Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kay frustrates Democrats: Hal Lindsey on how donkeys got caught with their pants down
WorldNetDaily.com ^ | Friday, January 30, 2004 | Hal Lindsey

Posted on 01/30/2004 12:50:16 AM PST by JohnHuang2

Following a giddy weekend of "I told you so" and "We got him" and a lot of "high-fiveing" by Democrats and the liberal media, former United Nations Special Commission and later U.S. weapons inspector David Kay testified before the Congress yesterday.

For several days, headlines screamed: "Demolishing the WMD Theory" (Hartford Courant), "Iraq Posed No WMD Threat" (Seattle Post-Intelligencer), "Weasel Wording To Justify War" (Palm Beach Post) and my personal favorite, "Kay Report Makes French Look Good" (Dayton Daily News).

A survey of the top 20 newspapers by circulation found that as of Wednesday, 13 had run editorials on Kay's resignation as chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq last Friday. They all featured his statement that no WMDs exist in Iraq and likely did not exist in Iraq during the U.S. run-up to war.

Nearly all of those papers blamed intelligence failures for the miscalculation and called for a full probe. But eight of the 13 also raised the issue of White House deceit and its possibly blind pursuit of intelligence that fit its plan for war.

Yesterday, David Kay got the chance to explain what he was selectively quoted as having said, plus what he actually did say and what it meant. A lot of the "high-fives" were apparently somewhat premature.

Kay remained composed, professional and fair despite the best efforts of Democratic senators ? most notably Ted Kennedy and Carl Levin. They all tried to get Kay to agree with their carefully tuned agenda to blame the president for deliberately distorting the intelligence reports in order to start a war with Iraq.

Ted Kennedy and Levin began their "questions" with the equivalent of courtroom indictments of the Bush administration. They charged that it deliberately misled the country into falsely believing Iraq posed an imminent threat.

Kay answered by saying he spoke to many analysts who prepared the intelligence and "not in a single case was the explanation that I was pressured to this."

Instead, Kay stressed the danger posed by Saddam and said that Iraqi documents, physical evidence and interviews with Iraqi scientists revealed that Iraq was engaged in weapons programs prohibited by U.N. resolutions.

That little tidbit didn't make it into the editorial pages and news coverage about how the "Kay Report Makes the French Look Good" or any of the other "Gotcha" stories over the weekend.

Kay assigned most of the responsibility on the intelligence gathering agencies, which he said relied mostly on U.N. inspectors' reports instead of developing their own intelligence sources.

Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan pointed to repeated statements by top administration officials flatly stating that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. He pressed Kay to acknowledge that there is no evidence Iraq even had small stockpiles as of 2002. Kay pointed out that Saddam was working on developing a stockpile of the deadly poison, Ricin, which Sen. John McCain reminded the committee is a weapon of mass destruction.

Kay told the committee that, now that Saddam is gone and we have more or less unfettered access, we know a lot more than the U.N. inspectors did, which makes any accusations valid only in hindsight.

Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts said it appears the problem is with some intelligence agencies and not the policymakers. "Anyone who believes otherwise has not done his homework and certainly was not listening to Dr. Kay," he said.

The Democrats have hung their hopes for capturing the White House on the allegation that the administration was so gung-ho to go to war (for reasons that change almost daily) that it pressured the intelligence services to lie to support their conclusion.

They ignore the salient fact that it was a Clinton appointee, George Tenet, held over by the administration, who briefed both Presidents Clinton and Bush, and that both presidents cited that intelligence as sufficient cause for war. Clinton bombed the fleas out of Iraq in 1998 ? the Bush administration merely finished the job in 2003.

The intelligence information regarding Saddam's WMD program had not substantially changed between 1998 and 2003. It was only after we actually got into Iraq that the assessments were proven wrong.

Kay was emphatic when he said that everybody, including himself, was wrong, based on the sum total of all the intelligence about Saddam gathered from the mid 1990s right up until the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.

As I noted in a previous column, everybody in the Clinton administration and most leading Democrats ? including Ted Kennedy, Carl Levin and Nancy Pelosi ? made public statements prior to the invasion that intelligence indicated Saddam possessed weapons of mass destruction.

