The media coverage in the run-up to the Iraq war
The media coverage in the run-up to the Iraq war
“was a disaster.” FAIR documents “some of the worst moments in journalism, from the fall of 2002 and into the early weeks of the Iraq War.” A few highlights from the report:
September 8, 2002
–Michael R. Gordon and Judith Miller co-author the article “U.S. Says Hussein Intensifies Quest for A-Bomb Parts” on the front page of the New York Times.October 9, 2002
–Kenneth Pollack, the influential and heavily cited war advocate at the Brookings Institution, appears on the Oprah show to discuss the impending war. “Does he have the ability to attack us here in the United States?” Oprah Winfrey asks. “He certainly does,” Pollack explains.December 12, 2002
–The Washington Post runs a front-page article by Barton Gellman headlined, “U.S. Suspects Al-Qaeda Got Nerve Agent From Iraqis; Analysts: Chemical May Be VX, and Was Smuggled Via Turkey.”February 25, 2003
–MSNBC cancels Donahue, its top-rated show and a rare oasis of war skepticism in the mainstream media.March 18, 2003
–Bill O’Reilly makes a promise on ABC’s Good Morning America: “If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it’s clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?”
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
March 18, 2003
–Bill O’Reilly makes a promise on ABC’s Good Morning America: “If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it’s clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?â€
We’re still waiting Bill-O.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:03 pmFunny. Let’s post up quotes from Democratic politicians from the same time frame and ooh and aaaah at the “disaster” they perpetrated. The Brookings Institution is a center-left think tank. Knock, knock. Who’s there? The historical record. The historical record who? Yeah, exactly.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:08 pmHillary Clinton STILL won’t admit her vote to authorize force into Iraq was a mistake!
March 19th, 2007 at 6:13 pmPlease try to stay on topic, L. We’re talking about the MEDIA, not politicians.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:13 pmHow can you blame the media for believing the same intel Congress, our President, and most major countries believed before the invasion? The real story is that we need to figure out how the world intelligence agencies got it so wrong so it never happens again. It is very sad that the intel turned out to be wrong. This isn’t a minor mistake either. When there is intel like this that is believed by our Congress and our President it is no doubt they went to war. It was be danergous not to engage a terrorist like Saddam if you believed he had these weapons as he certainly was an enemy of the USA and most everyone of our allies. It saddens me that we made this mistake but I hope we can learn from it going forward.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:16 pmLucifer, Bush, Rummy, Cheney, and Wolfowitz ALL LIED to the country and the world. Just because some Democrats and liberals were too stupid to realize that they were lying doesn’t mean that all of us were.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:16 pmKnight-Ridder (McClatchy,now) reporters, particularly Tom Lasseter, did a marvelous job reporting from Iraq since the war. Cockburn and others for the Indepedent before the war were also good, but like Scott Ridder, who was right all along, are never seen on US major media.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:17 pmThank goodness for the Daily Show, your most reliable source for news. (CNN wishes they were that good).
Off thread but an interesting news note. Ms. Ashley Holm, a Kansas State civil servant was threatened with termination unless she removed a bumper sticker from her car here.. The Govenor of Kansas said Ms. Holm did not have to remove the two word sticker that said “F” WAR. Rumor has it that Ms. Holm has agreed to a compromise: She will retain her job and will change the offending word on the bumber sticker. Tomorow the sticker will read “F” BUSH. The Govenor is expected to announce that Ms. Holm will be replacing Senator Brownback (R).
March 19th, 2007 at 6:19 pm#3 Everyone should apoligize. Now that we know the intel was faulty, everyone including the President should admit it was a mistake. I don’t blame Hillary for her vote. Her vote was an Honest mistake. Most all world government and our President believed this intel. Hillary was defending America from a threat she perceived to be real. How can you blame our leaders for trying to protect us. We just need to figure out how to create a better intelligence net so these mistakes don’t happen again. Hopefully we can learn from this going forward. Either way, she should call it a mistake. Hindsight is always 20/20 and I hope all our leaders can admit, including Bush, that if they knew what they know today, the invasion was a mistake. It is sad our politicians can’t even admit honest mistakes like this. Americans will give them some slack because we understand they were simply trying to protect us.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:20 pmHow can you blame the media for believing the same intel Congress, our President, and most major countries believed before the invasion?
