[Vision2020] Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles AgainstCheney

[Ted Moffett]

All-

Research?  Who does research, outside their professional life, in our
specialized world where career and money dominate?  As if, before supporting
a military invasion of another nation, citizens have an obligation to
investigate beyond the sound bites of political leaders?  Iraq has WMDs that
threaten the US with a "mushroom cloud over America," says the chief
executive?  Must be true.  Politicians don't lie, do they?  Especially born
again devout religious political leaders.  Iraq has ties to Al Queda?  Why
of course!  Just don't ask why Bin Laden slipped away during the US
invasion of Afghanistan, now in hiding in Afghanistan/Pakistan, in an area
known as a sanctuary for Islamic militants, while the bulk of our military
effort was refocused to invade a nation where Al Queda never found
sanctuary, given the enmity because Saddam and Bin Laden.  And if someone
questions the honesty of a political leader who happens to be a
"conservative" (though G. W. Bush makes a mockery of many essential
conservative values), just call them a "left winger."  That will put them in
their place.  As if deception and falsehoods uttered to justify taking the
US to war is an issue that should not arouse the opposition of all beyond
partisanship, regardless of political/economic orientation or religion.

It appears Bush/Cheney got away with it, their grand deception to scare
monger the US public and the US Congress into invading and occupying Iraq,
given the lack of public and congressional will to hold them accountable,
the astonishing disinterest in facing the gravity of the implications of the
president and vice president manipulating the public into war based on half
truths, distortions, omissions of critical facts, and out right fabrications
(yellow cake uranium supplied to Iraq evidence based on forged documents,
with Ambassador Wilson and Valerie Plame attacked for their exposure of this
fraud).

Note that article three of Kucinich's articles of impeachment against Cheney
focuses on military threats against Iran.  We shall find out how serious
these threats are.

The author of the book below provides ample documentation of distortions and
deceptions involved in pushing for the invasion of Iraq:
------------------
*Our Nation Betrayed: The Iraq WMD Intelligence Deception

Garland Favorito
*
Although many reasons have been given for the March 19, 2003 invasion of
Iraq, the invasion was based on one single overriding concern as explained
by Deputy Secretary of Defense, Paul Wolfowitz, on May 28, 2003: "For
bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction,
because it was the one reason everyone could agree on". However, since no
significant evidence of those weapons was found, President Bush and Congress
recently agreed to investigate the so-called intelligence "failure". But
like many Congressional investigations, this one has been set up to avoid
answering key questions while wasting millions of taxpayer dollars that do
not even exist because of huge budget deficits. The focus of the
investigation was limited so that it addresses only the gathering of
intelligence but not how forthright the administration presented
intelligence to Congress, the U.N. or the American public. The Bush
administration is also appointing all committee members so the investigation
can hardly be independent. In addition, the scope was expanded to include
intelligence on other countries such as Libya, Syria and North Korea and the
time frame was pushed into 2005 so that the findings would not impact the
2004 election. Since the Congressional investigation has been corrupted, I
have produced the following analysis of the exact intelligence known PRIOR
to the invasion and what the investigation will never reveal to the American
public.

*IRAQ WMD INTELLIGENCE SUMMARY*

The following general points are key to understanding the Iraq WMD
intelligence deception:
1. Public testimony by the U.N. weapons inspectors at the U.N. Security
Council just 12 days BEFORE the Iraq invasion rebutted all U.S. and British
weapons charges against Iraq, which is why most of the rest of the world
opposed the U.S. and British led invasion;

2. U.S. intelligence conclusions prior to October 2002 about Iraqi weapons
of mass destruction were very consistent with the conclusions of the U.N.
weapons inspectors, corroborating the fact that Iraq was not an imminent
threat to U.S. security;

3. In October 2002, the CIA produced a declassified National Intelligence
Estimate with false key judgments about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in
spite of dissents from several other U.S. intelligence agencies;
4. No weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq after the U.S. and
British led invasion in March 2003 and the evidence also corroborated U.N.
weapons inspectors conclusions that no such weapons or programs had existed
in Iraq since 1998;

5. Many Bush administration officials made dozens of false statements to the
U.N., Congress and the media about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction;

6. The rationale to invade Iraq under the premise of weapons of mass
destruction originated in the Project for the New American Century whose
advocates include key Bush administration personnel Dick Cheney, Donald
Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Pearle and Richard Armitage;

7. No "opposing" Democrats can truthfully say that they were misinformed by
the Bush administration since all had access to the public U.N. weapons
inspector testimony and some also had access to U.S. intelligence
corroborating those U.N. conclusions.

