Now… Bush is Lying! Why?
Written by JB Williams
In the President’s
address to the nation Sunday the 18th, 2005, he made this statement, “It is true that Saddam Hussein had a history of
pursuing and using weapons of mass destruction. It is true that he
systematically concealed those programs, and blocked the work of U.N. weapons
inspectors. It is true that many nations believed that Saddam had weapons of
mass destruction. But much of the
intelligence turned out to be wrong.”
This is the confession
many Americans have been demanding for years now and for what-ever reason, the
President decided to make this confession before the world community in this
address. But is this a true and accurate assessment of the situation as we now know
it, based on the facts?
Those of us interested in
the real facts long ago discovered that the case used by the Bush
administration to justify regime change in Iraq
was not new, nor unique to the Bush administration. In fact, it was the Clinton
administration that authored and passed legislation in 1998 making regime
change the formal U.S.
policy concerning Iraq
and they did so on the basis of the same intelligence later used by the Bush
In short, the
intelligence from around the globe strongly suggested that Hussein still had
WMD. As is always the case with intelligence work, it wasn’t 100%
certain. However, the CIA Director did refer to it as a “slam
dunk”. This was based primarily on the fact that we know he did have
them, had even used them. Hussein was ordered by numerous UN Resolutions and a
cease fire agreement from 1991 to destroy all of them and “provide evidence that they had been destroyed”,
including full unfettered verification by UN inspectors. This simply did not
happen… and every UN inspection report ever written on the subject says
There remained a large
cashe of WMD unaccounted for by UN inspectors for years. These unaccounted for
WMD remained at issue after 9/11 and nobody could confirm the whereabouts of Iraq’s
missing WMD, previously catalogued by UN inspectors themselves. After Hussein
failed for the 17th time to provide evidence of their disposal, the
Bush administration acted to implement the regime change policy established in
We also know that Senator
Jay Rockefeller traveled to Syria
less than four months after 9/11 to advise Hussein’s allies that he
believed Bush was intent upon invading Iraq.
We know that following
that trip, CIA operatives reported Iraqi military convoys carrying something
across the Syrian border and this became the centerpiece of Colin
Powell’s case to the UN Security Council, including satellite images of
the convoys. It was later reported by The
World Tribune on August
26, 2003, “U.S. intelligence suspects Iraq's weapons of mass destruction have finally been
located. Unfortunately, getting to them will be nearly impossible for the United States and its allies, because the containers with the
strategic materials are not in Iraq. Instead they are located in Lebanon's heavily-fortified Bekaa Valley, swarming with Iranian and Syrian forces, and
Hizbullah and ex-Iraqi agents.”
By June of
2004, The World Tribune reported “The
United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of
mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before,
during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003. The UN Monitoring, Verification and
Inspection Commission briefed
the Security Council on new findings that
could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam's missile and WMD program.”
“The briefing contained satellite photographs that
demonstrated the speed with which Saddam dismantled his missile and WMD sites
before and during the war. Council members were shown photographs of a
ballistic missile site outside Baghdad in May 2003, and then saw a satellite image of the
same location in February 2004, in which facilities had disappeared.”
So is it true? Did U.S.
and world-wide intelligence agencies have it all wrong? Or did we simply arrive
in Iraq after
the vast majority of unaccounted for WMD had been systematically moved outside
Then there is the little matter
of what we did find in Iraq,
which nobody including the President wants to discuss. On June 23 of 2004, U.S.
Forces found and removed 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium from a nuclear
facility in Iraq.
The Department of Energy, according to spokesman Bryan Wilkes, cataloged the
removal of radioactive materials in “powder form” (easily deployed
and dispersed), the worst kind of WMD post 9/11.
Tipped off by Iraqi
citizens, the Polish Military spent $5000. a pop to purchase seventeen
chemical-weapons warheads buried in the sand, in an effort to keep them off of
the black market and out of the hands of terrorist organizations operating in Iraq.
These warheads tested positive for “cyclosarin”, a nerve agent
reportedly five times the strength of “sarin”.
In addition, U.S.
troops found 1500 gallons of chemical agents in a Mosul
warehouse in August of 2005. There are more incidents, but you get the point.
These are all WMD, some of the very WMD we were concerned could end up in the
wrong hands and all found in Iraq.
So again, how wrong was
the pre-war intelligence concerning Iraq
and its WMD program? And based on this information, why would the President now
back away from these facts?
Unless you live in a
cave, you have also most likely seen all of the damning statements made against
by all those wannabe national leaders who have since criticized there own
statements as false and misleading. But in case you missed them, here they
are…Why the Facts No Longer
While much of the pre-war
intelligence might have unknowingly been no longer valid, as in once valid but
now outdated by days or weeks, it was certainly not “wrong”. So why
do we see the President’s current effort to take responsibility for a
wrong that didn’t even happen?
On a similar topic, why
do we now see Bush cowing to John McCain’s “anti-torture”
legislative effort? Doesn’t Bush remember that McCain’s legislative
effort to eliminate special interest money from campaigns resulted in the
biggest special interest bonanza in campaign history?
Maybe Bush should read Richard
Miniter’s most recent Best Seller “Disinformation”,
appropriately sub-titled “22 Media
Myths That Undermine the War on Terror”. In it, Miniter
clearly separates undocumented speculations from well documented pieces of hard
evidence concerning pre-war intelligence and many other hot-button issues
surrounding our efforts in the war on terror.
of December 18, 2005
are the closest he has come to telling a lie concerning Iraq
and pre-war intelligence, best I can tell. Why and why now?
Any honest examination of
pre and post war intelligence from any reliable sources will lead any
reasonable individual to conclude that we most likely got to Iraq
too late, rather than too soon. That the pre-war intelligence was far more
right than anyone wants to admit and that certain members of the American opposition party took at best,
questionable actions to insure that by the time we got to Baghdad,
the evidence supporting all pre-war intelligence would be gone.
So again, why the
In a word,
“politics”. Not Bush’s political career which is drawing to a
close. Not Cheney’s political career as he will soon be headed to
pasture. Not to save the Bush legacy, that will be written upon the long term
success or failure of administration policies overall.
Simply the modern day
politics of winning an unconventional war against an unconventional enemy,
being fought on the TV screens of Americans who would much rather be watching
their favorite sitcom or sportscast without a care in the world.
If Bush is to complete
this mission and win this battle in the war against international terrorism,
then he needs the support of the American people to do it. Our military
won’t lose in the field of operations. The international community
won’t be a factor for or against victory, they never are. But the
American people have the power to lose this war. They have the power to bring
our soldiers home in defeat.
If the American people
make this decision on the basis of disinformation in the press or at the
demands of the opposition party desperately seeking power by any means under
the sun, then they will make an emotional decision on the basis of bad
information and they won’t like the outcome at all.
Bush has chosen to
forfeit the PR battle at home in an effort to gain public support for winning
the war abroad. Will it work? Only time will tell.
But remember, the left
pushed his father into breaking his promise of “no new taxes” too,
only to later successfully use it against him in his re-election bid.
Bush has it right in the
war on terror. I’m not sure he has it right in the war against his
political foes at home, who will never concede him anything positive, no matter