The WikiLeaks Vindication of George W. Bush

The WikiLeaks de facto declassification of privileged material makes it case closed: Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction -- and intended to restart his program once the heat was off.

President George W. Bush, in the 2003 State of the Union address, uttered the infamous "16 words": "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

Former Ambassador Joe Wilson sprang into action and, in an op-ed piece, in effect wrote, "No, the Cheney administration sent me to investigate the allegation -- and I found it without merit."

Put aside that Wilson's CIA-employed wife, not the evil Vice President Dick Cheney -- as Wilson implied -- sent him on the African errand. Put aside that the British still stand by the intelligence on which Bush made the claim. And put aside that the anti-Bush Washington Post, in an editorial, concluded that Wilson had lied about not finding evidence to support the Iraq-in-Africa-for-uranium claim, since he told the CIA the opposite when he reported back from Africa.

http://townhall.com/columnists/LarryEld ... rge_w_bush

sadam had no WMD's, only in bush eyes..sadam was a good man, no problems with Iran, no murders like there is now..I will miss sadam, many here in the US, liked him.

Bush was NOT vindicated, and he LIED us into two unnecessary wars...and there WERE NO WMDs... But thanks for playing.

US intelligence report shows war drive against Iran based on lies
by Bill Van Auken
Global Research, December 5, 2007

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... a&aid=7553


IRAQ - A WAR BASED ON LIES
http://www.theinsider.org/news/article.asp?id=371

SOURCES:

BBC News, "Iraq verdict fills papers", 8 July 2003.
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3053438.stm ]

BBC News, "White House 'warned over Iraq claim'", 9 July 2003.
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3056626.stm ]

BBC News, "Bush under fire over Iraq claims", 9 July 2003.
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3051963.stm ]

BBC News, "CIA 'cleared' Iraq uranium claim", 11 July 2003.
[ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle ... 058809.stm ]

FURTHER READING:

The Debate - "Iraq War Motives"
[ [url=http://www.thedebate.org" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;]http://www.thedebate.org[/url] ]

Diplomat's suppressed document lays bare the lies behind Iraq war
By Colin Brown and Andy McSmith
Friday, 15 December 2006

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 28545.html



http://www.countercurrents.org/iraq-vann061003.htm



http://www.bushwatch.org/bushlies.htm

---

Eric_E_Johansson_President_San_Francisco_Veterans_ for_Peace_Chapter_69:

KAY’S CLEVERNESS: THE TRUTH BUT NOT THE WHOLE TRUTH ABOUT BUSH’S LIES

Do you understand the cleverness of behind the report by David Kay, a Bush appointee in charge of hunting for the absent Weapons of Mass Destruction that he confirmed didn't exist in Iraq which was Mr. Bush's stated reason (now exposed as lies) to take this nation to war? What Mr. Kay did was quite clever but some of his conclusions were also clearly misleading.

Mr. Kay’s report revealed that no Weapons of Mass Destruction could be found in Iraq and that there likely were none since the U.N., inspectors like Scott Ritter and the CIA all did their jobs correctly in the disarming process that occurred during the 1990’s. This fact was revealed by many writers prior to the war although they were ignored as Bush lied the country into supporting an unnecessary, unjust and immoral war that claimed thousands of lives and now over 525 American troops for nothing, nothing except for perhaps the 63% earnings increase at Halliburton or the 93% earnings increase at Chevron/Texaco.

By telling the truth, Mr. Kay had hoped to establish some measure of credibility and honesty that his word and his report to Congress were both rooted in integrity. Certainly, when he told the truth about the lack of Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq that did give him some measure of credibility, however, then he pointed his finger at U.S. intelligence (the CIA) as the culprit by faulting their intelligence gathering capability. In making such an accusation what Mr. Kay has tried to do is use the credibility he has earned by telling the truth about the lack of WMD to make a case for implicating intelligence agencies for the excuse Bush used to go to war. And this is how the Kay report is clever and partially honest but also clearly misleading and partially deceitful: The intelligence was not bad intelligence, it was cooked intelligence, cooked to support a decision to go to war that had already been made. This intelligence was cooked because of the pressure exerted by Vice President Dick Cheney as he periodically made visits to apply pressure upon mid-level analysts at CIA headquarters, demanding that they produce evidence, no matter how weak, that would support his decision to wage an unnecessary, unjust and immoral war that in the end killed thousands, our own troops and left us in a deepening quagmire of President Bush’s own making.

The cleverness of the David Kay is clear: He is using the credibility that he earned by telling the truth contained within the findings of his report, he is using that measure of credibility to implicate the CIA for their mistaken evidence which was cooked by the Vice President to drum up support for the war in the first place. Thus, ultimately no blame should be assigned to those mid-level personnel or any intelligence apparatus or agency who came under enormous pressure to cook up intelligence to build support for the war as per the Vice President office, an extension of President Bush’s office.