Detailed evidence for each of these points is provided in the following
separate sections.

*1. PUBLIC REBUTTAL OF U.S. CHARGES AGAINST IRAQ BY U.N. WEAPONS INSPECTORS*

On March 7, 2003, just a week prior to the U.S. and British led invasion of
Iraq, the U.N. Security Council received testimony from the heads of the
nuclear, chemical and biological weapons inspectors concerning any weapons
of mass destruction possessed by Iraq. Their testimony represented the
unanimous conclusion of over 100 U.N. weapons inspectors who were on site in
Iraq for four months just prior to the invasion beginning in November, 2002.
Unlike the Bush and Blair administrations, these inspectors, who were from
all over the world, had had no vested interest in invading Iraq. They
publicly refuted every charge that Secretary of State, Colin Powell, made
about chemical and biological weapons could not be substantiated.
During his verbal report, Mohammed Elbaradei, the chief U.N. nuclear weapons
inspector dramatically refuted all Bush and Blair administration assertions
against Iraq regarding its nuclear program.

· "The nuclear weapons program is defunct"
· "There is no indication of resumed nuclear activities or prohibited
activities";
· "There is no indication that Iraq is attempting to import enriched
uranium";
· "There is no indication that Iraq is attempting to import tubes for
uranium enrichment".
· "There is no indication to date that Iraq imported magnets for use in
centrifuge development"

Hans Blix, the chief weapons inspector for chemical and biological weapons,
indicated that they found nothing to support Bush / Blair claims and added.
· "No evidence so far has been found for mobile biological weapons units";
· "No underground facilities were found for chemical and biological weapons
(so far)".

Also contrary to Bush administration claims and reports from our national
news media of stymied inspections, Elbaradei told the U.N. Security Council
that:
· "Iraq has been forthcoming",
· "Inspections are moving forward" and
· They have made "important progress".

Blix corroborated Elbaradei's testimony as he told the council that chemical
and biological weapons inspections had "few difficulties".

But perhaps the most remarkable testimony was that of Elbaredei regarding
documents supplied by the U.S., British and Israeli governments about the
"agreement between Iraq and Nigeria for the sale of uranium between 1999 and
2001" that was purported to be for procurement of enriched uranium.
Elbaredei stated: "Iraq has provided a comprehensive explanation of its
relations with Niger". "The IA was able to review correspondence from the
government of Niger and compare full format contents and signature of that
correspondence with those of the alleged procurement related documentation".
"Based on thorough analysis the IA has concluded, with the concurrence of
outside experts, that these documents which formed the basis for the reports
of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger are, in fact, not
authentic"

Thus, the U.S. and British governments had provided falsified documents to
the U.N. to justify the invasion of Iraq. No wonder, Colin Powell stated
illogically at the same meeting that: "We must not allow Iraq to shift the
burden of proof onto the inspectors". The conclusions of the U.N. weapons
inspectors were further corroborated as being accurate by additional U.S.
searches on the ground after the Bush / Blair administrations ignored the
inspectors and invaded Iraq anyway.

*2. U.S. INTELLIGENCE PRIOR TO OCTOBER 2002 WAS VERY CONSISTENT WITH U.N.
CONCLUSIONS*

U.S. intelligence conclusions about Iraq weapons of mass destruction prior
to October 2002 were almost totally consistent with the conclusions of the
U.N. weapons inspectors. This has been proven by a thorough, recently
released study of declassified intelligence from the Carnegie Endowment of
International Peace entitled WMD in Iraq, Evidence and Implications. The
entire study can be viewed by all at:
http://www.ceip.org/files/Publications/IraqReport3.asp. Portions of the
study were entered into the Congressional Record at a Senate Armed Services
Committee hearing on February 4, 2004 to counter a claim by Sec. of Defense,
Donald Rumsfeld, that intelligence conclusions were consistent between the
Bush and Clinton administrations. Rumsfeld offered no response to this
study.

