"The Other Lies of George Bush" by David Corn

[roughsatori]

This article was adapted from the new book, 'The Lies of George W. Bush: Mastering the Politics of Deception' by Corn(Crown Publishers).

George W. Bush is a liar. He has lied large and small, directly and by omission. His Iraq lies have loomed largest. In the run-up to the invasion, Bush based his case for war on a variety of unfounded claims that extended far beyond his controversial uranium-from-Niger assertion. He maintained that Saddam Hussein possessed "a massive stockpile" of unconventional weapons and was directly "dealing" with Al Qaeda--two suppositions unsupported then (or now) by the available evidence. He said the International Atomic Energy Agency had produced a report in 1998 noting that Iraq was six months from developing a nuclear weapon; no such report existed (and the IAEA had actually reported then that there was no indication Iraq had the ability to produce weapons-grade material). Bush asserted that Iraq was "harboring a terrorist network, headed by a senior Al Qaeda terrorist planner"; US intelligence officials told reporters this terrorist was operating ouside of Al Qaeda control. And two days before launching the war, Bush said, "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised." Yet former deputy CIA director Richard Kerr, who is conducting a review of the prewar intelligence, has said that intelligence was full of qualifiers and caveats, and based on circumstantial and inferential evidence. That is, it was not no-doubt stuff. And after the major fighting was done, Bush declared, "We found the weapons of mass destruction." But he could only point to two tractor-trailers that the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency had concluded were mobile bioweapons labs. Other experts--including the DIA's own engineering experts--disagreed with this finding. snip//
more:http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0926-12.htm

[candy331]

1. Can

Bush be supeanoned(spelling)to give answers to the questions that congress needs to ask? I see Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and others in admin called up but can he? I would love to see him called up to give answers to the American people himself.

He needs to be put under the spotlight in Congress so they can ask the questions directly to him for Americans to see because he is hiding behind everyone and the buc stops anywhere but on him.

[Old and In the Way]

2. Will he sign an Independent Prosecuter law like Clinton?

To investigate the charges? doubt that sincerely.

A Republican Congress, so eager to investigate a busted $30K land deal, intern sex, and crimes against the WH keyboards, apparently has no stomach to question their President whose lies have directly killed 300+ Americans, 10s of thousand Iraqis, and injured countless thousands. And we still don't know what this administration knew on 9/10/01.

But I sense a seachange in public opinion....as the public turns against thismisadministration, I suspect that the political momentum will grow to stop this madman.