November 10, 2003 8:14 AM
Ray McGovern, former CIA analyst:
Many of us felt there had to be something there ... If this had been another country, one would have written a convincing analysis that this guy is lying through his teeth, that there are no weapons in Iraq. But people thought, the President can't say he knows something if he doesn't. That was persuasive, in a way.Now we know that no other President of the United States has ever lied so baldly and so often and so demonstrably ... The presumption now has to be that he's lying any time that he's saying anything.
Unless what has happened in the past year and a half is recognised as a scandal, in which the CIA has been badly abused, then there's no hope. I pin my hopes mostly on the press these days. Turns out, surprise surprise, that even the US press doesn't like to be lied to.
"so baldly, so often, so demonstrably" (11.10.2003)
Next Entry: Will the real National Security Advisor please stand up? (11.10.2003)
Previous Entry: "one powerful condemnation after another" (11.09.2003)
dhermesc:
Lets have a few quotes from others that must have been lying about WMD in Iraq:
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John
Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the
mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep. - Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a
particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003Just goes to show you how politicians can jump from one side of the fence to the other, on the same issue, if it suits their purposes.
Tue Nov 11 2003 6:15 AM
Your point is absolutely correct.
There is one person who has been universally derided by those left, right and center: Scott Ritter. Yet, he was absolutely right. Read this interview with Time from back in September 2002 - right after he was labeled a "Saddam sympathizer", accused of "drinking Saddam's kool aid" and for being on Saddam's payroll for speaking to the Iraqi government in the hope of starting a real dialog. To this day almost everyone considers Scott Ritter to be uncredible. That's incredible.
Scott Ritter:
Ha! Excuse me; I went to war against Saddam Hussein in 1991. I spent seven years of my life in this country hunting down weapons of mass destruction. I believe I've done a lot about Saddam Hussein. You show me where Saddam Hussein can be substantiated as a threat against the United States and I'll go to war again. I'm not going to sit back idly and let anybody threaten the United States. But at this point in time, no one has made a case based upon facts that Saddam Hussein or his government is a threat to the United States worthy of war.
This man is a hero, and he's been branded a traitor. That's seriously fucked up.
Tue Nov 11 2003 7:30 AM
dhermesc:
To this day almost everyone considers Scott Ritter to be uncredible. In the end it turns out Scott knew more about Saddams weapon's program and probably even Saddam knew. His problem was in his delivery and timing, under Clinton nobody wanted to hear it, and under Bush II nobody wanted to beleive it.
He also didn't help his professional reputation any by destroying his personal reputation.
Wed Nov 12 2003 6:57 AM
Sahib:
The fact that Scott Ritter is a child molester, twice caught preying on underage girls on the interenet, did not bolster his credibility either.
Fri May 13 2005 3:55 PM
Mike of the Great White North:
Same ol BS. Can you PULEEEEAZE, find Ritters conviction anywhere on the net for me? I sadly cannot seem to find it. Or did the charges actually come up bogus... guess the white house smear agents came through in spades again. Now O'Rielly, thats another story :)
Mon May 16 2005 1:14 PM
Email:
   
|
  
 |
