassett at 3:32PM on Jan 23rd 2008
33. I'm unapologetic when I say I cannot wrap my mind around Clinton's censure, nay Impeachment, over sex with an intern and dried ejaculate on a blue dress(oh, what the Kennedy's missed by 20 years!) VS. the UTTER ABANDONMENT OF TRUTH, FAITH, CREDIBILITY EXCHANGED AT THE PAST DUE MOMENT THAT GETTING RID OF A TYRANT WAS ALL WORTH IT WHEN THE U.N. COULD HAVE INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF OIL PUT ON THE MARKET BY SADDAM HUSSEIN BY HIMSELF AND THRU SANCTIONS AND AIRSTRIKES ALONE (WHICH - AGAIN - I'M NOT SORRY IRAN IS THE REAL THORN LEFT UNCHECKED IN THE "ROSE GARDEN" CALLED THE MIDDLE EAST NOW) IN SO FAR AS THAT NOW LITTLE BOY BUSH HAS GROWN UP AND IS WITNESS TO DIPLOMATIC REMEDIES TO IRAN THOUGH NOT OF IRAQ. 4 YEARS A DIFFERENCE MAKES WHEN A WET BEHIND THE EAR POLITICIAN FEELS HE'S DEALING WITH DALLAS OR GALVESTON. HUBRIS AND INEXPERIENCE HAS GOTTEN THE REPUBLICAN'S THE MILK THEY SUCKLE SO DELICIOUSLY. DRAGGING THE WHOLE OF AMERICAN'S TO THE MOCKERY OF THE WORLD. "ARMED AND DANGEROUS" WE ARE AND REMAIN. IRAN WILL THROW A SPEEDING BOAT INTO AN AIRCRAFT CARRIER AND THE OLD "DON'T FIRE UNLESS FIRED UPON" AWAITING AS WITH JAPAN IN HISTORY DOES NOT SWAY THEM. FOR A NUCLEAR ACC TO BE STRUCK IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO COMPROMISE THESE REACTORS IS THE DIRECT RESULT OF THIS POLICY OF MANUFACTURED LIES, INNUENDO AND CHALLENGE TO THE IRANIAN REGIME. TO HEAR IT EXPLAINED BY ANOTHER "pundit" THAT "BUSH DIDN'T LIE" SMACKS OF CABOOSE JUMPING NOT TRAINSPOTTING - SINCE THAT TRAIN LEFT THE STATION AND THE BLOGGER HAS BEEN OFF IN THE POPPIES WITH DOROTHY AND ATHEISTS FOR SUCH A LONG TIME - ONE NO LONGER WONDERS OF HIS DEBAUCHED CREDIBILITY ON SUCH MATTERS.
All of it was crap, is crap, and will continue to be crap - Win or Lose. The "libs" hardly can be blamed for all the votes pulled in the House and Senate. The patriotism and bonhomie once given CAN BE RESCINDED ON A DIME. This Nation does not need continue down the water shoot of oblivion for love of our Citizen Soldiers or for great gouts of Treasure spent on a we go 'round chasing out own asses long enough the World will forget WHY WE BROUGHT THE FIRE.
Bush LIED. How he is allowed divergence with destruction of papers, electronic memo, or evoking (HOW MANY TIMES?!) the Right of Executive Priviledge shows he knows how to "Play The Game". That's all. Every time - all to the expense of the American Honor Nations knew us to represent until this time in History. Bush could no more get "The Wall Down" and thankfully fickle FATE ameliorated this attempt at any kind of Legacy - thank you RR! His failure will be in the Middle East since he has no understanding of the Culture there and never will. Clinton came closer than ANY OTHER PRESIDENT to Final Shakes of Hands - until Militancy WHIPPED up a Fire Storm of no wee preportions in the Palestinian Camps that their Brother Muslims should have alleviated the suffering and negotiated with the Israelies in the first place. Muslim manners leave waste lands. 9 Nations against 1 leaves Wolves at one's door. Right, Wrong, Indifferent? The Niagara of propaganda flows to the death of people wanted nowhere and uprooted. Blame is a rush of odd emotions. So many fathers - but no child is claimed.
