How did we know Bush was not telling the truth.....

[dennis4868]

about WMD before the war? Yes, we knew for a long time before the war to never trust anything that comes out of this White House. But what evidence did we base our belief that Sadaam had no WMD? Was it anything that was coming out of annonymous sources from the CIA, WH, or Congress, other intelligence agencies? How did we know that he was lying to us on the issue of WMD?

After the fact it is easy to see that Bush was lying to us, but what evidence did we have (besides that Bush is a liar) before the war that no WMD existed in Iraq?

I knopw there must be something. Just cannot remember what it was.

[Solly Mack]

1. We don't have to prove they didn't exist before the invasion

That's not the issue at all...


Our government has to prove the reasons they sent soldiers and civilian populations to their deaths.
Our government took us to war-they have to prove they did so for good reasons. They are the ones who now must come up with the proof of their claims. It's not on us...we didn't take nations to war.

[TolstoyAndy]

2. That's my default setting

After FL 2000, I have to have it proven to me that he's not lying.

If he says, "nice day, huh?", I go to the window and look.

If he says, "gee, it's hot in here", I put on a sweater.

Scott Ritter the ex-UN inspector was out saying it a few months ahead of time though, but for me, especially since 9/11, it's always a lie.

[dennis4868]

6. right....

I agree with you...If Bush tells me that its nightime now I will say it is daytime. And, yes I do remember Scott Ritter out there on the Donahue Show on MSNBC (no other show would have Mr. Ritter) saying there was no WMD. But what I am saying how do we respond to a republican who simply says the CIA had it all wrong and so it is not Bush fault? Clearly the WH was hyping the threat by saying words like "grave danger" which Clinton never did despite believing like Bush there were WMD.

[ElementaryPenguin]

3. Easy. Because he was moving his lips?

Is that the answer you were looking for?

:shrug:

[Demonaut]

16. thats a dead giveaway with shrub, I mean Resident Bush

Lying piece of unelected shit, ooops,

[lucidmadman]

4. "It's hard to believe someone is telling the truth...

...when you know that if you were in his position you'd lie."

[LunaC]

5. Others were refuting the lies as they were being told

but the big, bad media ignored them.

"911, Al-Qaeda and Iraq"

Donald Rumsfeld (Secretary of Defense) "If you're asking, are there al Qaeda in Iraq, the answer is yes, there are. It's a fact, yes."

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/us/DailyNews/Iraqpolitics020926.html

Vince Cannistraro (Former head of the CIA's counterterrorism office): "Is there any confirmed evidence of Iraq's links to terrorism? No."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A59403-2002Sep9¬Found=true

Brent Scowcroft (Foreign Policy Advisor): “There is scant evidence to tie Saddam to terrorist organizations, and even less to the Sept. 11
attacks. Indeed Saddam's goals have little in common with the terrorists who threaten us."

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133

=========
George W. Bush"You can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein when you talk about the war on terror....The regime has
long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist organizations and there are al-Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq."

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2002/11/01/bushiraq021101

Ivan Eland (Director of Defense Studies at the Cato Institute): "The CIA is skeptical of ties between Al-Qaeda and Iraq -- justifiably so. The
CIA run around trying to corroborate this stuff, and it hasn't had too much luck. And the ties that they have claimed seem very thin
and on closer inspection don't seem to go anywhere.”

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2002/10/29102002161249.asp

==================

"Saddam is Evil"

Colin Powell (Secretary of State): "This despotic regime .....gassed its own people.....".

http://www.house.gov/international_relations/107/81814.pdf

"Both Iran and Iraq used chemical weapons against each other during their war. At the termination of the Iran-Iraq war, professors
Stephen Pelletiere and Leif Rosenberger, and Lt Colonel Douglas Johnson of the US Army War College (USAWC) undertook a study of
the use of chemical weapons by Iran and Iraq in order to better understand battlefield chemical warfare. They concluded that it was
Iran and not Iraq that killed the Kurds."

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=22569589

=================

"Weapons of Mass Destruction"

George W. Bush:

- "The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program."

- “Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past.”

- Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich
uranium for nuclear weapons.”

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html

Mohammed ElBaradei (International Atomic Energy Agency Director): "We have to date found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear
weapon program since the elimination of the program in the 1990s.”

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/updates/iraq_01-27-03.html

Mohammed ElBaradei (International Atomic Energy Agency Director): “First, we have been inspected all of those buildings and facilities that
were identified through satellite imagery as having been modified or constructed over the past four years. The IAEA inspectors have
been able to gain ready access and to clarify the nature of the activities currently being conducted in these facilities. No prohibited
nuclear activities have been identified during these inspections.”

http://www.usembassy.it/file2003_01/alia/a3012703.htm

Mohammed ElBaradei (International Atomic Energy Agency Director“A particular issue of focus has been the attempted procurement by
Iraq of high-strength aluminum tubes, and the question of whether these tubes, if acquired, could be used for the manufacture of nuclear
centrifuge. Iraqi authorities have indicated that their unsuccessful attempts to procure the aluminum tubes related to a program to
reverse-engineer conventional rockets. To verify this information, the IAEA inspectors have inspected the relevant rocket production
and storage sites, taken tube samples, interviewed relevant Iraqi personnel, and reviewed procurement contracts and related documents.
From our analysis to date, it appears that the aluminum tubes would be consistent with the purposes stated by Iraq and, unless modified,
would not be suitable for manufacturing centrifuges.”

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/iraq/elbaradei_report.html

========

The dangers of Saddam as the ultimate evil of terrorists was hammered even further into the nation's psyche during the State of the Union
address. Conspicuously missing from the national address was any mention that the joint congressional investigation of 911 had been completed and there really wasn't
any evidence linking Saddam to the attacks or Al-Qaeda.

"The administration sold the connection (between Iraq and al-Qaida) to scare the pants
off the American people and justify the war....What you've seen here is the manipulation
of intelligence for political ends."

"The reason this report was delayed for so long -- deliberately opposed at first, then
slow-walked after it was created -- is that the administration wanted to get the war in
Iraq in and over ... before (it) came out.

"Had this report come out in January like it should have done, we would have known
these things before the war in Iraq, which would not have suited the administration

Former Sen. Max Cleland who helped produce the 911 report

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html
http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030723-064812-9491r

[KT2000]

7. UN Inspectors

had not found anything up until the point Bush took us to war. The inspectors wanted more time to keep looking but Bush would not give it to them. At that point most of us knew he was using WMD and 9/11, another lie, as justification for going to war.
There NOTHING solid in his reasoning.

[dennis4868]

8. Also.....

we now know from the Carnegie report that Bush and his thugs did indeed hype (lie) the WMD threat. Also, what has been forgotten is that the CIA did its own internal review led by Richard Kearer (sp?) who was a deputy director for the CIA. His intital findings were that the Bush thugs told the world that Sadaam definitely had WMD based on the CIAs very circumstantial and inferential evidence and NO HARD EVIDENCE, always with caveats and qualifiers. Bsically, the CIA was not sure if Iraq still had WMD and the WH went out and told us they were sure they had it and if we do not acts the consequences could be grave.

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

13. Joseph Wilson

http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0706-02.htm

I think the best example of administration lie comes from Wilson's account of his experience with the "yellowcake". Administration wanted to look into a "sexy" sounding rumor, sends someone to look into it. Their agent (Wilson) finds nothing and says so. Meanwhile the documents the rumor is based upon are discredited and obviously fake. But the allegation appears in the State of the Union anyway, and that is speech from the President's own mouth for which responsibility can't be pawned off.

In Wilson's account it's clear that some layers of "deniability" were created in his mission, but the fact remains that the speech belongs to POTUS.

The importance of Wilson, like O'Neill, is that he was an insider who worked for the administration so that his account can't be so easily dismissed. The "outing" of his wife gives a clue as to the tactics used by the administration on those who would cross them. Makes you shudder to think what was said to O'Neill after his 60 Minutes interview. Shades of Frankie Pentageli in Godfather II.

[salin]

9. almost every lie /story they put out... was debunked in the international

press... the started trying to generate "new" stories all summer (2002) - by the end the turnaround to disproven was about 48 hours (reported internationally, but not in the US). The aluminum tubes story. The 'shipment of missle equpiment with 'nuclear' (?or something) spray painted on it ("found" in Turkey). The 'al qeada has camps in iraq'. The "dodgy dossier" (that was quickly demonstrated to be from an old masters thesis. The story went on and on. Of course one had to have access to the international press (bbc, international times, asia times, guardianUK, etc.) to find the quick debunking.

[laruemtt]

10. those squinting, shifty eyes

and that posture, omg that posture. he's a walking talking lie

[TruthIsAll]

11. The proof that he lied is when he did not let Blix finish

the WMD inspection process, which would have taken just a few months more. In fact, he belittled Blix - fought him every step of the way.

Bush KNEW WMD would NOT be found. He would have lost his rationale for invading. So he had to get Blix out of there.

[Ardee]

12. How did we know Bush was lying?

Because his lips were moving of course!

I am heartened to see the answers to that question especially from LunaC.......

But let us not forget the simple fact that, even if we suspected Hussein of possessing such devices, the proper way to attack that problem was through the use of concensus building, real coalition making and utilizing the United Nations to act as one world against possible threats to any and all......

Bush acted simply as a child might, lashing out verbally against not only Iraq but North Korea as well, alienating most of the rational people of this small planet and embarrassing the USA in the process.All his hyperbole cannot atone for ten thousand dead Iraqis and five hundred and counting dead american kids. Nor can it lead to anything less than an increase in violence as we see already.

[soothsayer]

14. I recall alot of DU'er's being swayed by colon bowel's "proof"

but lots more of us were going "oh, come ON"

It's cuz alot of us said "huh?" at the old bait and switch from osama to saddam

and cuz his dad had already tried to get saddam

and cuz he's a lying ass

[OneTwentyoNine]

15. Spy Satellites...

A mouse can't take a crap in Iraq without it showing up in high resolution at CIA headquarters thirty minutes later.

You can't just cook up WMD in your kitchen,they DAMN well knew there was nothing of any significance going on by studying photo after photo.

Same BS and lies that Bush told of SH military being totally rebuilt and many times stronger than in the Gulf War. Really,can WE THE PEOPLE see those photos Chimpy?? Bush knew,the CIA knew,Powell knew they all knew it was all bullshit but nothing was going to stop the invasion.

If these tutu wearing Dems don't keep pounding on this 24/7 then we might as well pull the shroud over this party.

David

[RapidCreek]

17. I knew because any truly homicidal dictator

would have used WMD's when faced with threats of complete obliteration by the worlds largest superpower. It's really that simple. That's after all, what weapons of mass destruction are for.

That aside...all the the "very convincing" evidence put forward by Mr. Powell during his UN address was shoddy at best and intentionally contrived, at worst. Artists renderings are not evidence...and one presenting them as such obviously lacks that which the rendering is designed to represent. One has to wonder, in a day when 2 Foot resolution, four color, satellite imagery is available to the general public (http://www.keyhole.com/), why evidence comprised of grainy, low resolution black and white imagery would be presented as a bases to start a war. One has to wonder unless one comes to the rather obvious conclusion that said "evidence" isn't evidence at all...but a sophomoric attempt to bamboozle. Attempts to bamboozle are not evidence...quite the contrary in fact. They demonstrate that the presenter has less than honorable intentions that are based upon ulterior motives.

While Mr. Ritter's hands on experience can be used as proof of the lie...it's sophomoric, contrived presentation was proof enough to anyone with an 8th grade intellect that it was what it was, a load of bullshit.

RC

[alcuno]

18. Ooh! I love clues! Here they are.....

Clue # 1 - SOTU 2002 - Iraq mentioned as part of the "Axis of Evil."

Clue # 2 - Rove reportedly says, while in Texas, that they are going to run on the war.

Clue # 3 - Summer of 2002 - Andy Card says, "You don't roll out a new product until the fall."