Comment by Roger_Roger
The press is supposed to be skeptical. They are not supposed to accept the word of political hacks, of either party, which is exactly what they did not do in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq. You cannot blame this on the CIA, much as you might like to excuse the Administration. “How were they to know?” They were to know because they fking made it up, that’s how.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:21 pmMore Trouble for Iraq Oil Law
March 19th, 2007 in Iraq
Four years ago this week, American tanks headed into Baghdad. At the time critics of the war said it was about oil. But those voices were dismissed. Then came Iraq’s Oil Law which essentially hands control of much of its oil wealth to foreign multinationals.
Opposition to the controversial law continues to grow. Former Iraqi oil industry officials, experts and lawmakers have just gathered in Jordan to debate the bill, expressing grave concerns over the Law.
“There are many question marks hanging over this draft law,†said Dhia al-Bakaa, former president of the Iraqi State Oil Marketing Organisation (SOMO). Why the timing? Why the hurry when we still lack political, economic and security stability.â€
Issam Chalabi, an oil minister under executed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein, said the bill did not take “into account our greater national interests†but was adopted “to satisfy US President George W. Bush.â€
Faleh al-Khayat, a former head of planning at the oil ministry, warned that “major foreign oil firms are greedy and will covet Iraq’s oil wealth†if the bill is adopted. MP Saleh Mutlak of Iraq’s National Dialogue Front echoed him: “We have no need for foreign companies. We are experienced enough to reap the fruit of our wealth.â€
MP Ali Mashhadani also agreed. “Our oil wealth is black gold that must be kept underground until security conditions are appropriate to take advantage of it. It has been entrusted to our safekeeping by the people we represent. Iraq has sold 125 billion dollars worth of oil since the start of the US-led occupation.â€
March 19th, 2007 at 6:21 pmWaiting for that apology Bill.
I won’t hold my breath….
March 19th, 2007 at 6:22 pmSeriously, TP — you can’t be making the argument that the mainstream media is pro-war. That is so wrong it is laughable. The same media that carried Kerry’s water for months on the Swift Boat story by basically refusing to cover it?
March 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pmThe real story is that we need to figure out how the world intelligence agencies got it so wrong so it never happens again. It is very sad that the intel turned out to be wrong.
There were inspectors on the ground IN Iraq already telling us they were finding no weapons, however this regime had already made the decision to go to war long before and were hellbent on waging it no matter what. It’s well known by now they cherry-picked intel that supported their case and suppressed what didn’t. As for the media, they have a degree of culpability in this, by acting as stenographers for these liars instead of doing some investigative reporting…their job.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:24 pmOn Jan. 24, 2003, four days before President Bush delivered his State of the Union address presenting the case for war against Iraq, the National Security Council staff put out a call for new intelligence to bolster claims that Saddam Hussein possessed nuclear, chemical and biological weapons or programs.
The person receiving the request, Robert Walpole, then the national intelligence officer for strategic and nuclear programs, would later tell investigators that “the NSC believed the nuclear case was weak,” according to a 500-page report released last year by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence.
It has been clear since the September report of the Iraq Survey Group — a CIA-sponsored weapons search in Iraq — that the United States would not find the weapons of mass destruction cited by Bush as the rationale for going to war against Iraq. But as the Walpole episode suggests, it appears that even before the war many senior intelligence officials in the government had doubts about the case being trumpeted in public by the president and his senior advisers.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/21/AR2005052100474.html
March 19th, 2007 at 6:26 pmComment by Roger_Roger:
Now that we know the intel was faulty, everyone including the President should admit it was a mistake.
This president? Bush? Admit a mistake? Can I have some of whatever you are smoking?
March 19th, 2007 at 6:27 pmIraq experts say draft oil industry law fraught with problems
Read this in the Turkish Press
“There are many question marks hanging over this draft law,” said Dhia al-Bakaa, former president of the Iraqi State Oil Marketing Organisation (SOMO).