Arugala at 3:33PM on Jan 23rd 2008
34. thommy, as i recall, you can't tell the difference between a communist and a fascist.
You might as well be an islamorepublican for all your intellectual acumen.
Fascists according to the inventor of fascism, your darling little duce oppose socialism as it perpetually creates class struggle. Instead, he corporatized the entire nation.
You are for privatization of constitutionally ordained government duties. That makes YOU a fascist, but since you lack any grasp the reality of government, you come here and wet the bed some more.
You have one argument - you are me. that didn't work the first time, much less the thousands of times afterward.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
When you can't wow them with wit, bury them in meaningless lefty bullshit.
Thomas J Gassett at 3:34PM on Jan 23rd 2008
35. Clue: NO ONE, I repeat for liberal simpletons, NO ONE sells chemical or bio weapons. Why? Because you can get everything you need from a hospital or a hardware store.
You are an illiterate fool. Try to weaponize an anthrax spore with stuff you pick up at Ace, bucky.
xxx
If it isn't weaponized it's not a wmd. maybe you should read my pet goat instead?
Clif Kuplen at 3:50PM on Jan 23rd 2008
36. When you can't wow them with wit, bury them in meaningless lefty bullshit.
Thomas J Gassett at 3:34PM on Jan 23rd 2008
xxx
lefty bullshit separated this nation from england, formulated a constitution and protected us in ww's I and II while bushes grandaddy played footsie with the nazis. Fascist bullshit got us bin laden after Reagan cut and ran from Lebanon and the war on enemies of Osama bin Laden.
Once a fascist, always a fascist. Now an islamofascist? Hussein was Bin Ladens' enemy and your boy took him out on my dime as a favor? What's next, a night in the Lincoln bedroom? Go sell out someone else's country!
Clif Kuplen at 3:54PM on Jan 23rd 2008
37. Gassett writes..." NO one on this Earth has ever used weaponized anthrax on anyone. (now come back with the envelopes of anthrax to prove we sold Saddam chem weapons ... you frigin moron)
------------------------------------------------
Hey, you, "friggin moron." I'm glad the subject of anthrax came up.
That's another TERRORIST ACT that has gone un-solved by the Bush Junta. Remember the multiple anthrax attacks on perceived, "liberals?"
That Anthrax came from the U.S. Army. No arrests. Another Bush failure.
Captain Negative at 4:08PM on Jan 23rd 2008
38. All presidents lie, as well as all congress and senators lie, I mean it's part of the job as a politician to lie. Sure Bush lied, so what, so did kliton. Kliton's 8 years of lies, PLUS the lies of his ol lady, equals 47,283 known lies and of course hundreds of those we don't know about.
OlieIII at 4:48PM on Jan 23rd 2008
39. 30. Before Bill Clinton became president there was no such thing as a "nuclear Islamic state". Now we have a politically instable nuclear Pakistan, since 1998.
xx
Here's a little pre Clinton pakistani nuclear development chronology that apparently 'missed' the poster's attention:
I am so sick of this revisionist crap I could puke. do they really think we're as stupid as they are?
Pakistan Nuclear Weapons - A Chronology
1960s
1965: Pakistani nuclear research reactor at Parr, Rawalpindi, starts functioning.
1968: Nonproliferation Treaty completed. Pakistan refuse to sign.
1970s
1974: India tests a device of up to 15 kilotons and calls the test a ``peaceful nuclear explosion.'' Pakistani Prime minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto tells meeting of Pakistan's top scientists of intention to develop nuclear arms.
1974 -- Pakistan proposed to India the establishment of a nuclear weapons free zone in south Asia
1978 -- Pakistan proposed to India a joint Indo-Pakistan declaration renouncing the acquisition and manufacture of nuclear weapons
1979 -- The United States cut off aid to Pakistan under section 669 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 FAA) after it was learned that Pakistan had secretly begun construction of a uranium enrichment facility.