The study contrasted the March 2003 conclusions of U.N. weapons inspectors,
the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), U.S. intelligence
prior to the October 2002 NIE and on ground survey results compiled after
the March 2003 invasion by the Iraq Survey Group. The following table
illustrates those conclusions on five key charges that were made against
Iraq:

March 2003 U.N. 2002 U.S. Intelligence Oct. 2002 NIE Post March 2003 Survey
Iraq reconstituted nuclear program after 1998 Probably Not Probably not Yes
No
Iraq attempted to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons No Possibly Yes No
Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from abroad No No Yes No
Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical weapons Possibly Undetermined Yes No
Iraq had covert chemical weapons production facilities Undetermined Probably
Not Yes No
Iraq had current biological weapons facilities Undetermined Undetermined Yes
No
Iraq reconstituted it biological weapons program Undetermined Yes Yes No
Iraq possessed 7+ mobile biological weapons labs Undetermined Not Mentioned
Yes Probably Not

In these examples of key charges against Iraq, U.N. weapons inspectors were
found to be the most accurate, closely followed by U.S. intelligence prior
to October 2002. The only consistently inaccurate intelligence regarding
these charges is the October 2002 NIE, produced by the Central Intelligence
Agency and entitled Key Judgments from the National Intelligence Estimate on
Iraq's Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction". Details to
support this table are provided in the subsequent sections.


*3. THE OCTOBER 2002 NIE MADE FALSE JUDGMENTS ABOUT IRAQ IN SPITE OF
DISSENTS FROM OTHER U.S. INTELLIGENCE AGENCIES*

The CIA's October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), is more than
simply inaccurate. It is a collection of false, deceptive and speculative
judgments with dissenting U.S. intelligence conclusions that were not
usually mentioned during Congressional testimony. In nearly every case of
incorrectly stated judgments, the change from an accurate to inaccurate
judgment occurred when this document was created as shown in the previous
table. The judgments were found to be false by the U.N. and contradicted by
other U.S. intelligence agencies, some of whose conclusions were even stated
in the same document. Here are several examples of the false judgments
including contradictory findings or statements of dissent from the State
Dept. Intelligence Bureau (State/INR), Dept. of Energy Intelligence (DOE)
and U.S. Air Force intelligence and a partially declassified Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA) document:

*3A. NUCLEAR WEAPONS FALSE JUDGMENTS AND DISSENTS*

October 2002 NIE: "Most agencies believe that Saddam's personal interest in
and Iraq's aggressive attempts to obtain high strength aluminum tubes for
centrifuge rotors - as well as Iraq's attempts to acquire magnets, high
speed balancing machines and machine tools - provide compelling evidence
that Saddam is reconstituting a uranium enrichment effort for Baghdad's
nuclear weapons program"
October 2002 NIE State INR Dissent: "The activities we have detected do not
add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would
consider an integrated, comprehensive approach to acquire nuclear weapons.
INR considers the available evidence inadequate to support such a judgment".
The State Dept. Intelligence bureau also concluded "The tubes were not
intended for use in Iraq's nuclear weapons".
October 2002 NIE State INR Dissent: "Iraq's efforts to acquire aluminum
tubes is central to the argument that Baghdad is reconstituting its nuclear
weapons program, but INR is not persuaded that the tubes in question are
intended for use as centrifuge rotors. INR accepts the judgment of technical
experts at the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) who have concluded that the
tubes Iraq seeks to acquire are poorly suited for use in gas centrifuges to
be used for uranium enrichment and find unpersuasive the arguments advanced
by others to make the case that they are intended for that purpose". "The
very large quantities being sought, the way the tubes were tested by the
Iraqis and the atypical lack of attention to operational security in the
procurement efforts are among the factors, in addition to the DOE
assessment, that lead INR to conclude that the tubes are not intended for
use in Iraq's nuclear weapons program"

October 2002 NIE DOE dissent "...the tubes probably are not part of the
program".

