Activists Stalk Eason Jordan / Fail to Make Bush Accountable
Activists are looking to take down Eason Jordan of CNN. Dan Rather’s head is still warm on the stake, and righties are feeling their “Wheaties”.
Readers at Little Green Footballs are taking issue with my saying that they are “stalking” CNN and Eason himself.
I only call it as I see it. If the shoe fits, we must learn to wear it without hiding our agendas and acting defensively when we’re called on it.
The political downsizing of Trent Lott was a success story for lefties. Was it fair to Senator Lott? Perhaps not. That’s life in the fast lane.
My point: Why be ashamed, LGF? If Democrats were nearly as tenacious as you ‘mighty righties’, FOX News (as we know it) would be history by now. They’d be exposed for the misinformation they spew 24/7. (I’m surprised Brit Hume’s head has not yet spun 360 degrees).
I was recently (unfairly) accused of being an “enemy” of America by an LGF reader. I would recommend that blog activists such as those at LGF do not pretend that they’re some kind of moral crusaders or that they are the only people who can claim to be on the “side” of America. That’s pure, unadulterated horsecrap. We know it. I think most readers at forums such as LGF would be surprised if the participants would sit down and honestly listen, without the ideology-blinders. I believe they might be shocked, perhaps even saddened with shame, when they came to understand that we shared many of the meaningful values that make us traditionally American - Progressive values such as truth, honesty, respect, openness, empathy, compassion, strong protection, fair and equal treatment, and fulfillment in life.
I would ask such activists, while they go after the journalists, why they fail to call upon our government to be accountable for the many known lies that they have told us. Freedom to do so is a traditional and important American value. Read a bit of Thomas Jefferson’s writings and you will not be able to disagree.
When I compare:
1. Eason Jordan’s comments that journalists have been targeted by military
and…
2. Myriad public comments by the Bush administration which caused the military to go to war on the wings of lies in the first place..
Well - I can think of far bigger “gates” to pry open. You don’t see Bushgate because many of you protect the ones in the secretive, lying, and tremendously inept administration who have breached the Constitutionally-sacred trust of Americans. The breach of that trust has damaged the national interest. While a small majority of voters carried Bush in November’s (forever-dubious) Ohio election, half of America and the entirety of the world community has lost trust in the integrity of his administration. Like falling dominos, this will have many unexpected consequential implications for the future of America’s strength and respect in world diplomacy. It will remain this way as long as this administration haphazardly wields its messianic foreign policy.
Rightwing activists: In your own nation, open government and democracy are dying, and you are only a part of that destruction when you become fearful to question the ones who tell you that freedom is paramount as they systematically remove your freedoms.
Do any of you care where an unaccounted-for $9 billion of your tax dollars dedicated to Iraq funds have gone? Where is the “$9 Billion Dollargate”? I’ll tell you where it is. Nowhere on your particular agenda.
I’ll bet the egotistical media will spend more time navel-gazing than reporting the truth about matters material to the most meaningful national interests. When you hear people say that the mainstream media seems as if they are in league with the American right-wing on the issues they choose to report, this is how it happens.
A final message to LGF readers: I’m not picking on you. You are the kind of people I’d love to have on my side of the issues. I don’t appreciate your focus, however. If your intent is a healthy and strong America, you should focus, as a group, on why so many of your fellow Americans are expecting a modicum of truth, honesty, openness, and integrity from our government - without jumping to false conclusions. Perhaps, after a while, you’ll start asking yourselves the tough questions. History isn’t going to treat the Bush administration with the blind-eye treatment that you have allowed by your easy compliance with their trust-killing lies.
Our blogs will be part of American history. You and I are the new pamphleteers. The views of those who opposed the Iraq war and felt it was unjust will last. You won’t be able to erase it or deny the reality.
When this nation was founded, the architects of the Constitution had widely diverse views, much as we on the left and right have today. They came together to form a more perfect nation. By today’s standards, we are tearing apart what is left of it by neglecting and refusing to take into account the Progressive values that have helped keep America strong. I think it’s time for a change. If right-wing activists do not agree, I dare to call them positively unAmerican.
