Take heart--the emperor's new clothes are not fooling anyone except those who want to be deceived--a decreasing number--and the whitehousewhitewash will not be mutely and meekly accepted.
Dr. Kay’s recent reported statements – for example that the Intelligence Community was wrong about there being stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the war; that it is the Intelligence Community’s consensus that the two alleged “biological” trailers were for hydrogen production, not for producing biological warfare agents; and that Iraq had not reconstituted its nuclear weapons program – stand in sharp contrast to statements made by the Administration before going to war in Iraq. Dr. Kay’s recent statements raise serious questions about the accuracy and objectivity of our intelligence and about the Administration’s public statements before the war that were supposedly based on that intelligence.
Before the war, the Administration, in order to support its decision to go to war, made numerous vivid, unqualified statements about Iraq having in its possession weapons of mass destruction – not “programs”; not “program-related activities”; and not “intentions”, but actual weapons.
For example, on August 26th, 2002, Vice President Cheney gave a major speech about a threat from Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.
He asserted the following: “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.”
Vice President Cheney was not talking about programs or intentions; he was talking about existing weapons that were being amassed for use against us.
</snip>
Surely we should find out what is the basis for Vice President Cheney’s recent statement as well as the basis for the unqualified statements made before the war I have just quoted.
Unfortunately, as of now, the leadership of the Senate will not allow an inquiry into how the Administration characterized the intelligence about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. The Intelligence Committee’s inquiry is limited to the question of the production of the intelligence. That Committee is not looking into how that intelligence was used and characterized by policy makers. We will continue to press for an inquiry looking to get the whole story, the full picture. If the only way to obtain that is to have an outside, independent and nonpartisan commission to conduct a comprehensive and objective review of this entire matter – so be it.
</snip>
When lives are at stake and our military is going to be placed in harms way – in other words, when we decide to go to war – it is totally unacceptable to have intelligence that is this far off, or to exaggerate or shape the intelligence for any purpose by anybody.
</snip>Read the whole litany of "Not program-related-activities, not intentions"
here.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
