Iraq war wasn't justified, U.N. weapons experts say
Did Bush Press For Iraq-9/11 Link?
I think he's done a terrible job on the war against terrorism.
I think it can safely be said that a year ago most of us got in line behind our President and our troops. We were going to war, and it seemed disingenuous to be contrary at a time of such import in our nation's history. I, for one, believed that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction. Why? Because my government had laid out what appeared to be a convincing case, one that I was willing to accept at face value given the nature of the "threat" we apparently faced. Little did I know then how masterfully public support had been marshalled and manipulated in an effort to achieve the desired policy end.
"I think it's clear that in March, when the invasion took place, the evidence that had been brought forward was rapidly falling apart," Hans Blix, who oversaw the agency's investigation into whether Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, said on CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer."
Blix described the evidence Secretary of State Colin Powell presented to the U.N. Security Council in February 2003 as "shaky," and said he related his opinion to U.S. officials, including national security adviser Condoleezza Rice.
"I think they chose to ignore us," Blix said.
Of course they did, because the advice clearly did not fit the justification for the course the Administration had already charted. If the facts do not fit, you must...well, just ignore them, I suppose. What is even more despicable than the fact that the Bush Administration repeatedly, openly, and cravenly lied to the American public, is that George W. Bush is now running on his anti-terrorism "record"- as if 9.11 was some sort of divine gift to demonstrate his "steady leadership".
President Bush ordered his then top anti-terrorism adviser to look for a link between Iraq and the attacks, despite being told there didn't seem to be one.
The charge comes from the advisor, Richard Clarke....
The administration maintains that it cannot find any evidence that the conversation about an Iraq-9/11 tie-in ever took place.
Clarke also tells CBS News Correspondent Lesley Stahl that White House officials were tepid in their response when he urged them months before Sept. 11 to meet to discuss what he saw as a severe threat from al Qaeda.
"Frankly," he said, "I find it outrageous that the president is running for re-election on the grounds that he's done such great things about terrorism. He ignored it. He ignored terrorism for months, when maybe we could have done something to stop 9/11. Maybe. We'll never know."
In what can only be described as fitting the "facts" to preconceived political "realities", the Bush Administration has clearly dragged us into a war in the name of fighting terror that in fact had nothing to do with fighting terror. Yes, the world is a better place with Saddam Hussein out of the picture, but that was not the way this war was sold to us, was it? No, we were sold a bill of goods that so far has cost almost 600 brave American soldiers their lives. And yet no one in Congress- Democrat or Republican- has had the balls the utter the words that are so clearly appropriate in this situation- IMPEACH GEORGE W.BUSH.
At least no one died when Bill Clinton lied.