Note: A version of this essay is posted today at my personal blog.
February 6th, 2005 at 6:40 pm
These kind of disagreements depress the hell out of me. It seems as if there is no common ground at all, which, of course, is how the powers that be want it. As long as we’re tearing at each other, we’ll never look up to see who we really should be clawing at.
February 6th, 2005 at 8:43 pm
I totally disagree. The Bush administration _wanted_ to replace former Dixiecrat, 64-party switching Lott, with the Born-Again Frist.
The left provided the cover.
February 6th, 2005 at 8:54 pm
Excellent article - the bushies are so blinded by their present day power,they overlook the fact that they are actually harming our country. I can’t remember when one side of the aisle completely ignored the other side when making OUR country’s laws. This isn’t right, and it will catch up with those that have hijacked our democracy.
February 7th, 2005 at 3:52 pm
Does anyone else remember is being CONSERVATIVE blogs like instapundit and powerline that brought down Trent Lott? ANYONE? Wow.
February 7th, 2005 at 3:53 pm
Jordan, by accounts now including two members of Congress, stated to an international forum that the US military targeted journalists. It’s an outrage, but not as much as the media not holding one of their own accountable. LGF has a point.
And for the last time…every intelligence agency in the world believed Iraq had WMD. Clinton believed it and said so in 1998, as did Democrats in Congress. But of course, Clinton did nothing about the looming threat.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:06 pm
okay, but before you call me positively unamerican, would you mind running down that list again of “the progressive values that have helped keep america strong” and how it is again that progressives have been tending to and accounting for them? freedom from want? freedom from fear? freedom from slander?
February 7th, 2005 at 4:15 pm
Your comment in the above blog:
Does not square with reality. The reason that the Coalition had to use force in Iraq was Iraq’s failure to abide by 17 specific United Nations Security Council Resolutions.
As you know, CIA Director, George Tenet - Clinton Appointee, advised President Bush that the case for WMD was a “Slam Dunk”.
I am forced to remind you of the following world leaders and weapons inspectors who also believed Iraq posessed WMD. Did you forget?
“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” -Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002
“The threat from Saddam Hussein and weapons of mass destruction – chemical, biological, potentially nuclear weapons capability – that threat is real.” — Tony Blair, British Prime Minister
“There are lots of countries around that have weapons of mass destruction. We can’t presumably attack them all.” — Bill Graham
Canada’s Foreign Affairs Minister
“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998
“Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance, even today, of the disarmament which was demanded of it.”
—Hans Blix, chief UN weapons inspector; Jan. 27, 2003
“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 Bill 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 Bill 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:
– Democratic Senators 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
“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.”
– Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.”
Letter to President Bush, Signed by:
– Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001
“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 mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e 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
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.”
– Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 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. 2003
February 7th, 2005 at 4:16 pm
Please read Congress’ Resolution authorizing the President to use force before talking about the going ” to war on the wings of lies in the first place.”
No, President Bush and his staff did NOT do a good job of emphasizing to the American people all of the rationales for this war. Yes, there should have been (and was) debate about the war before it started.
BUT, we’re there. We’re installing a democratically elected government (as opposed to Saddam’s 99.8% of the public voting for him “democracy”). We’ve removed a megalomaniacal dictator who slaughtered his own people and his neighbors; who lined his own pockets at the expense of his countrymen; who allowed his sons to rape, torture, and kill anyone they so chose.
Iraqis voted on 1/30/05 and then danced in the street to celebrate. They realize the US is not going to abandon them (as we did after GWI).
Please remember all of this when spouting your Chimpy-McHalliburton-lied-to-us crap.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:25 pm
“I only call it as I see it.”
You and a million others.
“If the shoe fits, we must learn to wear it without hiding our agendas and acting defensively when we’re called on it.”
Pot.Kettle.Black.
“Why be ashamed, LGF?”
They’re not.
