Appalling lies told about Iraq and terrible mistakes committed (MERGED)

By Christopher Scheer, AlterNet
June 27, 2003

“The Iraqi dictator must not be permitted to threaten America and the world with horrible poisons and diseases and gases and atomic weapons.”
– George Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in a speech in Cincinnati.

There is a small somber box that appears in the New York Times every day. Titled simply “Killed in Iraq,” it lists the names and military affiliations of those who most recently died on tour of duty. Wednesday’s edition listed just one name: Orenthal J. Smith, age 21, of Allendale, South Carolina.

The young, late O.J. Smith was almost certainly named after the legendary running back, Orenthal J. Simpson, before that dashing American hero was charged for a double-murder. Now his namesake has died in far-off Mesopotamia in a noble mission to, as our president put it on March 19, “disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger.”

Today, more than three months after Bush’s stirring declaration of war and nearly two months since he declared victory, no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons have been found, nor any documentation of their existence, nor any sign they were deployed in the field.

The mainstream press, after an astonishing two years of cowardice, is belatedly drawing attention to the unconscionable level of administrative deception. They seem surprised to find that when it comes to Iraq, the Bush administration isn’t prone to the occasional lie of expediency but, in fact, almost never told the truth.

What follows are just the most outrageous and significant of the dozens of outright lies uttered by Bush and his top officials over the past year in what amounts to a systematic campaign to scare the bejeezus out of everybody:

LIE #1: “The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program … Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.” – President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

FACT: This story, leaked to and breathlessly reported by Judith Miller in the New York Times, has turned out to be complete baloney. Department of Energy officials, who monitor nuclear plants, say the tubes could not be used for enriching uranium. One intelligence analyst, who was part of the tubes investigation, angrily told The New Republic: “You had senior American officials like Condoleezza Rice saying the only use of this aluminum really is uranium centrifuges. She said that on television. And that’s just a lie.”

LIE #2: “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” – President Bush, Jan.28, 2003, in the State of the Union address.

FACT: This whopper was based on a document that the White House already knew to be a forgery thanks to the CIA. Sold to Italian intelligence by some hustler, the document carried the signature of an official who had been out of office for 10 years and referenced a constitution that was no longer in effect. The ex-ambassador who the CIA sent to check out the story is pissed: “They knew the Niger story was a flat-out lie,” he told the New Republic, anonymously. “They [the White House] were unpersuasive about aluminum tubes and added this to make their case more strongly.”

LIE #3: “We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.” – Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on “Meet the Press.”

FACT: There was and is absolutely zero basis for this statement. CIA reports up through 2002 showed no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons program.

LIE #4: “[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade.” – CIA Director George Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that evening’s speech by President Bush.

FACT: Intelligence agencies knew of tentative contacts between Saddam and al-Qaeda in the early '90s, but found no proof of a continuing relationship. In other words, by tweaking language, Tenet and Bush spun the intelligence180 degrees to say exactly the opposite of what it suggested.

LIE #5: “We’ve learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases … Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints.” – President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: No evidence of this has ever been leaked or produced. Colin Powell told the U.N. this alleged training took place in a camp in northern Iraq. To his great embarrassment, the area he indicated was later revealed to be outside Iraq’s control and patrolled by Allied war planes.

LIE #6: “We have 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. We are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs [unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States.” – President Bush, Oct. 7.

FACT: Said drones can’t fly more than 300 miles, and Iraq is 6,000 miles from the U.S. coastline. Furthermore, Iraq’s drone-building program wasn’t much more advanced than your average model plane enthusiast. And isn’t a “manned aerial vehicle” just a scary way to say “plane”?

LIE #7: “We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they’re weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established.” – President Bush, Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

FACT: Despite a massive nationwide search by U.S. and British forces, there are no signs, traces or examples of chemical weapons being deployed in the field, or anywhere else during the war.

LIE #8: “Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets.” – Secretary of State Colin Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

FACT: Putting aside the glaring fact that not one drop of this massive stockpile has been found, as previously reported on AlterNet the United States’ own intelligence reports show that these stocks – if they existed – were well past their use-by date and therefore useless as weapon fodder.

LIE #9: “We know where [Iraq’s WMD] are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat.” – Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to the press.

FACT: Needless to say, no such weapons were found, not to the east, west, south or north, somewhat or otherwise.

LIE #10: “Yes, we found a biological laboratory in Iraq which the UN prohibited.” – President Bush in remarks in Poland, published internationally June 1, 2003.

FACT: This was reference to the discovery of two modified truck trailers that the CIA claimed were potential mobile biological weapons lab. But British and American experts – including the State Department’s intelligence wing in a report released this week – have since declared this to be untrue. According to the British, and much to Prime Minister Tony Blair’s embarrassment, the trailers are actually exactly what Iraq said they were; facilities to fill weather balloons, sold to them by the British themselves.