“Why the timing? Why the hurry when we still lack political, economic and security stability,” Bakaa asked a recent conference organised by the non-governmental Iraqi Centre for Strategic Studies.
“The Iraqi National Oil Company should have been restructured before the government endorsed the draft law, to allow INOC to develop the giant oil fields so that they would not face pressure and extortion in the future.”
March 19th, 2007 at 6:28 pmThe same media that carried Kerry’s water for months on the Swift Boat story by basically refusing to cover it?
That story was so wrong it was laughable…if it was funny, which none of that was. Kerry was Swift-boated by these fascists and this country is paying the price.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:29 pmMaking her no better than any of the trolls here that won’t admit when they are wrong. So, Hillary is just like your dumb a$$.
I think I am going to go to the bathroom and leave a big steamy Jake in the toilet.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:29 pmSpudge Boy:
Who you gonna vote for if she gets the Democratic nomination?
March 19th, 2007 at 6:32 pmIf by printing every lie the Swift Boaters stated, then yeah, the media carried Kerry’s water.
Fu*king retarded piece of sh!t.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:32 pmRe #5
roger_roger. bush wasn’t deceived by faulty intel, he provided that faulty intel to congress, the media, our allies, us. he lied to us. stop including him in your honor roll of victims.
re# 13
How exactly did the media carry kerry’s water in the swiftboat attack? the media carried the swiftboatliars’ water.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:33 pmYeah, well, maybe if checks and balances hadn’t gotten left behind in 1999 things would be better. I’m old enough to remember when the founding documents actually meant something to our leaders and we were at least somewhat respected as a country. I know that politics is a dirty business and all that, but this administration eclipses anything I have ever seen before. The amount of hubris that propels the expansion of executive power is truly breathtaking. It’s too bad you can’t harness it, it might help our energy problems.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:34 pmSpudge:
Jake would be the YELLOW and RUNNY kind!
March 19th, 2007 at 6:35 pm#5 Roger_Roger:
The real story is that we need to figure out how the world intelligence agencies got it so wrong so it never happens again.
Ummm, they didn’t. Not only that, but good portions of the U.S. intelligence network didn’t get it wrong either; they were sceptical. Consider that the CIA thought that Chalabi and his thugs were worthless, and the INR (and parts of the CIA) thought the Africa uranium stuff was a crock. Others dispelled the “Dodgy Dossier”, the “Niger ducuments” were shown within 24 hours to be phony by the IAEA, and the UNMOVIC investigators on the ground in Iraq before the war referred to the U.S. ‘intelligence’ they were given (after the maladministration had stonewalled them for months despite beign required to turn over any such ‘intelligence’ by UNSCR 1441), after they checked it out, as “garbage, garbage, and more garbage”.
Those that didn’t want to hear this just went their merry way. Those that were listening, opposed the war. And that was most of the world (and a fair number in the U.S.). It was only the U.S. and its strong-armed “Coalition of the Billing” that wanted to go to war, with 8 of the 13 U.N. Security Council nations opposed. The U.S. went to war without UNSC authorisation.
Cheers,
March 19th, 2007 at 6:37 pmI’m going to be perfectly frank: Anyone who believed the lies is ignorant at best and an idiot at worst.
Seriously, I’m not the most educated or even politically active person, but well before the war I read reports by the “Research Unit for Political Economy” which is a foreign economic policy think tank in India that completely predicted every failure we’ve made since the beginning of the war, exposed the lies and even laid out the current civil war, our posturing with Iran and Syria as well as the resurgence of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan. This book was sitting by the register in a local bookstore – not hidden away in a cellar. Many other books and reports I read had this information and if you all will remember some of the largest protests in American history took place in the lead up to this war. It was not a secret that we were being lied to. Heard of a guy named Joe Wilson?
Yes, the majority of Democratic leaders voted for it as did the majority of Republican leaders and the media was completely useless in doing their job of covering it. They should all be fired for being idiots. I saw a panel a few moths ago where a bunch of the talking poodles were complaining about being lied to by the administration and I thought to myself – each of these losers should be fired. They just admitted that they are not doing their job. They admitted they were just saying what our government wanted them to without questioning it.
Anyone who is “shocked” by the “faulty intelligence” need to wake up.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:38 pmKarl Rove, President Bush’s chief political adviser, cautioned other White House aides in the summer of 2003 that Bush’s 2004 re-election prospects would be severely damaged if it was publicly disclosed that he had been personally warned that a key rationale for going to war had been challenged within the administration. Rove expressed his concerns shortly after an informal review of classified government records by then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley determined that Bush had been specifically advised that claims he later made in his 2003 State of the Union address — that Iraq was procuring high-strength aluminum tubes to build a nuclear weapon — might not be true, according to government records and interviews.
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm
Bush LIED, and continues to LIE. EVERYDAY.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:40 pmRead the ABC Iraq poll report. It’s quite the read for the 4th anniversary of the war.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:41 pmhttp://abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=2954716&page=1
Sammy the Cat – Thanks for posting that link. Anyone who cares about this country should read that article imo.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:45 pmbob and Spudge,
If the SwiftBoat guys were lying, why didn’t Kerry just make his military records public and show the world the truth? Answer: he couldn’t because the record would show they weren’t lying! You guys should swear off the kool-aid for a bit…
The SwiftBoat book came out in the spring but the media didn’t really cover the story until the fall. I guarantee you that if something potentially damaging to a repub candidate like this came out, there would be no hesitation on leading the nightly news with it.
March 19th, 2007 at 6:45 pmCynicon,
You’re being sarcastic right? Why won’t Bush make his draft dodging records public?
March 19th, 2007 at 6:51 pmLaw of the Lie: No matter how often a lie is shown to be false, there will remain a percentage of people who believe it true. (Source: Murphy’s Law 26th Anniversary Edition)
March 19th, 2007 at 6:53 pmAl Gore: Stupid.
Hillary Clinton: Stupid.
John Kerry: Stupid.
John Rockefeller: Stupid.
According to the historical revisionist commenters at TP. Lovely.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:13 pmFrom the demonstrations today, it’s clear that people have connected the dots to the lies and smearing campaign of Plame to the neocon political agenda of this war – regardless of how it came about (legally or illegally – lies or truth) they were invading Iraq.
On this fact alone this entire group of whackos should be impeached right now! THIS IS WHY PEOPLE ARE DEMONSTRATING….not strictly because war is unpopular but because this White House lied to get us into it…..aided and abetted by a Republican Congress. Every individual who voted “yes” to enable this administration to move forward needs to be brought to accountability for that oversight on their part. It’s not like everyone didn’t do their homework on this one.
Russ Feingold voted No; Dennis Kucinich voted No; Wesley Clark voted No and Barak Obama vocalized his rejection of this war.
Do not be deluded by those charlatans (Hillary et al) who NOW say that they didn’t have all of the material facts; if these three guy above had the facts, everyone had the same facts. In fact, an argument can be made that Ms. Clinton was even more “informed” having been in the white house for 8 years and knowing all of the background which senators would not have had (daily briefings, etc. which presidents continue to receive) So, in Hillary’s case, her vote “yes” becomes more of a crime. This is precisely why Hillary Clinton will never become President of this country. This was the vote of her lifetime and she botched it. She stood by her man (as a ploy) when his affair was made public simply for publicity and her future political career. What she never guessed is that having done all of that prep work, this one vote “yes” would bring down her candidacy….it’s happening to McCain – it will happen fast to Hillary as her numbers are sinking daily. It’s too bad she didn’t use her brain on this one. You just can’t have it both ways.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:16 pm#33
If you classify those esteemed individuals as stupid then your idol King George the Dumb is below absolute zero on the IQ scale.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:25 pmIf the SwiftBoat guys were lying, why didn’t Kerry just make his military records public and show the world the truth? Answer: he couldn’t because the record would show they weren’t lying!