I think comment #1 above has a good point though. Too much talking past (or down to) each other going on. Witness my replies above. Being socially liberal and pro-war leaves me without a political party these days.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:34 pm
because a commenter on LGF says something proves nothing. There are people in Seattle walking the streets who say dead people inhabit the bridges. (I just heard one say this to me last week.) Does this mean that “The American Street” believes this? No, it’s (now pay attention) just a comment.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:35 pm
I actually read your post with some interest (notwithstanding the patronizing “if the shoe fits” balogney) and liked most of it, until I got to this sentence :
“If right-wing activists do not agree, I dare to call them positively unAmerican.”
Stupid.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:53 pm
“When I compare:
1. Eason Jordan’s comments that journalists have been targeted by military
and…”
Totally indefensible–he provided not a whiff of proof and back-peddled repeatedly when called to support this allegation.
“2. Myriad public comments by the Bush administration which caused the military to go to war on the wings of lies in the first place…”
Those same “public comments” were echoed repeatedly by those on the Democratic side of the isle, not to mention the foreign intelligence agencies of the British, the Russians, etc.
If you sincerely don’t understand the difference between the two events you mention, perhaps its time for you to review them in depth before commenting further.
February 7th, 2005 at 4:56 pm
#7, Zeus
who wants to dispute #7? come on, lets hear you defend the ‘bush lied’ hypothesis…. waiting….
Can you discredit the many MANY quotes Zeus posted? How about the John Kerry quote at the end? I want to hear the left try to rationalize that.
put that in your pipe and smoke it :Q * * *
February 7th, 2005 at 5:18 pm
Now, guys, it’s not fair to use facts against the lefties.
February 7th, 2005 at 6:08 pm
This is a traditional argument of the Left: “It doesn’t matter what Eason Jordan (insert any avowed liberal) did, look at so and so Republican, because he’s so much worse.” It gets old. I have no problem going issue to issue with you, and possibly you’ll trump me with facts (if you choose to use them). But excusing Eason Jordan by making analogies that have no logic, is the provence of weaker minds than yours. I’m disappointed.
February 7th, 2005 at 6:13 pm
owned on your own blog. maybe next time, before you type something so retarded, you will think twice. but probably not
February 7th, 2005 at 6:33 pm
Hobo, that’s nothing more than trollspeak.
You too, David.
p1ll, you were just a mockingbird for Zeus. Waste of breath..that “me too” stuff.
These are the kinds of comments that get us nowhere.
If you want to talk to me, talk to me with some form of reason and positive productivity.
February 7th, 2005 at 6:34 pm
Hold your horses, “On the Mark”.
You are being terribly undiscerning here.
I find it to be a common trait with some of you…to place words where no words had ever before been said.
I can’t let you get away with that.
There is no place in my post where I excused Mr. Jordan. I even went as far as to say that I wondered why he said what he’d said at Davos.
Excuse him?
Nope.
I’m only telling it like it is.
You want the mainstream media to cover this, even if it damages the world perception of our nation’s military in some material way.
Do you honestly think Rumsfeld and company want this smeared all over the front pages and cable headlines?
If so, I think you’re choosing your partisan venom for what some of you are calling the “old” media over the reputation of the military you claim to support.
February 7th, 2005 at 6:51 pm
Trapezium,
I meant that “unAmerican” comment with sincerity. This wholesale political alienation of your fellow Americans’ values and the very way many of you are speaking to me right here on this discussion are indications that you wish to see a disunited nation…further divided than it already is (if that’s possible). If it seems stupid to YOU, walk in a Progressive’s shoes for a brief distance. Your people pull that “unAmerican” accusation on us quite often, and it’s positively offensive. And it’s wrong. America belongs to all of us; we pride ourselves on our democracy; we promote the wisdom of democracy’s value all around the globe. The only way to get through to many of you is to speak to you in the only language you seem to clearly comprehend. By your reaction, you clearly got the message. You may think it to be “stupid”, but there are millions upon millions of Americans from whom I’d wager you’d get a strong disagreement.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:08 pm
“No, President Bush and his staff did NOT do a good job of emphasizing to the American people all of the rationales for this war. Yes, there should have been (and was) debate about the war before it started….”
