search
top

Another Stupid Letter To The Editor….

Our contestant for the day in writing silly letters that ignore facts is one Burton Green of Cocoa Beach who writes the Florida Today newspaper concerning the Obama administration, Susan Rice and pre-Iraq War intelligence.

Mr. Green writes:

Republican ‘hypocrisy’ over Susan Rice

Here it goes again. The hypocrisy wagon is being rolled out.

Republican pundits, Fox News commentators, Republicans Sens. Lindsey Graham and John McCain have already started the drumbeat

against U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, who is being considered to replace Hillary Clinton as secretary of state.

I am not opposed to fair criticism. But, please! Where were these voices when George Bush, Dick Cheney and others in the Bush administration were knowingly distorting or lying about Saddam Hussein’s alleged weapons of mass destruction. Not a peep. And not surprising.

Mr. Green seems to think that Ambassador Rice, who made statements that were known to be false before she even opened her mouth is the same thing as the long list of people, intelligence communities, and countries who rightfully claimed that Saddam Hussein did possess both the weapons of mass destruction and proscribed delivery systems.

No less than 10 intelligence agencies from other countries claimed Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. In his final report to the UN before the start of the second Iraq War, weapons inspector Dr. Hans Blix says Hussein had the weapons and had not complied with the UN mandate to destroy them.

Perhaps the most damning statements to Mr. Green’s factually challenged thinking process and letter are statements from within the US government itself:

[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.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, 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 refine 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.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983″ — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.” — Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

“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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 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.” — Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.” — Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” — Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 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.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.” — John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. 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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.” — John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

“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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.” — Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.” — Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. 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. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” — Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

And….

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

Quoted on CNN

“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

Quoted on CNN

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

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio — from USIA

“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

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio — From USIA

“We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US 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 (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D — MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

See letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others

“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

Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi — House of Representatives website

“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

Answer to a question at the Chicago Council of Foreign Affairs

“There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has invigorated 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, December 5, 2001

Letter to President George W. Bush signed by 9 Congressmen, including Democrats Harold Ford, Jr., Joseph Lieberman, and Benjamin Gilman.

” We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the… defanging Saddam..” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002

Online with Jim Lehrer — Public Broadcasting Service

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today

“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

Transcript of Gore’s speech, printed in USA Today

“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

U.S. Senate — Ted Kennedy

“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

Congressional Record — Robert Byrd

“When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable.” —Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry

“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 Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Jay Rockefeller

“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

Congressional Record — Rep. Henry Waxman

“In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad. In the 4 years since the inspectors, 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-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

“It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security.”
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Hillary Clinton

“The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam’s possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.

“Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened.”
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Ted Kennedy

“There is one thing we agree upon, and that is that Saddam Hussein is an evil man. He is a tyrant. He has used chemical and biological weapons on his own people. He has disregarded United Nations resolutions calling for inspections of his capabilities and research and development programs. His forces regularly fire on American and British jet pilots enforcing the no-fly zones in the north and south of his country. And he has the potential to develop and deploy nuclear weapons… — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. Bob Graham

But inspectors have had a hard time getting truthful information from the Iraqis they interview. Saddam Hussein terrorizes his people, including his weapons scientists, so effectively that they are afraid to be interviewed in private, let alone outside the country. They know that even the appearance of cooperation could be a death sentence for themselves or their families.

“To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may dislike running ”a defection agency,’ but that could be the only way to obtain truthful information about Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction — Sen. Joseph Biden

Congressional Record — Sen. Joseph Biden

“With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don’t even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.

“Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq’s efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction. — Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002

Congressional Record — Sen. John Edwards

Clearly Mr. Green has been listening to talking points rather than the actual facts that might get in the way of his preconceived conclusions.

Just like Mr. Green, we aren’t surprised by that.



4 Responses to “Another Stupid Letter To The Editor….”

  1. Charles Hnton says:

    Mr Afterwit is a tough critiquer, and not always fair. Sometimes really smart people can get lost in their own brilliance.

    I read Mr Green’s letter and said to myself, “Right on”. Susan Rice was selected to be the administrations spokesperson to appear on the Sunday talk shows, and given talking points from some intelligence agency, which she followed. I don’t understand why she wasn’t told to say “we think it was a planned Al Quada attack”. Maybe she was talking to the perpetrators in cover. I don’t know. Anyway all she did was carry the message like a good soldier.

    Now compare that with Colin Powell’s speech to the UN. It is probably the most embarrassing moment in his life. Remember those famous words, “And we know where they are.” Do you remember Bush’s speech where he spoke of “yellow Cake” from Niger and how Iraq was importing large quantities for their nuclear weapon? He said the Italian government had learned and reported on this. What he didn’t say was the US intelligence knew all about the story and knew it was not true so Bush had to lay it on the Italians to make his false point correct but misleading

    Mr Green’s letter to FL Today was 91 words long. He just had an essential point to make. Republicans are hypocrites for attacking Susan Rice. Mr Afterwit’s derisive rebuttal of Mr Green was 4087 words.

    Most everyone has forgotten that the UN had inspectors in Iraq who had free reign to inspect everywhere and they couldn’t find anything. I seem to remember there was an American on the team. Republicans had a lot of alibis as to why the UN couldn’t find the WMD but the fact remains they tried very hard up to the day that Bush ordered them out just before our attack.