— Cynicon Implant
The SwiftBoaters have been proven to be liars, and now you just proved yourself to be one.
Not supprising
March 19th, 2007 at 7:27 pm#34 Hit nail on head. Everyone of them should be voted out of office and never again be allowed the privilege of service to this country.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:31 pmso jake, you are admitting that it was a mistake?
March 19th, 2007 at 7:52 pmWhy does every loudmouth “patriot” have a US mailing address?
When the war of my generation came along, I at least enlisted and volunteered to go over. Not these neocon “patriots” – they are all mouth and no spine.
They are not just crooks and liars, but cowards!
March 19th, 2007 at 7:53 pmBill O’Reilly makes a promise on ABC’s Good Morning America: “If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it’s clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?â€
Okay Bill, We are waiting. Heres the crow, start chowing down.
March 19th, 2007 at 7:58 pmAccording to the historical revisionist commenters at TP. Lovely.
Comment by Lucifer
But Lucifer, our world is all lies, remember?
March 19th, 2007 at 7:59 pmIf we assume the point of these examples is that something different could have happened in the lead up to war if the media were more sceptical then here are some very interesting ones missing from your list:
February 6, 2003
Joe Wilson writes an editorial for the Los Angeles Times, A ‘Big Cat’ With Nothing to Lose, in which he claimed we should not attack Saddam Hussein because he will use his weapons of mass destruction on our troops and give them to terrorists.
February 28, 2003
Joe Wilson was interviewed by Bill Moyers. Wilson agreed with Bush’s SOTU remarks, and reiterated his belief that Saddam had WMD and that he would use them on US troops.
March 3, 2003
At the invitation of David Corn, Joe Wilson wrote a piece for the Nation, Republic Or Empire?
In it Wilson blasted the “neo-conservatives” in the Bush administration for their imperial over-reach. But he once again made no mention of uranium or any other suggestion that Bush misled the country or lied about Iraq’s WMD.
—
I have always been puzzled as to why Wilson waited 4 months into the war before penning an op-ed that stated Bush SOTU address some 5 months earlier was misleading.
I wasn’t aware his belief in the existance of WMDs, and one would assume Plame’s also, was no different than the wait-and-see crowd until I read this:
http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/when-and-why-joseph-c-wilson-iv-outed-valerie-plame
In terms of people who bravely stood up and told the truth when it counted, Joe Wilson would appear to be more like Russell Crowe’s character in The Insider. If instead of doing what he did he waiting until now, in 2007, to tell us cigarettes are addictive.
Yet somehow this is never queried and he is championed for doing something after the fact when he could have done it before to much greater effect.
March 19th, 2007 at 8:09 pmFebruary – SOTU
March – Invasion
April
May
June
July – Wilson’s Op-Ed
Lucifer: retard
March 19th, 2007 at 8:11 pmcynicon, the swiftboat liars made an initial purchase of about $100K of time in an inexpensive market. The media proceeded to give them saturation coverage worth tens of millions of dollars in free advertising. Even though most of their claims were debunked by military records themselves, the media kept trotting out liars like Bob Novak to make it seem as if Kerry’s war record was a matter of opinion.
And, Lucifer, what exactly has Al Gore been wrong about? The Iraq War? The viability of the internet? Environmental degradation? Global warming? WHAT!!!???
March 19th, 2007 at 8:11 pmKilo, that doesn’t change the fact that Bush knowingly lied in a SOTU address. We now know that he knew the uranium thing was bogus. We now know that his people knew it was based on a forgery. Sure. Let’s do timelines. The more you look at timelines, the more obvious it is that Bush lied our country into a shooting war. He should go down in history as the traitorous criminal he is.
March 19th, 2007 at 8:15 pmDear George,
You are an OIL WHOREBAG for the Saudi TERRORIST FINANCIERS and
a TRAITOR to the USA, as is the rest of your criminal “administrationâ€.
You REFUSED to SWEAR TO GOD TO TELL THE TRUTH about your involvement in 9/11 and with the Bin Laden Family.