Oh, man, you said a mouthful. But listen to you–you were so soft on the ones responsible for an unncessary American war. For all your strength, where is your courage to match? Why do you take no stand? Is honesty not an important American value, to you? What about trust? Do you think trust in American leadership is necessary for a strong and healthy democractic nation?
“BUT, we’re there.”
But we’re there?
Well, no shit, Dick Tracy!
The point is: There was a path to the Iraq war that was filled with dangerous lies told, by its leader, to a public who was already terribly frightened by what took place on 9/11 (an act which had NOTHING to do with Saddam Hussein’s government - and the Bushites knew it). Even the troops were misled about their reasons for going to Iraq. Good and decent Americans were taken advantage of.
Congress will have to answer for their own (far too-easy) complicity. History will judge all who sent our troops impulsively and with little debate. They were ALL wrong and need to be accountable to every mom and dad who look them in the eye and ask what their son or daughter has died or has been maimed for while serving in that war.
Remember, however, who led the nation and whose administration was responsible for filtering down the information the Congress would ultimately have to make their judgements.
Your failure to make the Commander in Chief accountable while blaming anyone and everyone else tells me an important story about you. It’s a story that only requires your one-sidedness.
You say pot-calling-kettle-black.
No..no.
It’s more like honest, rational, trust-desiring, supporter of American values calling partisans exactly what they are.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:08 pm
Would you be kind enough to specifically quote the misinformation you describe with dates and times or cite your sources on this?
Thanks much
February 7th, 2005 at 7:17 pm
Jude, how does reporting on Jordan’s UNSUBSTANIATED accusations hurt the US military in the ‘world perception’? Those who believe that the US military would target journalists ALREADY dislike America and its armed forces intensly. And should such a report include Jordan’s earlier comments in the smae vein about Israel? If a man makes a habit of accusing countries of targeting journalists for execution on the battlefield and then failing to provide ANY corroboration - who does that reflect more on, the man or the nation being accused?
PS Barney Frank is hardly a rightwinger, and HE saw Jordan’s comments the same way the Charles from LGF, and the crews at Catians Quarters and Powerline.
As for your claims that we want to see a ‘disunited nation’, don’t think for an instant you know what we think. For someone who supports massive, corrupt, and intrusive international clusterf*cks like Untied Nations to try to wrap himself in the mantle of the Founders and the Constitution is a crock. Go back berating Bush and ignoring an organization that lets China and Zimbabwe decide what human rights’ violations get looked at this year.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:19 pm
You may visit my personal blog anytime. It’s a chronological log of all the misinformation, dates included. Maybe even times. It has taken me a period of years to log it all. We could write a book here on the comments section.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:22 pm
Waiting on a response to post #7.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:37 pm
“If a man makes a habit of accusing countries of targeting journalists for execution on the battlefield and then failing to provide ANY corroboration - who does that reflect more on, the man or the nation being accused?”
A good question, Eric.
In this case, do you know if there is any corroboration? No one really knows…yet.
The only way to find out, if we want to press the story, is to get it out all over the media.
Who knows? Perhaps there’s more to the story than you might expect. If there is, and it’s something that most of us never really would have desired to hear about our militray, Jordan will not be the only one who takes damage. War is ugly enoug has it is. We’ll be dragging our Military through the mud - parading them in front of the world looking like evil suspects once again. (Even if innocent). After Abu Ghraib, one might think we’d use a bit of discretion.
Whether we’re right or wrong on having initiated this war, our Military still has to carry out their duties in a land where they have had enough bad PR already. Do they need more? I don’t think so. Yes, the world sees us in a far worse light than ever. We’ve terribly mismanaged this war. We have ourselves to blame.
No one says you should or shouldn’t press for heavy mainstream coverage/rotation on Jordan’s comments. (Be it FAR from me to stop you–or to want to try). But there will be consequences that some of you may regret having brought on with your desire to get some mileage out of the scoop. Especially if people start talking. This is just something you should think carefully about at a time when your troops are risking their lives in an already-mismanaged and chaotic war. That’s all I’m saying. Don’t shoot me, I’m only the messenger.