Where should blame be placed? First upon the shoulders of President Bush for allowing the Vice President to act in such an unethical, dictatorial and ruthless manner that led to the needless deaths of a lot of people, many of them American soldiers. Second, upon the shoulders of President Bush for then using such obvious cooked intelligence to drum up support for a war based on the obvious lies he told the American people almost daily. Third, blame should also be placed squarely on the shoulders on CIA Director George Tenet for allowing such behavior by the Vice-President at his agency and for allowing outright lies to be told to the American people without even having even a morsel of moral courage to come forward and reveal the inner acts of betrayal and treason being committed by President Bush or Vice President Cheney. By not coming forward and by allowing such behavior to go unchecked, Director George Tenet betrayed the CIA, he betrayed the integrity of U.S. intelligence and he betrayed the troops who would later die, and he betrayed the American people. His political head should nowadays be served upon a platter. Also at fault is the entire senior management team at the CIA for the very same reasons that their Director is at fault. By not coming forward and by allowing such behavior to go unchecked, I consider every senior manager at the CIA to be a modern-day Benedict Arnold, traitors to America, traitors to the troops and traitors to the American people. I do not fault the CIA but I do clearly fault their management, the Directorship, and above all the President of the United States George W. Bush for his lies, manipulations and betrayal that sent good troops to their graves for nothing but the greed of money, power and domination. You are all cowardly insignificant yellow-belly traitors as far as I’m concerned.

Now, as President Bush appoints and tries to bury the truth by selecting members of his Whitewash Commission to conceal his lies and betrayal to the troops, to America and to the American people, I have but one question for you Mr. Bush, how does it feel to be exposed as the low, cowardly, yellow-belly, misleading, war-mongering, mass-murdering, troops-murdering lying piece of human [fecal material] that you are, sir?

Your needless war which is now sinking-into-a-bloody-civil-war-occupation of Iraq is becoming costly isn’t it sir? It has been transformed from a political asset in a political liability, hasn’t it Mr. Bush?
I have only two words for you Bush: MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!!!!!!!!! Now eat it.

Long-term implications: Good-bye military industrial complex, you're outta here!!!!!!

---

74. 'Statement by David Kay on the Interim Progress Report on the Activities of the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) Before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, The House Committee on Appropriations, Subcommittee on Defense, and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence', October 2, 2003, http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/s ... 22003.html .

75. "Newsmaker: David Kay," News Hour with Jim Lehrer, PBS TV, October 2, 2003, http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_e ... 10-02.html .

76. Michael R. Gordon, "Weapons Of Mass Confusion," New York Times on the Web, August 1, 2003. See also Associated Press "Air Force Assessment Before War Said Iraqi Drones Were Minor Threat: U.S. arms experts in Iraq came to same conclusion," Baltimore Sun, August 25, 2003; David Rogers, "Air Force Doubts Drone Threat: Report Says Bush Exaggerated Perils of Unmanned Iraqi Aircraft," Wall Street Journal, September 10, 2003; Joseph Cirincione and Alexis Orton, "The Air Force Dissents," Carnegie Analysis, September 11, 2003, http://www.ceip.org/files/nonprolif/tem ... wsID=5346; Bradley Graham, "Air Force Analysts Feel Vindicated On Iraqi Drones," Washington Post, September 26, 2003, p. 23.

77. Walter Pincus, "Intelligence Report For Iraq War Was 'Hastily Done'," Washington Post, October 24, 2003, p. 18.

78. Thomas Patrick Carroll, "The Intelligence on Iraq's WMD," Middle East Intelligence Bulletin, Vol. 5, No. 11, November 2003, http://www.meib.org/articles/0311_iraq1.htm .

79. William M. Arkin, "A Thin Basis For War," Los Angeles Times, July 27, 2003.

80. Jay Taylor, "When Intelligence Reports Become Political Tools . . .," Washington Post, June 29, 2003, p. B2.

84. New York Times, James Risen and Douglas Jehl, "Expert Said to Tell Legislators He Was Pressed to Distort Some Evidence," June 25, 2003.

85. Jason Vest, "The 'Intelligence' Game," The Nation, June 30, 2003, http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20030630&s=vest . See also John Prados, "Iraq: A necessary war?" Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, May/June 2003, Vol. 59, No. 3, pp. 26-33, http://www.thebulletin.org/issues/2003/ ... rados.html .

86. Mark Hosenball, Michael Isikoff and Evan Thomas, "Cheney's Long Path to War: The Hard Sell: He sifted intelligence." He brooded about threats. And he wanted Saddam gone. "The inside story of how Vice President Cheney bought into shady assumptions and helped persuade a nation to invade Iraq," Newsweek, Nov. 17. 2003.

117. Nancy Gibbs and Michael Ware, "Chasing A Mirage: The U.S. was sure Saddam had WMD, but Iraqi scientists tell TIME the weapons were destroyed long before the war," Time, October 6, 2003, p. 38.

136. Andrew Gumbel "Case for war confected, say top US officials," Independent, 09 November 2003.

Bush comes from a long line of war profiteers. Hard to trust a family that made their money selling weapons to Nazis.

Bush was vindicated by Clinton three years prior.....
[youtube:23cnqzoz][/youtube:23cnqzoz]

Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq’s nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.

Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.

Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.

I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of my national security team, to use force in Iraq; why we have acted now; and what we aim to accomplish.

Six weeks ago, Saddam Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors called UNSCOM. They are highly professional experts from dozens of countries. Their job is to oversee the elimination of Iraq’s capability to retain, create and use weapons of mass destruction, and to verify that Iraq does not attempt to rebuild that capability.

Yep, most experts agree that he had a weapons programs then and they were obliterated with those strikes.

Leftist Jerk, how did Chemical Ali kill all the Kurds, with kindness you twit?

HEARTLESS wrote: Leftist Jerk, how did Chemical Ali kill all the Kurds, with kindness you twit?

...oh come on Heartless....Saddam Hussien was a nice guy....so what if he gassed a few thousands of people.

You're right, Backend of a Zouthbound camel said so.

HEARTLESS wrote: Leftist Jerk, how did Chemical Ali kill all the Kurds, with kindness you twit?

With the weapons he bought from Reagan.