May you TRULY get what you deserve from God on Judgement Day. Considering you are a LIAR, MURDERER and THIEF (Halliburton),
YOU are in trouble
You silver-spoon AWOL coward PUNK coxucker TRAITOR to the USA.
God Bless America, the Democrats, and the WORLD!
Sincerely,
Arn Gunnutes
March 19th, 2007 at 8:31 pmREAL American PATRIOT
Non-BushNazi/OIL WHOREBAG
How come you’re not listing the warmongering talk from leading Democrats at the time?
“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am
keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and
biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to
all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the
development of weapons of mass destruction technology
which is a threat to countries in the region and he
has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.”
Nancy Pelosi (D) December 16, 1998.
“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal,
murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We
all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so
consistently prone to miscalculation. …And now he is
miscalculating America’s response to his continued
deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass
destruction. That is why the world, through the United
Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice,
demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and
disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons
of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has
been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.”
John F. Kerry (D) Jan 23, 2003.
“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a
serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his
pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot
be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” Ted Kennedy (D)
Sept 27, 2002.
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling
evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a
number of years, a developing capacity for the
production and storage of weapons of mass
destruction.” Bob Graham (D) December 2002.
“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of
the Persian Gulf and we should organize an
international coalition to eliminate his access to
weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons
of mass destruction has proven impossible to
completely deter and we should assume that it will
continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” Al Gore
(D) 2002.
“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to
America and our allies, including our vital ally,
Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has
sought weapons of mass destruction through every
available means. We know that he has chemical and
biological weapons. He has already used them against
his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to
build more. We know that he is doing everything he can
to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he
gets closer to achieving that goal.” John Edwards (D)
Oct 10, 2002
“In the four years since the inspectors left,
intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has
worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his
nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and
sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members,
though there is apparently no evidence of his
involvement in the terrible events of September 11,
2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity
to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep
trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed
in that endeavor, he could alter the political and
security landscape of the Middle East, which as we
know all too well affects American security.” Hillary
Clinton (D) October 10, 2002.
“The community of nations may see more and more of the
very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with
weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or
provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond
today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his
footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” Bill Clinton
(D) in 1998.
“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to
completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction,
and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its
agreement.” Barbara Boxer (D), November 8, 2002.
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October
March 19th, 2007 at 9:02 pmof 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained
some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons,
and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare
capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he
is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved
nuclear capability.” Robert Byrd (D), October 2002.
BlueDog asks:“what exactly has Al Gore been wrong about?”
Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power…Indeed, should we decide to proceed, that action can be justified within the framework of international law rather than outside it. In fact, though a new UN resolution may be helpful in building international consensus, the existing resolutions from 1991 are sufficient from a legal standpoint…We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.
The President should be authorized to take action to deal with Saddam Hussein as being in material breach of the terms of the truce and therefore a continuing threat to the security of the region. To this should be added that his continued pursuit of weapons of mass destruction is potentially a threat to the vital interests of the United States….
Transcript of Al Gore’s Speech “Iraq and the War On Terrorism”
Monday, September 23rd, 2002
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/iraq-020923-gore01.htm
So, with what part of these highlighted comments do you agree, BlueDog?
March 19th, 2007 at 9:03 pm“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October
of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained
some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons,
and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare
capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he
is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved
nuclear capability.†Robert Byrd (D), October 2002.
Comment by muckdog
And yet none have proved to be true. What is the point here?
March 19th, 2007 at 10:19 pmDo you wish to group me by association to what one man said? That you wish to group me by one mans words? That you yourself were fooled? That you cannot think for yourself?
So, with what part of these highlighted comments do you agree, BlueDog? Comment by Exley
I agree that Exley cannot think for himself, I agree that Exley engages in groupthink.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:21 pmOne man one vote Exley, why is that so hard for you to see?
March 19th, 2007 at 10:23 pmZep, your last two postings (50 & 51) are enigmatic, at best…Nonsensical, at worst.
March 19th, 2007 at 10:28 pm“If the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it’s clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right?â€
Okay Bill, We are waiting. Heres the crow, start chowing down.