I’m a woman, by the way, Eric. I think you are under the impression I’m a male.
I’ll save the UN for another blogtopic. Afetr all, that’s getting more than a mile away from the main points.
February 7th, 2005 at 7:43 pm
#7?
I answer quote-comments with quote responses.
How the United States should react if Iraq acquired WMD.
“The first line of defense…should be a clear and classical statement of deterrence—if they do acquire WMD, their weapons will be unusable because any attempt to use them will bring national obliteration.” Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor
January/February 2000 issue of Foreign Affairs
2/1/2000
We are greatly concerned about any possible linkup between terrorists and regimes that have or seek weapons of mass destruction…In the case of Saddam Hussein, we’ve got a dictator who is clearly pursuing and already possesses some of these weapons.. A regime that hates America and everything we stand for must never be permitted to threaten America with weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President
Detroit, Fund-Raiser
6/20/2002
Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President
Speech to VFW National Convention
8/26/2002
There is already a mountain of evidence that Saddam Hussein is gathering weapons for the purpose of using them. And adding additional information is like adding a foot to Mount Everest. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From Press
9/6/2002
We don’t want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor
CNN Late Edition
9/8/2002
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons. George W. Bush, President
Speech to UN General Assembly
9/12/2002
Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons — the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have George W. Bush, President
Radio Address
10/5/2002
The Iraqi regime . . . possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons. We know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve gas. George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
10/7/2002
And surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding facilities that it had used to produce chemical and biological weapons. George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
10/7/2002
After eleven years during which we have tried containment, sanctions, inspections, even selected military action, the end result is that Saddam Hussein still has chemical and biological weapons and is increasing his capabilities to make more. And he is moving ever closer to developing a nuclear weapon. George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
10/7/2002
We’ve also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas George W. Bush, President
Cincinnati, Ohio Speech
10/7/2002
Iraq, despite UN sanctions, maintains an aggressive program to rebuild the infrastructure for its nuclear, chemical, biological, and missile programs. In each instance, Iraq’s procurement agents are actively working to obtain both weapons-specific and dual-use materials and technologies critical to their rebuilding and expansion efforts, using front companies and whatever illicit means are at hand. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
Speech to the Hudson Institute
11/1/2002
We estimate that once Iraq acquires fissile material — whether from a foreign source or by securing the materials to build an indigenous fissile material capability — it could fabricate a nuclear weapon within one year. It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mustard, sarin, and VX. It actively maintains all key aspects of its offensive BW [biological weapons] program. John Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Arms Control
Speech to the Hudson Institute
11/1/2002
Iraq could decide on any given day to provide biological or chemical weapons to a terrorist group or to individual terrorists,…The war on terror will not be won until Iraq is completely and verifiably deprived of weapons of mass destruction. Dick Cheney, Vice President
Denver, Address To Air National Guard
12/1/2002
If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
12/2/2002
The president of the United States and the secretary of defense would not assert as plainly and bluntly as they have that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction if it was not true, and if they did not have a solid basis for saying it Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From Press
12/4/2002
We know for a fact that there are weapons there. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
1/9/2003
I am absolutely convinced, based on the information that’s been given to me, that the weapon of mass destruction which can kill more people than an atomic bomb — that is, biological weapons — is in the hands of the leadership of Iraq. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
MSNBC Interview
1/10/2003
What is unique about Iraq compared to, I would argue, any other country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
NewsHour Interview
1/22/2003
The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. George W. Bush, President
State of the Union Address
1/28/2003
Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. George W. Bush, President
State of the Union Address
1/28/2003
We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to UN Security Council
2/5/2003
There can be no doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to rapidly produce more, many more. And he has the ability to dispense these lethal poisons and diseases in ways that can cause massive death and destruction. If biological weapons seem too terrible to contemplate, chemical weapons are equally chilling Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Addresses the U.N. Security Council