It is only with the benefit of hindsight that they confidently proclaim that the Bush administration lied.

But if we follow their line of logic in the light of the true fact, it leads to only one conclusion: "If Bush lied, so did they."


TOPICS: Editorial; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: davidkay; hallindsey
Friday, January 30, 2004

Quote of the Day by Dr.Zoidberg

1 posted on 01/30/2004 12:50:18 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
That little tidbit didn't make it into the editorial pages and news coverage about how the "Kay Report Makes the French Look Good" or any of the other "Gotcha" stories over the weekend.

Didn't have to. The truth already reached the sheeple. They no longer need to read further. Damage done, advantage: Left.

2 posted on 01/30/2004 12:55:48 AM PST by Old Sarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
haha

The media also looked really bad.

I can't wait to see what MRC will do on that.

3 posted on 01/30/2004 12:57:02 AM PST by GeronL (www.ArmorforCongress.com ............... Support a FReeper for Congress)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
Kay should have kept is butt off TV until his formal report was issued and his testimony before congress was completed.
4 posted on 01/30/2004 12:59:02 AM PST by Texasforever
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Texasforever
Kay should have kept is butt off TV until his formal report was issued and his testimony before congress was completed.

He said much of the same while testifying.

5 posted on 01/30/2004 1:02:19 AM PST by cinFLA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
For all those that are lurking on this forum, and have not kept an eye on this throughout the 90's as many of us have, I'll give you some prospective on those that are slinging mud around Washington DC.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/985627/posts?page=1,50 By BOBTHENAILER

A Brief Compilation of DemocRAT Hypocrisy
September 2003 | Persons Quoted


Posted on 09/19/2003 10:15:48 AM CDT by BOBTHENAILER


"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.


"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 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 Rockerfeller (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.


"[W]ithout 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.


SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!


6 posted on 01/30/2004 1:57:12 AM PST by Broadside Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
Clinton bombed the fleas out of Iraq in 1998, the Bush administration merely finished the job in 2003.

I have three wishes:

I wish someone would play the tape of Clinton explaining why it was necessary to bomb Iraq in 1998.

I wish someone would read the Senate transcripts of Torecelli's recommendation to dismantle our human intelligence.

I wish both would be done at the start of an "independent" investigation into the global intelligence "failures".

7 posted on 01/30/2004 2:30:25 AM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Broadside Joe; JohnHuang2
Thanks ..for focusing on the issue, the 'RATs' lies. :|
8 posted on 01/30/2004 3:19:14 AM PST by skinkinthegrass (Just because you're paranoid, doesn't mean they aren't out to get you :)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
With all due respect to Mr. Kay,I note the following:

1. Iraq is about the same size as California.

2. The U.S. Army, on a sweep through the desert found BY ACCIDENT, a squadron of fighter aircraft buried in the sand. They had no idea they were there no record of them and no tips from locals.

When Libya let our inspectors in they found that much to their surprise that Libya was much further along with their weapons program than anyone believed.

The a**holes in the DemocRAT party want us to take a chance that our intelligence was wrong on Iraq when we don't have human int on the ground and with the restrictions that the RATS put on the CIA during the Clinton Admin.

Don't think I'm going for that one.

Regards,

9 posted on 01/30/2004 3:50:26 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Old Sarge
Deception is the tool used by the left to regain power.

This served old Saddam but for a short time before it landed him in a "pit".

10 posted on 01/30/2004 4:02:40 AM PST by Just mythoughts
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: JohnHuang2
First of all, good morning John.

Regarding Tenet, Rush stated that Klintoon met with Tenet twice in his tenure (anyone know how long Tenet was director under Klintoon?) and that Bush meets with him on a daily basis.
11 posted on 01/30/2004 4:10:56 AM PST by Mean Daddy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mean Daddy
Tenet wasn't with Clinton too long... he replaced Deutch, who had to resign for taking secret documents, etc, home where they were not terribly secure. It was good riddance as Deutch had turned the CIA into a PC wonderland.
12 posted on 01/30/2004 4:48:31 PM PST by piasa (Attitude adjustments offered here free of charge.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson