Bush Administration made 935 false statements because of the Iraq War

[EconomistBR]

Souce: AP (Associated Press)
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080123...ation_study;_ylt=Ajb46nGXfmoBHcSPLCexPlOs0NUE

"A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks."

"The study concluded 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."

"The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues,"

"Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both."

"Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found."

Ouch!!! That's what I call a bad legacy.

 

[GenMarshall]

Sources and links please?

 

[DaveShack]

This article conveniently leaves out a fact.

We know now that Iraq no longer had WMD, or at least didn't have them in large numbers. At the time the statements were made, the best information available at the time said that there were WMD.

A statement can only be false in this usage if it is both incorrect and known to be incorrect.

 

[cubsfan6506]

That certainly isnt true. False involves not being right. Wether they knew or not is anybody's guess.

 

[Fetus4188]

So what are we saying? That they were wrong or that they lied?

There's a huge difference.

 

[DaveShack]

The point of the article is to try to say they lied. That would be serious, and I for one don't believe it is true.

Being wrong isn't a crime.

 

[FriendlyFire]

The point of the article is to try to say they lied. That would be serious, and I for one don't believe it is true.

Being wrong isn't a crime.

Official's Key Report On Iraq Is Faulted
'Dubious' Intelligence Fueled Push for War

Intelligence provided by former undersecretary of defense Douglas J. Feith to buttress the White House case for invading Iraq included "reporting of dubious quality or reliability" that supported the political views of senior administration officials rather than the conclusions of the intelligence community, according to a report by the Pentagon's inspector general.

"The bottom line is that intelligence relating to the Iraq-al-Qaeda relationship was manipulated by high-ranking officials in the Department of Defense to support the administration's decision to invade Iraq," Levin said yesterday. "The inspector general's report is a devastating condemnation of inappropriate activities in the DOD policy office that helped take this nation to war."

While Pentagon officials said in responses cited in the summary that no senior policymakers mistook these briefings as "intelligence assessments," the inspector general said that administration officials had indeed cited classified intelligence that allegedly documented a close al-Qaeda-Iraq relationship.

The policy office, the summary stated, "was inappropriately performing Intelligence Activities . . . that should be performed by the Intelligence Community."

Feith's office, it said, drew on "both reliable and unreliable" intelligence reports in 2002 to produce a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq "that was much stronger than that assessed by the IC [Intelligence Community] and more in accord with the policy views of senior officials in the Administration."

The summary recommended no action within the Defense Department because, it said, the current collaboration under new leadership at the Pentagon and the intelligence community "will significantly reduce the opportunity for the inappropriate conduct of intelligence activities outside intelligence channels."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802387_pf.html

"inappropriately performing Intelligence Activities" +

The inspector general's report further states that Feith's briefing to the White House in 2002 "undercuts the Intelligence Community" and "did draw conclusions that were not fully supported by the available intelligence."

"undercuts the Intelligence Community" +

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Some people still believe that Bush administration acted with best intentions in mind and did not lie deliberately?

 

[MobBoss]

Some people still believe that Bush administration acted with best intentions in mind and did not lie deliberately?

Actually...yes.

Most people actually do believe that their president acts with their best intentions in mind and does not lie deliberately. While we may not agree with the Presidents choices in each and every instance, I still think he believes in what he is doing is best for the american people.

But then again, I am not a paranoid and delusional conspriacy theorist. /shrug.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Actually...yes.

Most people actually do believe that their president acts with their best intentions in mind and does not lie deliberately. While we may not agree with the Presidents choices in each and every instance, I still think he believes in what he is doing is best for the american people.

But then again, I am not a paranoid and delusional conspriacy theorist. /shrug.

Trolling again, are we? New definition for "conspriacy theorist" everyday?

Oh, i almost forgot -- .

 

[Ball Lightning]

This article conveniently leaves out a fact.

We know now that Iraq no longer had WMD, or at least didn't have them in large numbers. At the time the statements were made, the best information available at the time said that there were WMD.

A statement can only be false in this usage if it is both incorrect and known to be incorrect.

The Intellegence just before the war did not say there were WMD. You really should see the BBC show government inspector. All evidence of WMD in Iraq came down to 1 source in Germany.

 

[ArneHD]

But then again, I am not a paranoid and delusional conspriacy theorist. /shrug.

No, most conspiracy theorists are very intelligent people and I would think that only a few of them suffered from schizophrenic paranoia.

 

[Miles Teg]

Most people actually do believe that their president acts with their best intentions in mind and does not lie deliberately. While we may not agree with the Presidents choices in each and every instance, I still think he believes in what he is doing is best for the american people.

Just like Nixon. Sorry, Presidents are politicians. And politicians need to be re-elected

 

[MobBoss]

Just like Nixon. Sorry, Presidents are politicians. And politicians need to be re-elected

Actually, Nixon did a lot of things very good for the United States and Americans as a people. He re-established relations with China, which was a huge foreign policy victory for him. That is just simple fact. And while yes, its true Watergate will be what he is remembered for, I for one, dont think he ran for president merely for what he could get out of it. If you take Watergate out of the picture, Nixon ends up being quite possibly on the top 10 list of Presidents in our nations history.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Yep, and if you take out of Iraq war Bush administration surely rises up on ranking as well.

 

[MobBoss]

Yep, and if you take out of Iraq war Bush administration surely rises up on ranking as well.

Remains to be seen what the effect of it will be on his ranking say, 30 years from now.

 

[Julian Delphiki]

Last time it was 50 years.. are you softening up?

 

[MobBoss]

No, most conspiracy theorists are very intelligent people and I would think that only a few of them suffered from schizophrenic paranoia.

Not really. Lets just say that if they are 'intelligent' as you say, then for some reason they decidedly lack the ability to recognize fact/logic when even more intelligent people than they debunk said conspriacies three ways to Sunday. Like the WTC towers lunacy. Its almost pathological in how far people will not accept the fact that it wasnt some 'inside' job and that the government didnt do it. There was no 'controlled' demolition. And yes, that particular brand of lunacy can affect intelligent people too, which makes it all that much worse and sad to be honest.

Last time it was 50 years.. are you softening up?

Nope, just optimistic.

 

[Jawz II]

This article conveniently leaves out a fact.

We know now that Iraq no longer had WMD, or at least didn't have them in large numbers. At the time the statements were made, the best information available at the time said that there were WMD.

A statement can only be false in this usage if it is both incorrect and known to be incorrect.

No its not. Why do you think the EU and the UN didnt join the coalition?

No, Saddam disposed of all the stuff he had back in 2001 to appeal to UN to get some of the sanctions lifted. The UN and everyone else knew this.

And everybody and their dad knew that saddam was not involved with the Al Qaeda.

If you didn't know this back in 2003, its for one reason only, you didn't want to know it.

 

[MobBoss]

No its not. Why do you think the EU and the UN didnt join the coalition?

Errr. There were EU and UN nations that did join the coalition.

No, Saddam disposed of all the stuff he had back in 2001 to appeal to UN to get some of the sanctions lifted. The UN and everyone else knew this.

Errrr. No...no they didnt. When asked on the eve of war, even Hans Blix couldnt confirm that Iraq had indeed fully complied with UN resolutions.

And everybody and their dad knew that saddam was not involved with the Al Qaeda.

Again, false. The 9/11 commission confirmed that yes, indeed Al Qaeda was in Iraq prior to the war and in contact with the Iraqi government, just not in an operational relationship against the USA.

If you didn't know this back in 2003, its for one reason only, you didn't want to know it.

Or...it could be we just didnt know it.