2/5/2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons — the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have. George W. Bush, President
Radio Address
2/8/2003
In Iraq, a dictator is building and hiding weapons that could enable him to dominate the Middle East and intimidate the civilized world — and we will not allow it. George W. Bush, President
Speech to the American Enterprise Institute
2/26/2003
If Iraq had disarmed itself, gotten rid of its weapons of mass destruction over the past 12 years, or over the last several months since (UN Resolution) 1441 was enacted, we would not be facing the crisis that we now have before us . . . But the suggestion that we are doing this because we want to go to every country in the Middle East and rearrange all of its pieces is not correct. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Interview with Radio France International
2/28/2003
I am not eager to send young Americans into harm’s way in Iraq, or to see innocent people killed or hurt in military operations. Given all of the facts and circumstances known to us, however, I am convinced that if we wait, a threat will continue to materialize in Iraq that could cause incalculable damage to world peace in general, and to the United States in particular. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Letter to Future of Freedom Foundation
3/1/2003
Iraq is a grave threat to this nation. It desires to acquire and use weapons of mass terror and is run by a despot with a proven record of willingness to use them. Iraq has had 12 years to comply with UN requirements for disarmament and has failed to do so. The president is right to say it’s time has run out. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Senate Speech
3/7/2003
So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? . . . I think our judgment has to be clearly not. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to UN Security Council
3/7/2003
Getting rid of Saddam Hussein’s regime is our best inoculation. Destroying once and for all his weapons of disease and death is a vaccination for the world. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Washington Post op-ed
3/16/2003
Let’s talk about the nuclear proposition for a minute. We know that based on intelligence, that [Saddam] has been very, very good at hiding these kinds of efforts. He’s had years to get good at it and we know he has been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons. And we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons. Dick Cheney, Vice President
Meet The Press
3/16/2003
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. George W. Bush, President
Address to the Nation
3/17/2003
The United States . . . is now at war “so we will not ever see” what terrorists could do “if supplied with weapons of mass destruction by Saddam Hussein.” Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Senate Debate
3/20/2003
Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
3/21/2003
There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command
Press Conference
3/22/2003
One of our top objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites. Victoria Clark, Pentagon Spokeswoman
Press Briefing
3/22/2003
I have no doubt we’re going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction. Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board member
Washington Post, p. A27
3/23/2003
We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
ABC Interview
3/30/2003
We simply cannot live in fear of a ruthless dictator, aggressor and terrorist such as Saddam Hussein, who possesses the world’s most deadly weapons. Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Speech to American Israel Political Action Committee
3/31/2003
We still need to find and secure Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction facilities and secure Iraq’s borders so we can prevent the flow of weapons of mass destruction materials and senior regime officials out of the country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Conference
4/9/2003
You bet we’re concerned [concerned that those weapons might have been shipped out of the country]about it. And one of the reasons it’s important is because the nexus between terrorist states with weapons of mass destruction … and terrorist groups — networks — is a critical link. And the thought that … some of those materials could leave the country and [get] in the hands of terrorist networks would be a very unhappy prospect. So it is important to us to see that that doesn’t happen. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Conference
4/9/2003
Obviously the administration intends to publicize all the weapons of mass destruction U.S. forces find — and there will be plenty. Robert Kagan, Neocon scholar
Washington Post op-ed
4/9/2003
I think you have always heard, and you continue to hear from officials, a measure of high confidence that, indeed, the weapons of mass destruction will be found. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
4/10/2003
But make no mistake — as I said earlier — we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
4/10/2003
Were not going to find anything until we find people who tell us where the things are. And we have that very high on our priority list, to find the people who know. And when we do, then well learn precisely where things were and what was done. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Meet the Press