So, months after the war, we are once again where we started – with plenty of rhetoric and absolutely no proof of this “grave danger” for which O.J. Smith died. The Bush administration is now scrambling to place the blame for its lies on faulty intelligence, when in fact the intelligence was fine; it was their abuse of it that was “faulty.”

Rather than apologize for leading us to a preemptive war based on impossibly faulty or shamelessly distorted “intelligence” or offering his resignation, our sly madman in the White House is starting to sound more like that other O.J. Like the man who cheerfully played golf while promising to pursue “the real killers,” Bush is now vowing to search for “the true extent of Saddam Hussein’s weapons programs, no matter how long it takes.”

On the terrible day of the 9/11 attacks, five hours after a hijacked plane slammed into the Pentagon, retired Gen. Wesley Clark received a strange call from someone (he didn’t name names) representing the White House position: “I was on CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, ‘You got to say this is connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected to Saddam Hussein,’” Clark told Meet the Press anchor Tim Russert. “I said, ‘But – I’m willing to say it, but what’s your evidence?’ And I never got any evidence.'”

And neither did we.

Christopher Scheer is the managing editor of AlterNet.org. He can be reached at [email protected]

Excellent Article.

excellent and true article :k:

Does it really matter that lies are being exposed? US administration and military successfully manipulated average American and got approval of war. Even if their lies are exposed this time around, many Americans still are happy about the war because "Iraq is FREEEE, no more oppression". I'm 1000% sure US admin/military will be able to successfully convince/fool very same American public anytime they want to goto war again in future.

Even if the idea of WMD was a complete lie, aren't we all glad the fact the Iraq is free from tyrant like Saddam Hussein, who killed thousands of him own people.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Changez_like: *
Does it really matter that lies are being exposed? US administration and military successfully manipulated average American and got approval of war. Even if their lies are exposed this time around, many Americans still are happy about the war because "Iraq is **FREEEE
*, no more oppression". I'm 1000% sure US admin/military will be able to successfully convince/fool very same American public anytime they want to goto war again in future.
[/QUOTE]

But what if Changez_like?

What if?

I pose a hypothetical thought to you.

If most...Iraqi's believe that Americans are the spawn of evil and intentions are nothing but evil upon them... how come only the disgruntled fight?

Might there be a hope that life could be better without Saddam...even if Americans are involved? Do you think there is a minute possibility that some might be glad that there are Americans there?

Forget religious differences for a moment and answer without prejudice.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by AvgAmericanGirl: *
...
If most...Iraqi's believe that Americans are the spawn of evil and intentions are nothing but evil upon them... how come only the disgruntled fight?

[/quote]

There is not a ONE thought, there are many angle/version of similar thought, therefore not everyone (of those who think US is evil) is picking up arms, I am sure as it becomes "clear" more and more people will pick up arms. Many people are just doing the "wait & watch" thing. If things turn towards "better" they may change their opinions, a lot depends upon how quickly things change for better for common Iraqis (not just corporations).

[quote]
Might there be a hope that life could be better without Saddam...even if Americans are involved? Do you think there is a minute possibility that some might be glad that there are Americans there?
[/quote]

No doubt that life will be better without Saddam, but the issue is that it didn't really have to be this "WAR" way. Yes, there will be some people who will be happy for American presence (not because its "America") because no more Saddam, specially those families who suffered his oppression.

Religion is not the only bias in this world AAG.

Great article. Thanks for posting.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by UMAIR316: *
**Even if the idea of WMD was a complete lie...
[/QUOTE]
*

So you don't take offense at the fact that you, and the rest of us, were sold a lie by two democratic governments - that innocent civilians were killed, and are being killed, based upon the foundation of a lie?

The Big Lie and Terrible Mistake

Its beginning to look like the people of the United States are finally seeing the light. We were lied to and decieved by our own leaders. We will shortly be throwing them out and electing a new set of leaders. Those leaders will want to undo what the Evil Bush Administration has done.

Whether you are an American or an Arab, or from any other point of view, please try to put aside your hatred or support for those actions which put the United States in this position. Just for a moment try to help find a solution, instead of supporting the occupation or throwing more fuel on the fire.

TRY TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION IN A REAL AND POSITIVE WAY:

What can be done to get the United States out of Irag and leave it a better place than before they arrived?

Or is it possible?

First off Diebold machines will take care of Bush getting elected again.. and even if that can't be pulled off the opposing candidate has already been propped up.. Howard's been rearing his head in the polls and he will follow the same foreign policy of continuing to break Iraq into three pieces and slowly letting Israel expand it's borders.

The corporations will have their way.. US slaves be damned.. we don't have money for schools but can give $10B to Israel..

A loyal American should vote for a President whose loyalties are with this country and it's people.. not some foreign nation or corporations who have no interest in providing jobs to Americans but would rather send them abroad to Communist or sham secular nations with gross human rights violations to their credit.

What you are saying is totally true. I don't question that. In fact, I agree strongly. I was not aware that Bush was undertaking a policy of breaking Iraq into three pieces.

