Yes, Bush lied (WND'S Title)

WorldNetDaily ^ | Oct 6, 2003 | Paul Sperry

[prairiebreeze]

good response Quilla

Prairie

[Egregious Philbin]

This is the source of his information.

[JakeINJoisey]

Um...It seems that there has developed a consensus of opinion that our pre-war Iraq intelligence SUCKED? Now I'm to understand that everything sucked EXCEPT the CIA analysis of the potential for a Saddam/AlQaeda alliance which could have been written in stone?

Perhaps PRUDENCE mandated that due consideration be given to the DOWNSIDE of a wrong assessment of Hussein/AlQaeda ties from intelligence estimates that were, by no means, definitive?

And, I agree, the bigger story here is HOW WND got hold of that "REPORT" in the first place.

[MuchoMacho]

this sounds like CIA propaganda to me.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

Sorry, Paul, you can't ignore Saddam's history of mass-murder against his own people using chems or his absolute intent to buy long range missiles and continue efforts to create chem and bioweapons. We know all this from the Kay report and many, many other reports before it.

Someone's been doing a serious number on the world that a man who used to care about truth and honor would write this unworthy and inaccurate piece.

 THE CRUELEST COVER-UP 

 

 STATEMENT BY DAVID KAY ON THE INTERIM PROGRESS REPORT

Case closed. If anything, the President didn't tell the world enough about Saddam's evil past and his willingness to mass-murder innocents for power's sake - both neighbors and neighboring nations.

[Robert A Cook PE]

Good points!

[varon]

Yes, Bush lied

Depends on what the definition of is, is.

[stradivarius]

Thanks for the link to the report. I guess it's been declassified.

The report had High Confidence that SH was violating the terms of his cease-fire agreement with the U.S., and also high confidence that SH was continuing his WMD program and was working to obtain nukes within the near future.

Post 911, why wait until SH already has nukes and is undeterrable, when we had just cause to remove him for violating his cease-fire obligations now?

The U.N. was useless, and so were the economic sanctions against Iraq and constant "containment", which was even more worrisome (why did SH refuse to cooperate with inspections and willingly endure crippling sanctions if he had no WMD programs?)

Sperry's got a strange agenda... what's up with his distortions? He sounds just like a mentally-challenged Leftist. And what's up with Farah???

Confidence Levels for Selected Key Judgments in This Estimate

High Confidence:

•Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

•We are not detecting portions of these weapons programs.

•Iraq possesses proscribed chemical and biological weapons and missiles.

•Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year once if acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.

Moderate Confidence:

•Iraq does not yet have a nuclear weapon or sufficient material to make one but is likely to have a weapon by 2007 to 2009. (See INR alternative view, page 84).

Low Confidence:

•When Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction.

•Whether Saddam would engage in clandestine attacks against the US Homeland.

•Whether in desperation Saddam would share chemical or biological weapons with al-Qa'ida. { p.6 }

[Amelia]

The writer is an ultra conservative writer.

...who happens to agree with my ultra liberal relatives that Bush just attacked Iraq to take over the oil fields.

[joesbucks]

but he was a very powerful anti clinton voice.

[JohnGalt]

Sperry has played the loyal dissenter throughout. His cache on the right I see is not holding sway with the newbies who were not with us during the Clinton Era, but this is an important broadside in rightwing media coverage of this President.

WND is an arm of Scaife publishing, a loyal funder of the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy.

[ex-snook]

Bush has neo-conned America.

[JohnGalt]

There is still time for Bush to 'end' some careers but me thinks the neocons will take Bush down with them.

(See L'Affair Wilson.)

[billbears]

The bigger story here is why WND? Is WND starting to turn away from Bush, if so, why?

Perhaps because as Bush continues his move to the left and the growing influence of the neocons to continue this hunt for weapons that probably haven't been there in ten plus years, conservative magazines are beginning to point out fact instead of covering for an administration that doesn't actually stand for anything conservative? I don't know, just thinking out loud

[billbears]

Thanks for the latest cover articles Cindy. Nice to read how it's going in Wonderland. Except now Kay says the WMDs were moved to Syria. Guess ol' Dave got his latest update from Wolfowitz the past few days on who the Armed Forces are going to needlessly attack next

[Cindy]

Well Vince. Syria is old news.

Speaking of "Wonderland"; where do you get your news from?