4/13/2003
I have absolute confidence that there are weapons of mass destruction inside this country. Whether we will turn out, at the end of the day, to find them in one of the 2,000 or 3,000 sites we already know about or whether contact with one of these officials who we may come in contact with will tell us, “Oh, well, there’s actually another site,'’ and we’ll find it there, I’m not sure. General Tommy Franks, Commander in Chief Central Command
Fox New
4/13/2003
We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them. George W. Bush, President
NBC Interview
4/24/2003
There are people who in large measure have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Briefing
4/25/2003
We’ll find them. It’ll be a matter of time to do so. George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters
5/3/2003
I’m absolutely sure that there are weapons of mass destruction there and the evidence will be forthcoming. We’re just getting it just now. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Remarks to Reporters
5/4/2003
We never believed that we’d just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Fox News Interview
5/4/2003
I’m not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein — because he had a weapons program. George W. Bush, President
Remarks to Reporters
5/6/2003
U.S. officials never expected that “we were going to open garages and find” weapons of mass destruction. Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor
Reuters Interview
5/12/2003
I just don’t know whether it was all destroyed years ago — I mean, there’s no question that there were chemical weapons years ago — whether they were destroyed right before the war, (or) whether they’re still hidden. Maj. Gen. David Petraeus, Commander 101st Airborne
Press Briefing
5/13/2003
We said all along that we will never get to the bottom of the Iraqi WMD program simply by going and searching specific sites, that you’d have to be able to get people who know about the programs to talk to you. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Interview with Australian Broadcasting
5/13/2003
Before the war, there’s no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical. I expected them to be found. I still expect them to be found. Gen. Michael Hagee, Commandant of the Marine Corps
Interview with Reporters
5/21/2003
It’s going to take time to find them, but we know he had them. And whether he destroyed them, moved them or hid them, we’re going to find out the truth. One thing is for certain: Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction. George W. Bush, President
Speech at a weapons factory in Ohio
5/25/2003
Given time, given the number of prisoners now that we’re interrogating, I’m confident that we’re going to find weapons of mass destruction. Gen. Richard Myers, Chairman Joint Chiefs of Staff
NBC Today Show interview
5/26/2003
They may have had time to destroy them, and I don’t know the answer. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Remarks to Council on Foreign Relations
5/27/2003
For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on. Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Vanity Fair interview
5/28/2003
The President is indeed satisfied with the intelligence that he received. And I think that’s borne out by the fact that, just as Secretary Powell described at the United Nations, we have found the bio trucks that can be used only for the purpose of producing biological weapons. That’s proof-perfect that the intelligence in that regard was right on target. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Press Briefing
5/29/2003
We have teams of people that are out looking. They’ve investigated a number of sites. And within the last week or two, they have in fact captured and have in custody two of the mobile trailers that Secretary Powell talked about at the United Nations as being biological weapons laboratories. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Infinity Radio Interview
5/30/2003
But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them. George W. Bush, President
Interview with TVP Poland
5/30/2003
You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons …They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two…And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on. George W. Bush, President
Press Briefing
5/30/2003
It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it’s not for lack of trying. We’ve been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they’re simply not there. Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
5/30/2003
Do I think we’re going to find something? Yeah, I kind of do, because I think there’s a lot of information out there. Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton, Defense Intelligence Agency
Press Conference
5/30/2003
Q: The fact that there hasn’t been substantial cache of weapons of mass destruction — is that an embarrassment? Wolfowitz: No. Is it an embarrassment to people on the other side that we’ve discovered these biological production vans, which the defector told us about? Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of Defense
CNN Interview
5/31/2003
This wasn’t material I was making up, it came from the intelligence community Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Press Briefing
6/2/2003
We know that some of them, especially the biological weapons, were being destroyed,” Hastert said, adding that it would “take a little while to find weapons of mass destruction… and we’re going to continue to do it. Dennis Hastert, House Speaker R-IL
Press Briefing
