Hey, two groups known for outstanding credibility and journalism have just made major news with a report on the deception that led to the Iraq war.
You've probably read this already. All I'm adding is that I know some of the people behind this, and they have my complete confidence, fwiw, and have superb records for honesty.
President George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses.
On at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony, and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda, or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's case for war.It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence (2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group, whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it.
Follow Craig Newmark on Twitter: www.twitter.com/craignewmark
And this is going to be covered by the MSM?
Fat chance.
They must have "bundled" multiple lies that were told at the same sitting and counted them as a single instance.
(How can you tell if a GOP politician is lying? His/her lips move!)
Article 2, Section 4.
The Dems have been completely in sync in collaborating with Bush both on initiating this war and on continuing its prosecution. So let's look at all the lies the Dems are telling now to keep us in Iraq, because the damage has already been done in initiating the war and the Dems won't impeach and remove despite the traitorous actions of Bush, Cheney, etc.
As a matter of fact, the Dems were better at opposing our getting into the war at its outset, as more than half of the Congressional Dems (both Houses of Congress combined) voted against the Iraq Resolution.
Now both sides simply mouth off for the war. I thought after New Years Edwards had finally seen the light, but his comments at the debate continued his Madison Avenue BS about pulling out all "combat" troops, meaning he'd keep in an indefinite number of "non-combat" troops for an undefined period of time -- just like Hillary and Obama. "Non-combat" v. "combat" troops is a distinction without a difference -- to those "non-combat" troops who are killed and maimed and those whom the "non-combat" troops kill and maim.
The most harmful lies being told now are bi-partisan -- arguing that even though we shouldn't have gone into Iraq, now that we're there we must stay because our leaving will cause something worse than our staying.
Immediate, safe withdrawal of all US military forces and contractors.
or are we some third world dictatorship,
crafty and dodgey. guns and drugs under banana trees. i guess so.
how about jail for 50 lies leading up to a global war? how about 40? um....935 lies?
935 lies?
935 lies leading to a global war?
935 lies leading to a global war by the united states of america?
935 lies leading to a global war by the united states of america?
and this is immune from punishment?
does "america" mean anything - apparently not.
IMPEACH the bastards NOW!!