Comment by Zep Tepi #40
Zep,
…haven’t you heard…
…they just found the ULTIMATE wmd…
…chlorine…
March 19th, 2007 at 11:10 pmTaking back the airwaves is a major plank…
…in resolving the problems our democracy faces…
…the corporate owned media has become a liability…
…they’ve managed to consolidate the power of the press…
…and airwaves…
…into too few hands…
…PRIVATIZATION…
…of resources essential to the people’s well being and survival like:
healthcare
information (news)
insurance
military
education
…should be ILLEGAL…
March 19th, 2007 at 11:26 pmROLL OVER BEETHOVEN AND MSM MUTTS WHO BARK FOR THEIR MASTERS OF Bushland Uber Allies!!!! ARF! ARF! ARF! ARF! ARF! DOWN, Sandy, STOP RIPPING MY THROAT OUT, Said CHIMPya as Little Orphan Annie(tm) DIRECTED Sandy(tm) TO RIP OUT CHIMPya’s THROAT—-SHE AND Sandy(tm) WEREN’T Bush’s LAP-DOGS LIKE THE MSM!!!!!
March 19th, 2007 at 11:43 pm#30 If the SwiftBoat guys were lying, why didn’t Kerry just make his military records public and show the world the truth? Answer: he couldn’t because the record would show they weren’t lying! You guys should swear off the kool-aid for a bit…
You incredible moron. Kerry did release his records after the election. Go ahead. Find something in his records. I am guessing he felt that it was all a diversion…and it was for retards like you.
March 19th, 2007 at 11:51 pm#48 You just blamed Al Gore for Iraq. Nice strawman. He wasn’t in Congress. He wasn’t in the administration. Maybe you should stick the blame where it belongs instead of on Gore. That was ridiculous.
March 19th, 2007 at 11:54 pmThe right attacks certain Dem Senators for voting for the war…while they defend the war and Bush. You can’t have it both ways. You can’t hammer on your allies (you have so few these days.)
March 19th, 2007 at 11:56 pmI charge the media; corporate, conservative and otherwise, with as much fault as the administration for lending faulty coverage to this sham. A lot of the commonly recognized media persists with the inaccurate depiction even now, four years later. It’s a crime, frankly. I’m tired of the ranting and raving, and want them to just stop. Boycott them all.
March 19th, 2007 at 11:58 pm#59 I am not sure about that. From all media reports and my diagnoses of them I didn’t believe Iraq had WMD. Then again, I didn’t read Judith Miller’s tripe and believed credible sources, not journalists. I listened to Blix, Ritter and El Baredai. People who knew what they were talking about.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:11 am#59 If you knew who to trust the info was there. That is why Dems who voted for the authorization have no credibility with me.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:17 amPulled this about about Donahue firing in 2003…truly fascinating look into the executive mindset at NBC in early 2003…they admit they didnt want “a tired liberal…while the other networks were waving the flag at every opportunity….so they fire Donahue and hire Savage and Dick Armey instead to become a light weight Fox News….the irony is that after 3 years they have come back full circle with KO at least to embrace “tired liberals”
That report–shared with me by an NBC news insider–gives an excruciatingly painful assessment of the channel and its programming. Some of recommendations, such as dropping the “America’s News Channel,” have already been implemented. But the harshest criticism was leveled at Donahue, whom the authors of the study described as “a tired, left-wing liberal out of touch with the current marketplace.”
The study went on to claim that Donahue presented a “difficult public face for NBC in a time of war……He seems to delight in presenting guests who are anti-war, anti-Bush and skeptical of the administration’s motives.” The report went on to outline a possible nightmare scenario where the show becomes “a home for the liberal antiwar agenda at the same time that our competitors are waving the flag at every opportunity.”