October 2002 NIE: "Iraq also began vigorously trying to procure uranium ore
and yellow cake"
October 2002, NIE State/INR dissent: "Claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural
uranium in Africa are, in INR's assessment, highly dubious"

October 2002 NIE: "In the view of most agencies, Baghdad is reconstituting
its nuclear weapons program"
October 2002 NIE State/INR dissent: "INR is unwilling to speculate that such
an effort began soon after the departure of U.N. inspectors or to project a
timeline for completion of activities it does not now see happening"

*3B. CHEMICAL WEAPONS FALSE JUDGMENTS AND DISSENTS*

October 2002 NIE: "Baghdad has begun renewed production of chemical warfare
agents", "...the regime has begun renewed production of mustard, sarin, GF
(cyclosarin), and VX", "Iraq probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons
(MT) and possibly as much as 500 (MT) of CW agents - much of it added in the
last year"
U.S. Air Force dissent: "The Director, Intelligence, Surveillance and
Reconnaissance, U.S. Air Force, does not agree that Iraq is developing UAVs
primarily intended to be delivery platforms for chemical and biological
warfare (CBW) agents. The small size of Iraq's new UAV strongly suggests a
primary role of reconnaissance, although CBW delivery is an inherent
capability"

*3C. BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS FALSE JUDGMENTS AND CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS*

October 2002 NIE: "We judge that all key aspects - R&D, production and
weaponization - of Iraq's offensive BW program are active and that most
elements are larger and more advanced that they were before the Gulf War"
March 7, 2003 U.N. testimony: "No evidence so far has been found for mobile
biological weapons units". "No underground facilities were found for
chemical and biological weapons (so far)"

*3D. MIISSILE FALSE JUDGMENTS AND CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS*

October 2002 NIE: "Baghdad has exceeded U.N. range limits of 150 km with its
ballistic missiles"
2002 U.N. Tests: The U.N. found that 13 of 40 Al Samoud 2 missiles exceeded
the range when NOT equipped with payloads or guidance systems.

*3E. OTHER FALSE JUDGMENTS AND CONTRADICTORY FINDINGS*

October 2002 NIE: "Iraq would probably attempt clandestine attacks against
the U.S. Homeland if Baghdad feared an attack that threatened the survival
of the regime were imminent or unavoidable…" "The Iraqi Intelligence Service
probably has been directed to conduct clandestine attacks against the U.S.
and Allied interests in the Middle East in the event the U.S. takes action
against Iraq"
March 2003 Invasion: Proven false by time and events

The basis for some of the false intelligence judgments in the October 2002
NIE may have originated from defectors provided by the Iraqi National
Congress, led by Ahmed Chalabi who the U.N. knew was not credible. Chalabi
was placed in charge of the Congress by the Bush administration despite not
having lived in Iraq since 1956. He was also wanted in Jordan since 1992 to
serve a 22-year sentence for a 60 million dollar bank fraud resulting from
the collapse of the Petra bank he founded in 1977.

Regardless of the source of the judgments, this CIA document falsely stated
that Iraq was significantly advancing its nuclear, chemical, biological and
missile weaponry, all of which were blatantly false accusations as explained
in the previous and subsequent sections. In a review of the basic summary
text body, I found 20 false judgments, 7 deceptive assertions and only 6
essentially true statements that could not be disputed as false or
deceptive. Many of the judgments are also speculative rather than being
factually based, as you would expect in a credible intelligence document. It
should be clear to any unbiased observer that the extent of false judgments,
deceptions and speculations mean that this CIA document cannot possibly be
an intelligence "failure" or "mistake". It could only be a deliberate
creation of false, deceptive and speculative information to justify a
planned Iraq invasion.


*4. NO SIGNIFICANT POST INVASION EVIDENCE OF WEAPONS WAS UNCOVERED*

President Bush and CIA director Tenet selected David Kay to head the Iraq
Survey Group for weapons evidence gathering after the invasion. The
appointment gave them good reason to expect a report consistent with the
October 2002 NIE and favorable to the administration charges against Iraq.
Kay was one of the only U.S. weapons inspectors who supported the charges
against Iraq right up until the March 2003 invasion. He frequently opposed
former U.N. weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, who stated facts that have now
been proven to be true about how Iraq was not a threat to U.S. security.

Although David Kay is frequently referred to now as a CIA analyst, his
relationship with the CIA was not so publicly well known when he was a U.N.
weapons inspector in 1998. Although supposedly an impartial inspector, Kay
was actually working for the CIA, which likely explains why his conclusions
at that time conflicted with most other U.N. weapons inspectors. Kay was
ultimately responsible for getting the U.N. weapons inspectors kicked out of
Iraq in December 1998 after his U.S. team passed bombing target information
back to the Clinton administration. President Bill Clinton subsequently
bombed Iraq on December 18, 1998 in a futile attempt to avoid his own
impeachment the day before the House vote.