1979 -- Pakistan proposed to India mutual inspections by India and Pakistan of nuclear facilities
1979 -- Pakistan proposed to India simultaneous adherence to the NPT by India and Pakistan
1979 -- Pakistan proposed to India simultaneous acceptance of full-scope IAEA safeguards
1980s
Early 1980's--Multiple reports that Pakistan obtained a pre-tested, atomic bomb design from China.
Early 1980's--Multiple reports that Pakistan obtained bomb-grade enriched uranium from China.
1980
1980--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: Reexport via Canada (components of inverters used in gas centrifuge enrichment activities).
1981
1981--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: New York, zirconium (nuclear fuel cladding material).
1981--AP story cites contents of reported US State Department cable stating `We have strong reason to believe that Pakistan is seeking to develop a nuclear explosives capability * * * Pakistan is conducting a program for the design and development of a triggering package for nuclear explosive devices.'
1981--Publication of book, Islamic Bomb, citing recent Pakistani efforts to construct a nuclear test site.
1982
1982/3--Several European press reports indicate that Pakistan was using Middle Eastern intermediaries to acquire bomb parts (13-inch `steel spheres' and `steel petal shapes').
1983
1983--Declassified US government assessment concludes that `There is unambiguous evidence that Pakistan is actively pursuing a nuclear weapons development program * * * We believe the ultimate application of the enriched uranium produced at Kahuta, which is unsafeguarded, is clearly nuclear weapons.'
1984
1984--President Zia states that Pakistan has acquired a `very modest' uranium enrichment capability for `nothing but peaceful purposes.'
1984--President Reagan reportedly warns Pakistan of `grave consequences' if it enriches uranium above 5%.
1985
1985--ABC News reports that US believes Pakistan has `successfully tested' a `firing mechanism' of an atomic bomb by means of a non-nuclear explosion, and that US krytrons `have been acquired' by Pakistan.
1985--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: Texas, krytrons (nuclear weapon triggers).
1985--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: US cancelled license for export of flash x-ray camera to Pakistan (nuclear weapon diagnostic uses) because of proliferation concerns.
1985/6--Media cites production of highly enriched, bomb-grade uranium in violation of a commitment to the US.
1985 -- Pressler Amendment [section 620E(e) of the Foreign Assistance Act] requires a total cut-off of U.S. aid to Islamabad unless the president can certify that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear weapon, and that continued US aid will significantly decrease the probability of its developing one in the future.
1986
1986--Bob Woodward article in Washington Post cites alleged DIA report saying Pakistan `detonated a high explosive test device between Sept. 18 and Sept. 21 as part of its continuing efforts to build an implosion-type nuclear weapon;' says Pakistan has produced uranium enriched to a 93.5% level.
1986--Press reports cite U.S. `Special National Intelligence Estimate' concluding that Pakistan had produced weapons-grade material.
1986--Commenting on Pakistan's nuclear capability, General Zia tells interviewer, `It is our right to obtain the technology. And when we acquire this technology, the Islamic world will possess it with us.'
1986--Declassified memo to then-Secretary of State Henry Kissinger states, `Despite strong U.S. concern, Pakistan continues to pursue a nuclear explosive capability * * * If operated at its nominal capacity, the Kahuta uranium enrichment plant could produce enough weapons-grade material to build several nuclear devices per year.'
1987
1987 -- Pakistan proposed to India an agreement on a bilateral or regional nuclear test ban treaty
1987--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: Pennsylvania, maraging steel & beryllium (used in centrifuge manufacture and bomb components).
1987--London Financial Times reports US spy satellites have observed construction of second uranium enrichment plant in Pakistan.
1987--Pakistan's leading nuclear scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan states in published interview that `what the CIA has been saying about our possessing the bomb is correct.'
1987--West German official confirms that nuclear equipment recently seized on way to Pakistan was suitable for `at least 93% enrichment' of uranium; blueprints of uranium enrichment plant also seized in Switzerland.
1987--U.S. Nuclear Export Control Violation: California, oscilloscopes, computer equipment (useful in nuclear weapon R&D).