6/4/2003
We recently found two mobile biological weapons facilities which were capable of producing biological agents. This is the man who spent decades hiding tools of mass murder. He knew the inspectors were looking for them. You know better than me he’s got a big country in which to hide them. We’re on the look. We’ll reveal the truth George W. Bush, President
CAMP SAYLIYA, Qatar
6/5/2003
I would put before you Exhibit A, the mobile biological labs that we have found. People are saying, “Well, are they truly mobile biological labs?” Yes, they are. And the DCI, George Tenet, Director of Central Intelligence, stands behind that assessment. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Fox News Interview
6/8/2003
No one ever said that we knew precisely where all of these agents were, where they were stored Condoleeza Rice, US National Security Advisor
Meet the Press
6/8/2003
What the president has said is because it’s been the long-standing view of numerous people, not only in this country, not only in this administration, but around the world, including at the United Nations, who came to those conclusions…And the president is not going to engage in the rewriting of history that others may be trying to engage in. Ari Fleischer, Press Secretary
Response to Question From Press
6/9/2003
Iraq had a weapons program…Intelligence throughout the decade showed they had a weapons program. I am absolutely convinced with time we’ll find out they did have a weapons program. George W. Bush, President
Comment to Reporters
6/9/2003
“It doesn’t appear there are any more targets at this time,” said Lt. Keith Harrington whose team has been cut by more than 30 percent. “We’re hanging around with no missions in the foreseeable future.” Keith Harrington, Lt. Colonel
Iraq
6/9/2003
The biological weapons labs that we believe strongly are biological weapons labs, we didn’t find any biological weapons with those labs. But should that give us any comfort? Not at all. Those were labs that could produce biological weapons whenever Saddam Hussein might have wanted to have a biological weapons inventory. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
Associated Press Interview
6/12/2003
Those documents were only one piece of evidence in a larger body of evidence suggesting that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Africa … The issue of Iraq’s pursuit of uranium in Africa is supported by multiple sources of intelligence. The other sources of evidence did and do support the president’s statement. Sean McCormack, National Security Council Spokesman
Statement to press
6/13/2003
A British scientist and biological weapons expert, who has examined the trailers in Iraq, told The Observer last week: “They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were — facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons.” Unnamed British Weapons Inspector
The Observer
6/15/2003
My personal view is that their intelligence has been, I’m sure, imperfect, but good. In other words, I think the intelligence was correct in general, and that you always will find out precisely what it was once you get on the ground and have a chance to talk to people and explore it, and I think that will happen. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Press Briefing
6/18/2003
You may be reading too much. I don’t know anybody that I can think of who has contended that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons. Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
DoD News Briefing
6/24/2003
I have reason, every reason, to believe that the intelligence that we were operating off was correct and that we will, in fact, find weapons or evidence of weapons, programs, that are conclusive. But that’s just a matter of time…It’s now less than eight weeks since the end of major combat in Iraq and I believe that patience will prove to be a virtue Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of Defense
Pentagon media briefing.
6/24/2003
I’m not sure that’s the major reason we went to war Bill Frist, Senate Majority Leader
Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist told NBC, Today Show.
6/26/2003
MS. BLOCK: There were no toxins found in those trailers. SECRETARY POWELL: Which could mean one of several things: one, they hadn’t been used yet to develop toxins; or, secondly, they had been sterilized so thoroughly that there is no residual left. It may well be that they hadn’t been used yet. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
All Things Considered, Interview
6/27/2003
That was the concern we had with Saddam Hussein. Not only did he have weapons — and we’ll uncover not only his weapons but all of his weapons programs — he never lost the intent to have these kinds of weapons. Colin Powell, Secretary of State
All Things Considered, Interview
6/27/2003
Based on my experience with the administration in the months leading up to the war, I have little choice but to conclude that some of the intelligence related to Iraq’s nuclear weapons program was twisted to exaggerate the Iraqi threat Joseph C. Wilson IV, Ambassador
New York Times Editorial
7/6/2003
There are plenty more. Knock yourself out.
November 23rd, 2006 at 8:51 am
Dave…
Interesting topic… I’m working in this industry myself and I don’t agree about this in 100%, but I added your page to my bookmarks and hope to see more interesting articles in the future…
November 26th, 2006 at 10:03 pm
victoria hall…
Interesting post. I came across this blog by accident, but it was a good accident. I have now bookmarked your blog for future use. Best wishes. Leeann Tweeden….