So, you think that would be the best way to get us out? Would that be best for Iraq? I'm concerned that we Americans regain a possitive image. Will breaking Iraq into parts help that?

Admitting they all lied would be a good start for the administration..... followed by an immediate withdrawl of young American men and women in harms way in Iraq and handing over the control to UN peacekeeping forces.

Iraqis will decide if they wish to continue as one nation or want to make autonomous Shia, Sunni, Kurd provinces etc.

Back home people need to wake up to the reality that the two party system is a sham and both are puppets of bigger powers..we need something close to a revolution to get people to wake up to this horrendous game where honest and trusting hard working men and women of the USA are being enslaved and made cannon fodder for someone elses wars.

well truth will never come out. FBI is joining the investigation in iraq. the doers will have the chance to cover up their trackz and marks so that no one will know they were behind the attackz and probably will plant a few evidences here and there to link everything to al-qaeeda :~)

You know?

Shortly after the 9/11 tradgedy I joined this forum, and somebody predicted that Iraq would end up be bombed..

Made a posting insinuating that Iraq would eventually become blame fodder basically.

I didn't want to believe it, but seems the prediction was on the mark.

I doubt anyone ever admits to lying. Though we seem to be hearing stories from various entities that they themselves were not convinced about Iraq's capabilities... etc.

I'm not sure I have good plan on how to get out of Iraq. Probobly would be a good idea to try a multi-national peace-keeping force as a start.

I think the peace-keeping force would have more clout if it included forces from majority Muslim countries.

Perhaps poll the Iraqi's and find out what their ultimate vision of Iraq is, though I suppose that wounds nieve.

I'm pretty stumped at how one salvages a country..especially one that has peoples killing fellow Iraqi's, along with others.

Perhaps a movement similar to the civil rights movement could be created, encouraged and endorsed by a group of respected members of all the various sects, Shia/Sunni/Kurd and others. Though not quite sure how to bring that about.

Perhaps members of each Mosque/Group/Sect select a member to represent the views of the people in their immidiate neighborhoods and communities. And then those people gather together to debate their ideas on the best way to rebuild and govern the country while being guaranteed safety and the right to express their needs, wants and views by international peacekeepers, even if it takes moving those representives to another country to discuss their views. Afterwards returning them to Iraq for the people to vote on the options decided by their self-appointed community representatives... though that does sound democratic, also leaves room for theocratic decisions.

The problem with this idea I think is that the various communities/sects are going to probobly stick with their own Shia/Sunni/Kurdish views..so the problem needed to be solved is how even the minorities of Iraq be equally represented.

Maybe a census might help? Or be consulted to get an accurate number persons of varying minorities and then use as a basis to fairly determine a majority vote on the vision/views/government of the country.....so that even if the majority of people are Sunni's for example, they are not automatically given complete decision on what type of government should be put to the people to decide.

Then put it to the people again using Peace-Keepers if needed.

And Immediately put to the people on how best to get the utilities/water/oil .........

facilities protected and working even if it takes asking for Iraqi volunteers to work with the rebuilding/repairing and protecting those facilities against sabatoge.

Unfortunately because of the personal embarassment that Clinton brought to the presidency, a lot of Americans (including me) tolerated Bush's stupidities for a while. Now it's become so bad - we've lost clout internationally, soldiers are dying everyday, no middle-east peace initiative, the UN has been rendered ineffective, acts of terrorism are on raise, the domestic economy is struggling to get up, job situation is scary for many, the deficit is ballooning beyond control and we've all given up a lot of personal conveniences in the name of homeland security and freedom.

We must throw this naive clown and his evil band of adminstration out. I hope the democrats can bring atleast one sane alternative to the table.

Finally we see the truth. I love these posts, showing the eastern world that we are not about the pain and suffering which has been put upon them by Bush and his Regime.

Please, everyone, write as if the American Press are reading this. You may be surprised.

What happened after (or even before) 9/11 was an in-house coup at the White House by ChristianZionists aka Neo-Conservatives, who are fundementally un-American in their outlook. I am confident the American people have wised up to this and will turf these criminals out of power at the next election.

Long live the American people. :k:

Just thought I would add this to this thread…

Michael Meacher, who served as a minister for six years until three months ago, today goes further than any other mainstream British politician in blaming the Iraq war on a US desire for domination of the Gulf and the world.](Meacher sparks fury over claims on September 11 and Iraq war | Politics | The Guardian)

I think 9/11 was and always will be a tragedy. An unnecessary loss of innocents. Definately loss of American sense of innocense. Definately a learning experience.

I have always held the thought that those who lost their loved ones, yet, decided that peace (nonviolence) was the best alternative as the best of the best people to be found anywhere on earth.

I think time that countries behaved like adults rather than children.

Yes, I agree. But, sort of backhandedly. It is only an adult, with their deviousness that could turn such a tragedy into such a rape of so many innocent people; Irag and American alike.

Indeed, we haved had to grow up again. But, at such a cost!