Clue # 4 (this is a big one.) In September 2002, Bush and Blair BOTH refer to an IAEA report suggesting that Saddam is 6 months away from getting a nuclear weapon. The IAEA responds that there was no such recent report but rather that a 1998 report had been refering to pre-1991 capabilities. Ding, ding, ding, ding, ding!

After that, I assumed that everything they said was a lie.

[maggrwaggr]

19. try this on for size:

They put the pressure on Saddam.

Saddam buckled, and let the inspectors in. Let 'em go anywhere they wanted.

The inspectors couldn't find jack shit. Bushco said "but we know they're there." The inspectors said "where?" Bushco said "well, we know they've got 'em and we know where they are."

The inspectors said "tell us one place where we can go find them."

And Bushco said "no. We know where they are but we're not going to tell you."

How smelly does the rat have to get before you notice it?

It still makes me feel physically sick to my stomach to know that they got away with these lies. Thousands of people dead because of it. You can't undo any of this.

[Pobeka]

22. EXCELLENT POST!

Could not have said it better myself! :thumbsup:

[Kinkistyle]

20. I'm sorry, not countries have to give reasons for us NOT to invade them?

What kind of topsy turvy twisted world do we live in? I think its up to the invading country to give ample evidence and reasoning for the invasion, and not the other way around. You can twist and turn things so that the invaded country will never be able to provide enough evidence, because simply the fact that they have nothing to produce as evidence can be twisted to demonstrate that they are hiding something. That is EXACTLY what Bush did, and thats why that type of stupid line of reasoning is USELESS in a court of law and in a science laboratory. Because it is PURE BULLSH*T.

[Poiuyt]

21. The burden of proof should have been on bush, not the rest of the world

Since you can't prove a negative, it should have been in bush's corner to provide irrefutable proof that Iraq had WMD, AND intended on using them in the near future.

A country shouldn't go to war unless it's damn sure that they are in peril.

[Th1onein]

23. Because the UN inspectors couldn't find any.......

Remember? After searching, and searching, and searching?

[Oilwellian]

24. What was key for me...

was learning about Rumsfeld's Office Of Special Plans specially created to supply the intelligence information that our traditional sources could/would not provide. At the same time, Tenet was testifying before the Senate Intelligence Committee that the information they had on Iraq did not prove conclusively that they had wmds. It was apparent this criminal administration was using "creative" intelligence from a convicted felon that didn't jive with the CIA's.

We knew Bush lied about the Niger incident long before the war began, thanks to Joseph Wilson.

We knew Bush lied about the aluminum tubes long before the war began, thanks to the IAEA.

We knew Bush lied about the IAEA report on Saddam's nuclear program that was published a decade earlier.

We knew Bush lied about the "sexed up" British dossier that was plagiarized from a graduate student's paper.

We knew Bush lied after listening to Scott Ritter say for months they destroyed all of Saddam's wmds.

All of these "reasons" for war were debunked months before our invasion began, yet Bush continued to ignore it all.

And last but not least, PNAC made it quite clear why we were really going to war and it had nothing to do with wmds.

[uhhuh]

25. Gulf War I

Babies being thrown from incubators: A proven lie.

Thousands of Iraqi Troops massed on the border of Saudi Arabia: another proven lie.

From that point on, any statement coming from a Bush without complete, irrefutable evidence regarding Iraq, has got to be assumed to be crap.

As mentioned before, the fact that the U.N. was asking for the evidence and being denied access should have tipped off even the biggest idiot, but it didn't seem to sink in.
Also, the bugging of the U.N. security council folks before the big vote should have been a warning sign, but that got passed over too.

I wonder why we didn't get sanctioned, or kicked out of the U.N. for that?

[TeeYiYi]

26. Even the Pope knew it was a lie and tried to intervene . . .

. . . by sending a peace envoy to Baghdad . . .

"The ageing pontiff rebuffed attempts by the Bush Administration to persuade him that impending military action against Baghdad amounted to a Christian “just war”.

<snip>

But the Archbishop, speaking for the Pope, said that US arguments were insufficient and that there was no imminent threat from Baghdad that could justify a war.

