So you want details about who lied

So you want details about who lied

Monday, November 14, 2005

JAMES BRUNER
GUEST COLUMNIST

Marty McNett of Burlington (Letters, Wednesday)

believes there is no proof that President Bush

lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq,

so we should lay off claims that he did.

I refer McNett and anyone else who is laboring

under that misconception to read "Iraq On The

Record: The Bush Administration's Public

Statements On Iraq," prepared by the U.S. House

of Representatives Committee on Government

Reform -- Minority Staff Special Investigations

Division, March 16, 2004.

http://www.house.gov/reform/min/pdfs_108_2/pdfs

_inves/pdf_admin_iraq_on_the_record_rep.pdf

This 36-page report goes into great detail

about outright false and deceptive public

statements by Bush (55 misleading statements),

Vice President Dick Cheney (51), former

Secretary of State Colin Powell (50), former

National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice (29)

and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (52)

on the subject. These 237 misleading statements

were made in a variety of forums (53

interviews, 40 speeches, 26 news conferences

and briefings, four written statements and

articles and two appearances before Congress)

beginning at least a year before the war began,

and their frequency peaked at key

decision-making points.

Here are a few excerpts: In October 2002, the

State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and

Research concluded in the National Intelligence

Estimate that "the activities we have detected

do not, however, add up to a compelling case

that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would

consider to be an integrated and comprehensive

approach to acquire nuclear weapons."

INR added: "Lacking persuasive evidence that

Baghdad has launched a coherent effort to

reconstitute its nuclear weapons program, INR

is unwilling to speculate that such an effort

began soon after the departure of UN

inspectors." The INR position was similar to

the conclusions of the International Atomic

Energy Agency, which concluded (in March 2003)

that there was "no indication of resumed

nuclear activities ... nor any indication of

nuclear-related prohibited activities."

These doubts and qualifications, however, were

not communicated to the public. Instead, the

five administration officials repeatedly made

unequivocal comments about Iraq's nuclear

program. For example, Bush said in October 2002

that "the regime has the scientists and

facilities to build nuclear weapons and is

seeking the materials required to do so."

Several days later, Bush asserted Saddam

Hussein "is moving ever closer to developing a

nuclear weapon."

Cheney made perhaps the single-most egregious

statement about Iraq's nuclear capabilities,

claiming: "We know he has been absolutely

devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons.

And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted

nuclear weapons." He made this statement just

three days before the war. He did not admit

until Sept. 14, 2003, that his statement was

wrong and that he "did misspeak."

Bush and others portrayed the threat of Saddam

waging nuclear war against the United States or

its allies as one of the most urgent reasons

for pre-emptively attacking Iraq.

Administration officials used evocative

language and images. On the eve of

congressional votes on the Iraq war resolution

(Oct. 7, 2002), Bush stated: "Knowing these

realities, America must not ignore the threat

gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of

peril, we cannot wait for the final proof --

the smoking gun -- that could come in the form

of a mushroom cloud."

The words "mushroom cloud" echoed time and

again in speech after speech by key members of

the administration from that point on until the

beginning of hostilities. If that isn't lying,

I don't know what is.



http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/248055_firstperson14.html

==========