http://www.allyourtv.com/0203season/news/02252003donahue.html
March 20th, 2007 at 12:32 am#62 Wow, their cowardice really outpaced their business sense didn’t it? Hmm, he has good ratings but…oh my god, he is anti-war…
March 20th, 2007 at 12:35 am#61- I’m speaking in wide, sweeping generalities, I know- but, I was essentially referring to the big corporate network NBC. NYT and WP haven’t been forthcoming either. I found my news from alternative sources but ordinary people don’t always have that recourse and stupidly accept these inaccurate news deliveries at face value and believe them.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:47 am#64 I know what you mean. Most people buy what they are sold. And Judy and Co. sold it day after day. Give us some more Chalabi. I wish people weren’t so stupid. We might not be at war.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:50 am#64 At that time I hadn’t tuned in to the blogs. I got my news from TV. I didn’t buy it. I was incredibly disgusted with Colin Powell. I knew it was the end of the road for him, politically.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:51 am#66- Same, here. I have changed a lot this past four years. I am even more militant than I was during the Vietnam War days. I trust the media about as far as I can spit at it. I can’t watch television anymore. It disgusts me. I blog and listen to AAR and Democracy Now all the time.
March 20th, 2007 at 12:58 am#67 I was an infant at the end of the Vietnam war but I was still more intelligent than our leaders. How is it that BushCo. did not learn from that mistake? Yeah, I know, because they were high on coke at the time. This is the Peter Principle in action.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:02 am#68- The Bush family is pathological and a sick, sick twist. I’m sure you know thier sordid history as well as I do. It’s amazing the least likely sick son is now the fascist bastard-leader of the “free world”.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:08 amI’m tired JPark. I need some sleep and so will talk at ‘cha tomorrow. Later-
March 20th, 2007 at 1:14 am#70 Night R
March 20th, 2007 at 1:18 amKilo, that doesn’t change the fact that Bush knowingly lied in a SOTU address. We now know that he knew the uranium thing was bogus. We now know that his people knew it was based on a forgery. Sure. Let’s do timelines.
Comment by Bluedog49 — March 19, 2007 @ 8:15 pm
I just did you a timeline. Question was why is everyone so happy with Wilson blowing the lid on the false claims in the SOTU in July, 4 months after the invasion ?
Why hasn’t anyone asked why Wilson was agreeing with the content of the SOTU address at a time when exposing its false claims could have made a difference.
Instead of answering these you’ve chosen to tell us Bush used misleading info in the SOTU which helped set the case for invasion. Well thanks for that and welcome to 2003. How brave.
March 20th, 2007 at 1:50 amkilo, links?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:19 amNever mind kilo.. I found your links and I read the articles.. Did you?
March 20th, 2007 at 2:29 amYeah. I mentioned doing that earlier.
March 20th, 2007 at 2:59 amIf you found the link, me referring to have read it is directly above that.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:01 amCan you find the unanswered questions in the post immediately prior to yours ?
Bill-O takes the cake.
March 20th, 2007 at 3:05 am#13 You are correct B. ush was deceived by the intel. He was so convinced by it, he gave it to congress and congress agreed with his findings. Again, we need to work on our intelligence net so these mistakes don’t happen again. Our leaders should come out and admit this with a mistake. We, the American public, don’t hold these men and women personally responsible. That would be unfair seeing as though Bush, Cheney, and Congress didn’t know the intel was faulty. They were merely trying to protect us. When The President and both partiesd agree that we need to take action, we can rest assured the intel was reviewed thoroughly by both parties and they had our national security interests in mind. I just thank both parties and out president for doing such a wonderful job staying on top of these threats after 9/11, yet it is sad our President was deceived.
March 20th, 2007 at 9:21 am#57 *sigh* JPark, To use your own words, “Nice strawman.” Obviously, I was not “blaming” Al Gore for Iraq. In responding to BlueDog’s request for examples of when Al Gore was wrong, I simply posted parts of a speech made by Mr. Gore in 2002 that contained numerous statements, which either turned out to be incorrect or with which I believe BlueDog would disagree.
But, nice try, JPark.
March 20th, 2007 at 10:44 amDid I dream it, or didn’t O’Reilly make good eventually? For some reason, I was thinking that he actually did make an apology or semi-apologetic statement of some kind. Can somebody sort me out here?
March 20th, 2007 at 1:47 pm