|
Nightline Daily E-Mail
July 9, 2003
TONIGHT'S FOCUS: It's hard to remember when a single reference in a long State of the Union speech has taken on a life of its own nearly six months later. But this isn't just any reference. In January, before a joint session of Congress, the president claimed that Saddam Hussein had tried to acquire uranium for nuclear weapons from Africa. Now the administration has conceded that claim was, indeed, based on false information. And some in Congress have pounced on that admission to renew calls for an inquiry on how the White House used prewar intelligence on Iraq. It's become the issue that won't go away.
The latest flare-up began over the weekend when Ambassador Joseph Wilson, the former charge d'affaires at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, wrote in the New York Times that he was sent by the CIA to the African nation of Niger to investigate the allegation that Saddam was buying yellowcake uranium in the late 1990's. Wilson says he reported back to intelligence officials, well before the president's State of the Union speech, that the story was bogus. But somehow, the false information made it into a heavily vetted address.
Why was the president allowed to misspeak in the lead up to war with Iraq on such a crucial issue? Did he manipulate intelligence to help pave the way for invading Iraq? That remains a mystery. But today as President Bush and Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld were half a world away from each other -- in South Africa and Washington respectively -- each was pressed on the truth behind that justification for war with Iraq. The president sidestepped the specific issue of the false claim in his State of the Union address, saying he is "absolutely confident" in his decision to remove Saddam from power. And the defense secretary told a Senate committee, "The coalition did not act in Iraq because we had discovered dramatic new evidence of Iraq's pursuit" of weapons of mass destruction. He continued, "We acted because we saw the evidence in a dramatic new light - through the prism of our experience on 9-11."
Massachusetts Senator Edward Kennedy has weighed in with some tough language: "It's bad enough that such a glaring blunder became part of the president's case for war. It's far worse if the case for war was made by a deliberate deception. It's more important than ever that Congress conduct a real investigation into the use of intelligence sources as a justification for war. The American people deserve to know whether the President is making war and peace decisions based on reliable information. We cannot risk American lives because of shoddy intelligence or outright lies."
So tonight, Chris Bury has the latest on the lingering questions on the justifications for war with Iraq and a look at how the search for the weapons of mass destruction has been handled in Iraq. Is it possible that those materials could be in the hands of those who don't have the best interests of the United States at heart?
Chris will also check in with three of ABC's correspondents tracking the issue of who knew what and when they knew it: John Cochran, traveling with the president in South Africa, Martha Raddatz at the Pentagon and Linda Douglass on Capitol Hill.
We hope you'll join us.
Richard Harris and the Nightline Staff
ABCNEWS Washington bureau
|
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