1987--According to photocopy of a reported German foreign ministry memo published in Paris in 1990, UK government official tells German counterpart on European nonproliferation working group that he was `convinced that Pakistan had `a few small' nuclear weapons.'
1987 -- China concluded a deal with Pakistan to sell M-11 missiles and launchers.
1988
1988--President Reagan waives an aid cutoff for Pakistan due to an export control violation; in his formal certification, he confirmed that `material, equipment, or technology covered by that provision was to be used by Pakistan in the manufacture of a nuclear explosive device.'
1988--Hedrick Smith article in New York Times reports US government sources believe Pakistan has produced enough highly enriched uranium for 4-6 bombs.
1988--President Zia tells Carnegie Endowment delegation in interview that Pakistan has attained a nuclear capability `that is good enough to create an impression of deterrence.'
1989
1989--Multiple reports of Pakistan modifying US-supplied F-16 aircraft for nuclear delivery purposes; wind tunnel tests cited in document reportedly from West German intelligence service.
1989--Test launch of Hatf-2 missile: Payload (500 kilograms) and range (300 kilometers) meets `nuclear-capable' standard under Missile Technology Control Regime.
1989--CIA Director Webster tells Senate Governmental Affairs Committee hearing that `Clearly Pakistan is engaged in developing a nuclear capability.'
1989--Media claims that Pakistan acquired tritium gas and tritium facility from West Germany in mid-1980's.
1989--ACDA unclassified report cites Chinese assistance to missile program in Pakistan.
1989--UK press cites nuclear cooperation between Pakistan and Iraq.
1989--Article in Nuclear Fuel states that the United States has issued `about 100 specific communiques to the West German Government related to planned exports to the Pakistan Atomic Energy Commission and its affiliated organizations;' exports reportedly included tritium and a tritium recovery facility.
1989--Article in Defense & Foreign Affairs Weekly states `sources close to the Pakistani nuclear program have revealed that Pakistani scientists have now perfected detonation mechanisms for a nuclear device.'
1989--Reporting on a recent customs investigation, West German magazine Stern reports, `since the beginning of the eighties over 70 [West German] enterprises have supplied sensitive goods to enterprises which for years have been buying equipment for Pakistan's ambitious nuclear weapons program.'
1989--Gerard Smith, former US diplomat and senior arms control authority, claims US has turned a `blind eye' to proliferation developments Pakistan in and Israel.
1989--Senator Glenn delivers two lengthy statements addressing Pakistan's violations of its uranium enrichment commitment to the United States and the lack of progress on nonproliferation issues from Prime Minister Bhutto's democratically elected government after a year in office; Glenn concluded, `There simply must be a cost to non-compliance--when a solemn nuclear pledge is violated, the solution surely does not lie in voiding the pledge.'
1990
1989-1990--reports of secret construction of unsafeguard nuclear research reactor; components from Europe.
Spring 1990 -- Pakistan reportedly reacted to Indian Army war game maneuvers near its border by preparing to drop one of seven weapons from a specially configured C-130 cargo plane. [02 December 1992 NBC News report]
1990--US News cites `western intelligence sources' claiming Pakistan recently `cold-tested' a nuclear device and is now building a plutonium production reactor; article says Pakistan is engaged in nuclear cooperation with Iran.
1990--French magazine publishes photo of West German government document citing claim by UK official that British government believes Pakistan already possesses `a few small' nuclear weapons; cites Ambassador Richard Kennedy claim to UK diplomat that Pakistan has broken its pledge to the US not to enrich uranium over 5%.
1990--London Sunday Times cites growing U.S. and Soviet concerns about Pakistani nuclear program; paper claims F-16 aircraft are being modified for nuclear delivery purposes; claims US spy satellites have observed `heavily armed convoys' leaving Pakistan uranium enrichment complex at Kahuta and heading for military airfields.
1990--Pakistani biography of top nuclear scientist (Dr. Abdul Qadeer Khan and the Islamic Bomb), claims US showed `model' of Pakistani bomb to visiting Pakistani diplomat as part of unsuccessful nonproliferation effort.
