"Dedicated to exposing the lies and impeachable offenses of George W. Bush"

List shows some of Bush's claims on Iraq haven't held up
Knox News/Scripps Howard News Service
November 27, 2005

WASHINGTON - President Bush is engaged in a bitter exchange with critics who maintain the White House intentionally misled the public to generate support for the war in Iraq.

Evidently most people seem to believe those claims - 64 percent of those questioned in the most recent Harris Interactive Poll believe the administration "generally misleads the public on current issues."

The administration has acknowledged that the intelligence used to advance the argument that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction was faulty. But critics say their claims that Bush is providing misleading data is based on other declarations:

- On Oct. 7, 2002, during a speech in Cincinnati, the president said Iraq was involved in training al-Qaeda members. It subsequently was learned through Defense Intelligence Agency documents that the sole source for that claim, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, a top al-Qaeda operative, "was intentionally misleading the debriefers" when he offered that information. That report was issued in February 2002 - before Bush included the allegation in his speech.

- In that same presentation, the president said Iraq maintained a "growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles" that could be used in missions targeting the United States. But the U.S. Air Force, in a National Intelligence Estimate released to the White House just before Bush's appearance, declared that Iraq was developing the UAVs "primarily for reconnaissance rather than delivery platforms."

- In his Jan. 28, 2003, State of the Union address, Bush cited intelligence sources when he declared Iraq "attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons." Three months earlier, the Office of Intelligence within the Department of Energy determined that the aluminum tubes were not intended for Iraq's nuclear program.

- Vice President Cheney, during a Dec. 9, 2001, appearance on NBC's "Meet the Press," said it was "pretty well confirmed" that Mohammed Atta, the ring-leader of the 9/11 hijackers, met with Ahmed Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, an Iraqi government official, in Prague, Czech Republic, on April 8, 2001, providing evidence of a link between the terrorist group and the Iraqi government. Neither the CIA nor the FBI believes Atta left the United States that April.

Then there is the part of the 2003 State of the Union address where Bush noted the British government "has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." Before the speech, the CIA warned the administration that the claim shouldn't be cited because it could not be confirmed. The State Department, in the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, declared that the uranium claim was "highly dubious."

I put this up because it's absurd. Doesn't everyone already know this? Reasons for war NEVER change but Bush excuse for war changed a dozen times within the first few months of war? Good grief. It was self-evident since before the war that Bush was lying. Bush asked congress to authorize war so he's have more power in the UN to persuade them to put inspectors back into Iraq (they had left in 1998). After the inspectors were placed back in Iraq they couldn't verify a single piece of Bush's damning intelligence. Only a completely brain dead idiot thought he had actionable intelligence - (the media pushed known lies until a majority believed things that were not true).