Civiltà Cattolica (Catholic Civilisation), a Jesuit journal that reflects Vatican views, said that “the Islamic masses, which already harbor a deep hatred of the West, will see it as an act of war against Islam”. The journal said that the real US motive was economic and that the concept of “preventive war” was highly dangerous. “If every country which feels threatened attacks first, there will be war without end on the entire planet,” it said."

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0210-03.htm

TYY

[PaDUer]

27. He's never ever told the truth

about one thing, it runs in the family..

[truthspeaker]

28. Hans Blix's inspectors weren't finding any

1. Hans Blix and the UNMOVIC team said the Iraqis were mostly being cooperative, and UNMOVIC wasn't finding anything.

2. None of Iraq's neighbor's seemed concerned about aggression from Iraq (with or without WMDs).

3. The "evidence" presented by the Bush gang was flimsy - even before most of it turned out to be fake.

[ComerPerro]

29. I knew he was either lying or that he was a dangerous asshole

Now I realize he is both.

But, please, think about this. I wish somebody in the press would have mentioned this:

You have a crazy, evil dictator hell bent on taking over the world. He has this massive stockpile of WMDs, he is selling them to terrorists to use against the US, and he kills his own people by the thousands without so much as blinking.
And you want to invade his country with our troops?

Fuck you!!!!

Why wouldn't you think that this evil dictator would use his stockpiles of WMDs when we get to the captial in a last ditch effort to make us pay for invading. After all, he doesn't care how many of his citizens he kills, right? And think about how badly he could blindside our troops. They would be slaughtered in the thousands!

If Bush really thought that there were WMD in Iraq, and he still sent troops in so readily, then he is a dangerous motherfucker. Otherwise, he is a liar.

[GumboYaYa]

30. There were lots of things, that showed the lies.

The Niger yellowcake evidence was debunked by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) before the invasion. It took one-day of looking at this so-called "evidence" to debunk it. This was not reported in the US Press prior to the invasion of Iraq.

The IAEA was also reporting that there was no evidence of any active nuclear program in Iraq at the same time George Bush was warning us of mushroom clouds and Cheney was on MTP telling us Saddam had reconstituted his nuclear enrichment programs. The world's leading experts on these issues were telling us that Cheney and Bush were lying, but this was not reported in the US.

The evidence that there were tons of nerve gas etc. was based on records of what we knew Iraq had before the war after subtracting those amounts that we knew had been destroyed. Using that methodology and assuming that none of these weapons had been destroyed in the 1991 war or subsequent to that without our knowledge, the administration clearly overstated the amount of unaccounted for gas by about 100%. We also had intelligence from an Iraq defector that Iraq had destroyed those weapons after the 1991 war. The Bush gang used the intelligence from the same defector for support that Saddam had these weapons, they just omitted the part where he said Saddam had also destroyed them.

If you remember Colin Powell's statements to the UN, I was very skeptical of his recorded phone conversations as there was no date-stamp or other means to verify when the conversations allegedly occurred. After the presentation it came out that the translation of the alleged damning remarks by Iraqis was questionable at best.

Colin Powell's photographs of "WMDs being spirited about" again had no date stamp and was little more than a few trucks on the roads. The trucks could have contained anything and the pictures proved nothing.

Inspectors on the ground were telling us that they were getting active participation from the Iraqis in their searches and requested just 30 more days to see if Iraq would comply in full with their requests. George Bush couldn't wait thirty days, because there was a real risk that Saddam would comply in full and prove that he had no WMDs. Then Bush would have no reason to get his war on.

[rman]

31. UN inspections

Some 10, 15 years of inspections cleaned out the place. If there was anything there by the time 9/11 took place, then how come the UN didn't know while they were there on the ground, searching for those very WMDs. How come only Rummy's OSP managed to find "anything, related or not" to implicate Saddam in international terrorism?
If you'd believe what B* was saying about Iraq and the UN at the time, you'd think there never where any UN inspections - which might be easy to believe unless you'd been following international news.

[devinsgram]

32. That's easy,

Once a liar, always a liar. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.