1990--Defense & Foreign Affairs Weekly reports `US officials now believe that Pakistan has quite sufficient computing power in country to run all the modeling necessary to adequately verify the viability of the country's nuclear weapons technology.'
1990--Dr. A.Q. Khan, father of Pakistan's bomb, receives `Man of the Nation Award.'
1990--Washington Post documents 3 recent efforts by Pakistan to acquire special arc-melting furnaces with nuclear and missile applications.
October 1990 -- President Bush announced that he could no longer provide Congress with Pressler Amendment certification that Pakistan does not possess a nuclear weapon. Economic and military aid was duly terminated, though the Bush administration continued to permit a limited number of commercial military sales to Pakistan. Pakistan handled the cutoff with little public rancor and committed itself to freezing the nuclear program in an attempt to placate the United States
The whole damned party is getting that shifty and that un-american. Everything in the republicanist universe is for sale - morality, security, truth, future generations, number of commandments, everything.
If this isn't an evil administration already, then what's the standard? When is too much too much. 935 lies and you have everyone here defending it.
What's the payoff? another thirty years of this shit, until you can't tell us from haiti? or worse a subdivided set of mutant former american zaibatsu run by doomsday fundametal rapturists, chinese communists and mexican trillionaires?
Vote now, save ammunition later!
Clif Kuplen at 4:13PM on Jan 23rd 2008
40. If I remember correctly we went to Iraq because Saddam Hussein was known to have WMDs in the past (for sure) and then in 2002 refused to let UN inspectors review his inventory which contained certain weapons that could be used against neighboring countries with devastating effects.
In 2002 Bush warned Iraq that military force would have to be used if he didn’t allow weapons inspection.
Bush didn’t say we are invading Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction; He said (paraphrasing) we are going to war with Iraq because they are not complying with inspections rules, and we suspect that they have WMDs.
Imagine this: If you knew your next door neighbor was released from prison recently for assault with a deadly weapon and murder, and the police suspect that he had been hoarding deadly weapons since he was released, and the neighbor refused to let them enter his home even with a warrant, would you support a police raid?
Bush was in a damned if I do damned if I don’t scenario. If we didn’t invade Iraq and later they used a WMD against anyone, Bush would have been labeled guilty of neglect of duty. People would be saying, “why didn’t he stop them when we had a chance?”
The reason why we are mired in Iraq right now isn’t because Bush got us into this mess. In fact it is too easy to sit back and place them blame on Bush. The reason why we are mired in Iraq is because we did what almost everyone in the United States of America knew to be the right thing at the time.
The reason why we are still there are for multiple reasons. For one we are Americans. We aren’t going to punish the general Iraqi people for something the Baath party did or what violent Jihadist are doing now. Also if we pulled out of Iraq right now, that would allow a weakened Iraqi government to be overthrown by violent Jihadist, which would result in an even deadlier war later.
As a soldier for nine years, and having an older brother still serving for seventeen years, I hate that we have people dying violently in Iraq. but I’m not going to blame our President for doing the right, but unpopular thing.
Why is it that in 2001 you could see the US flag waiving proudly on every American street, but now you hardly see it? Are we ashamed to be American? I would like you to know that I am still proud to be an American and I’m proud of Americans, and would hope that if you aren’t you might reconsider what America is about. Yes, negative things exist in America, (pornography, drugs, children without good mothers or fathers) just like the rest of the world, but I feel that America in general is a good country full of good people, just like the rest of the world.
marc at 4:25PM on Jan 23rd 2008
41. PLUS the lies of his ol lady, equals 47,283 known lies and of course hundreds of those we don't know about.
OlieIII at 4:14PM on Jan 23rd 2008
xxx
Olie, if bill clinton jumped off a building would you do it too?
Clif Kuplen at 4:24PM on Jan 23rd 2008
42. If I remember correctly we went to Iraq because Saddam Hussein was known to have WMDs in the past (for sure) and then in 2002 refused to let UN inspectors review his inventory which contained certain weapons that could be used against neighboring countries with devastating effects.
