Reply #187: This article was published on April 25, 2003, before David Kelly began...

[Peace Patriot]

whistleblowing (late May 2003), before Wilson published his article (July 6), and before the Plame outing (July 14), Kelly's death (July 17), and the Brewster/Jennings outing (July 22). April 25 was a only month after the invasion. It is mainly about the Bush's junta expulsion of the UN weapons inspectors (by the US invasion) and failure to let them back in, afterwards, to conduct further inspections along with U.S. troops (and Judith Miller). The Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity at that time discussed the possibility of the Bushites planting WMDs, and generally judged it to be too risky (although they had no unanimity on this). The article goes on to cite other instances of evidence-manufacture in past wars (Gulf War I, Iran-Contra, Vietnam, the Central-South American drug wars and US. skulduggery).

Here's the paragraph relevant to this theory:

"The media have raised the possibility that the US might “plant” weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and that this may be another reason to keep UN inspectors out. This is a charge of such seriousness that we Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity have been conducting an informal colloquium on the issue. As one might expect, there is no unanimity among us on the likelihood of such planting, but most believe that Washington would consider it far too risky. Those holding this view add that recent polls suggest most Americans will not be very critical of the Bush administration even if no weapons of mass destruction are found." --David MacMichael and Ray McGovern

------

I wonder what they think of the possibility of a WMD-planting plot now? So much has gone down since that time (spring 2003).

I'm also intrigued by "the media have raised the possibility...". I wish they had cited what media they are talking about. I don't recall any such speculation in the war profiteering corporate news monopoly press, but maybe they mean alternative media.

The article also makes the poor political judgement that "recent polls suggest most Americans will not be very critical of the Bush administration even if no weapons of mass destruction are found."

They were wrong about that. That is the reason that Americans most often cite for their opposition to the war--no WMDs, no imminent threat. People remember that justification, and do not forgive the Bushites for lying. The polls they are citing (circa March 2003) are the only instance of any dip in American opposition to the Iraq war--in the few weeks of the invasion itself, when U.S. troops were at max risk. Before and after that, and to this day, the great majority of Americans opposed and oppose the Iraq war.