    Now let’s take a look at all of those statements where everyone was so certain that Iraq had WMDs. Scroll down through them and note the dates. Note there are essentially two time frames – late 1998 and just after 9/1, nearly five years apart. I don’t remember what was happening between the US and Iraq in 98, but I do remember the orchestration of laying the blame for 9/11 on Iraq after 9/11. No one wanted to be on the wrong side of that war and Bush had the Democrats blackmailed into getting on board the Iraq War Express. And I remember “Only a war-time President can be a great President.”

    • AAfterwit says:

      Mr. Hinton,

      Thank you for your comment.

      Like so many, you seem to have selective memory.

      It is amazing that you think Susan Rice is a “good little soldier” for continuing to lie about what happened in Benghazi. Remember, State Department officials knew from the moment at the time of the attack that this had nothing to do with a YouTube Video yet 5 days after the event, Rice was saying it was. A week after the attack, the president was still saying it was. Secretary of State Clinton continued to press the idea that the attack was based on the YouTube video.

      What appears to be lost on you and Mr Green is that there is a difference in relying on intelligence and knowing what happened in real time.

      The Obama administration knew within hours of the attack what happened and that it was not based on the YouTube video. Yet they chose to repeatedly tell the American public that lie. They even attempted to harass the one of the people who made the video. Some Democrats called for penalties and to limit free speech because the video had “caused the attack.”

      Yet none of that was true and the Administration knew it as they were talking.

      Contrast that with relying on intelligence where there are not always definite knowns and unknowns. As I said (and you forgot to mention) the best intelligence communities in the world all agreed Iraq had WMD’s. The UN agreed that Iraq had WMD’s. The UN inspection team to which you refer said Iraq had proscribed delivery systems. Hans Blix and the UN inspection team left no doubt Iraq had WMD’s, the stockpiles of those weapons were missing, and Iraq was not cooperating with the UN. For some reason those facts skim over the heads of people.

      (And the American you are thinking about on the inspection team was Scott Ritter. Ritter later took money from an Iraqi businessman to make a pro Iraq / Saddam movie. After that, Ritter was convicted of child pornography.)

      Finally sir, if you think that the US went into Iraq simply because of the charge of WMD’s, you are factually wrong. I suggest you read the Joint Resolution on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq which was overwhelmingly passed by the House and Senate.

      I am sorry that you feel that my response to Mr Green was too long. Frankly, that is really a sad argument as it doesn’t address the heart of the matter in that the world rightly knew Saddam had and was continuing to develop WMD’s while this administration knew the narrative they put out concerning Benghazi was false from the very beginning. The length of my response shows the number of people that knew Saddam had WMD’s. Your response to that is “Bush lied.” The fact of the matter is that if Bush lied, so did those people. Why aren’t you trying to hold them accountable?

      You and Mr. Green have wrongly attacked Bush for not lying while failing to hold Susan Rice and the administration accountable for lying.

      Mr. Green claims there is a hypocrisy here and there is.

      It is just not the way you and he present it.

      A. Afterwit.

  2. Local Guy says:

    The whole story, we need the whole story. We don’t question our government consistently and constantly, we accuse them, both with the Iraq WMD’s and the Benghazi incident. We are tearing ourselves apart from the inside. I’m sure that we knew more than was reported on Benghazi when it was reported. However, it may not have been to our advantage to let people know what we knew and the timing of acquiring information. It happened in Benghazi and it happened to President Bush too. Nobody wanted to lose our brave in Benghazi, what would be the advantage in that? There may have been mistakes made, the events might be played as mistakes to accomplish a bigger goal. We may never know the facts because of the bigger picture. We are just now finding out about the hostage rescue in 1979 as portrayed in Arrgo. What would have been the outcome if the media blasted that there were some Americans not accounted for?

    • AAfterwit says:

      Local Guy,

      Thanks for the comment.

      I think you may be missing my point.

      First, if the administration wanted to come out and say “we are gathering information” in order to protect sources, that is fine. (Although after giving up Shakil Afridi to the Pakistanis, I am not sure I would trust the idea that we were trying to “protect sources,” but I would give the benefit of the doubt.)

      The administration didn’t come out and say that at all. Instead they lied to the American people. They lied to the families of the deceased. There is no polite way of spinning that. Rice, Obama, Clinton and Carney all lied to the American people. They knew there was no connection to the video and knew it at the time they made the statements to the press and to the American people.

      It was deliberate.

      For Mssrs. Green and Hinton to try and equate what happened with Benghazi and with Iraq is a false comparison. At best, Bush can be blamed for relying on somewhat faulty intelligence. That is not the same thing as lying to the American people. There was no doubt in anyone’s mind that Iraq possessed WMD’s. None. The real problem is that people ignore the fact that the intelligence wasn’t faulty. Iraq did have WMD’s and proscribed delivery systems. Therefore Bush wasn’t lying.

      One cannot in good conscience make the comparison between the Obama administration which lied and the Bush administration which did not lie.

      In my opinion it is important to get at the truth of issues.

      In the case of Iraq, the Bush administration had good intelligence that proved to be correct.

      In the case of Benghazi, the Obama administration had direct information and they lied.

      The two situations are not even remotely the same and yet people keep trying to set up the logical fallacy of a “false comparison.”

      That is what I objected to and still object to.

      A. Afterwit.

top