In 2002 Bush warned Iraq that military force would have to be used if he didn’t allow weapons inspection.
Bush didn’t say we are invading Iraq because they have weapons of mass destruction; He said (paraphrasing) we are going to war with Iraq because they are not complying with inspections rules, and we suspect that they have WMDs.
Imagine this: If you knew your next door neighbor was released from prison recently for assault with a deadly weapon and murder, and the police suspect that he had been hoarding deadly weapons since he was released, and the neighbor refused to let them enter his home even with a warrant, would you support a police raid?
Bush was in a damned if I do damned if I don’t scenario. If we didn’t invade Iraq and later they used a WMD against anyone, Bush would have been labeled guilty of neglect of duty. People would be saying, “why didn’t he stop them when we had a chance?”
The reason why we are mired in Iraq right now isn’t because Bush got us into this mess. In fact it is too easy to sit back and place them blame on Bush. The reason why we are mired in Iraq is because we did what almost everyone in the United States of America knew to be the right thing at the time.
The reason why we are still there are for multiple reasons. For one we are Americans. We aren’t going to punish the general Iraqi people for something the Baath party did or what violent Jihadist are doing now. Also if we pulled out of Iraq right now, that would allow a weakened Iraqi government to be overthrown by violent Jihadist, which would result in an even deadlier war later.
As a soldier for nine years, and having an older brother still serving for seventeen years, I hate that we have people dying violently in Iraq. but I’m not going to blame our President for doing the right, but unpopular thing.
Why is it that in 2001 you could see the US flag waiving proudly on every American street, but now you hardly see it? Are we ashamed to be American? I would like you to know that I am still proud to be an American and I’m proud of Americans, and would hope that if you aren’t you might reconsider what America is about. Yes, negative things exist in America, (pornography, drugs, children without good mothers or fathers) just like the rest of the world, but I feel that America in general is a good country full of good people, just like the rest of the world.
marc at 4:26PM on Jan 23rd 2008
43. "The United States exported $500 million of dual use exports to Iraq that were approved by the Commerce department. Among them were advanced computers, some of which were used in Iraq’s nuclear program. The non-profit American Type Culture Collection and the Centers for Disease Control sold or sent biological samples to Iraq under Saddam Hussein up until 1989, which Iraq claimed it needed for medical research. These materials included anthrax, West Nile virus and botulism, as well as Brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Some of these materials were used for Iraq's biological weapons research program..."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction
Hey, everyone was getting a piece of the action though... isn't that right Gassbag?
not-pboyfloyd at 4:50PM on Jan 23rd 2008
44. WMD boom!!!(p)
not-pboyfloyd at 4:58PM on Jan 23rd 2008
45. A lie is a false statement that, at the time it was made, was known to be false by its maker. Your article and your sources offer no proof that will support calling those statements lies.
xxxx
The preponderence of evidence points to bush and cheney knowingly and repeatedly making false statements.
There would be no other probable explanations for plamegate nor for the downing street memos to cite just two instances.
Anecdotally we have it from several sources that it was bush's intention to go to war prior to being elected, and I saw myself that just before the war, no amount of compliance would save Iraq.
To allege in the face of full cooperation that they were still sandbagging was a lie. Iraq complied to the letter with each demand and the admin. denied they had, as though we hadn't seen the newscasts.
that was right in front of anyone who had a television every day at the time.
This is in fact classic neocon dogma as they themselves admit - management of public perception of facts surrounding incidents to suit the party's ends.
And their reaction after going to war and not being met with resistance via wmd's was to change the reason for having gone to war. That was also a lie we all witnessed repeatedly.
They said it was not a war on terrorism but a struggle against global terror until they got their 'non wartime' tax cut and then changed it back to a war on terror. They were either lying when they said it wasn't a war, or they've been lying since by saying it is.
He also said he'd exhaust all diplomatic options before going to war but he lied about that too.
neoliberalbabble.
Clif Kuplen at 5:28PM on Jan 23rd 2008