In his January 20, 2004 State of the Union address President Bush referenced
the October 2, 2003 testimony of David Kay before the House and Senate
Intelligence Committees. Bush cleverly stated: "already the Kay report
identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities
and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United
Nations". This is a very deceptive statement since Kay's testimony had
already closed the door on three of the four investigative areas regarding
weapons of mass destruction.

In regards to nuclear weapons Kay testified: "We have not uncovered evidence
that Iraq undertook significant post-1998 steps to actually build nuclear
weapons or produce fissile material". In regards to chemical weapons Kay
testified: Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG
that Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled CW program
after 1991. Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale
capability to develop, produce and fill new CW munitions was reduced, if not
completely destroyed…". In regards to CIA claims of missiles exceeding their
range limits, Kay testified: "We have not discovered documentary or material
evidence to corroborate those claims".

Kay gave the most favorable report possible for the administration under the
circumstances by leaving the door open on some potential biological
activities and equipment as stated by President Bush. These involved CCHF
and Brucella agents, a special type of botulinuum B and trailers that were
the "strongest evidence to date" of biological weapons according to the May
28, 2003 CIA/DIA report entitled Iraqi Mobile Biological Agent Production
Plants. However, after DIA engineers determined that the trailers were used
for hydrogen weather balloons and Kay's team found that Iraq never
weaponized any of the agents, Kay was forced to conclude that there were no
biological weapons either. He told the Senate Armed Services Committee in
his January 28, 2004 testimony that: "It turns out that we were all wrong,
probably in my judgment, and that is most disturbing".

Kay's opening statement was actually more accurate: "…we were almost all
wrong and I certainly include myself here". In reality, several U.S.
intelligence agencies, such as the State/INR, DIA, DOE and Air Force
intelligence got it right as explained in the previous section. Kay, who had
access to the intelligence from these agencies and was well acquainted with
fellow U.N. weapons inspectors who contradicted his views, has little excuse
for being "all wrong" prior to the invasion. His complete reversal after the
invasion could be attributed to less pressure from the Bush administration,
which had already accomplished its objectives in the invasion or more
pressure from his team of inspectors in demanding a forthright survey. But
perhaps the most important point of all in Kay's testimony is that he
further corroborated the findings of U.N. weapons inspectors in that Iraq
not only had no weapons or programs of mass destruction but also had none of
significance since the U.N. inspectors left in 1998.


*5. MANY BUSH ADMINISTRATION OFFICIALS MADE FALSE STATEMENTS TO THE U.N.,
CONGRESS AND THE MEDIA
*
Despite U.N testimony just prior to the invasion, many officials in the Bush
administration continued to emphatically state that they KNEW Iraq had
various types of weapons capabilities, were conducting specific activities
to support weapons programs or were an imminent threat to U.S. security. The
evidence indicates that these officials have made false or deceptive
statements or produced misleading reports regarding Iraq weapons of mass
destruction, Iraq links to terrorism or Iraq's cooperation with weapons
inspectors. They include President George W. Bush, Vice President Dick
Cheney, Secretary Of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin
Powell, CIA Director George Tenet, National Security Advisor Condoleezza
Rice, General Tommy Franks, Pentagon Spokeswoman Victoria Clark, White House
Press Secretary Ari Fleischer and Under Secretary of Defense for Policy,
Douglas Feith. Here are some over two-dozen examples of false or deceptive
information disseminated by Bush administration officials along with the
contradictory findings that illustrate those deceptions:

*5A. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE INTELLIGENCE BRIEFINGS TO MEMBERS OF CONGRESS*

Donald Rumsfeld - Senate Armed Services Committee testimony and public
statements - Sept 19, 2002: (Saddam) "amassed large clandestine stockpiles
of chemical weapons and that we know he continues to hide chemical and
biological weapons, moving them to different locations as often as every
12-24 hours and placing them in residential neighborhoods". Rumsfeld stated
five times to the committee variations of: "We know Iraq has weapons of mass
destruction"

DIA - Iraq: Key WMD facilities and Operational Support Study- September
2002. "There is no reliable information on whether Iraq is producing and
stockpiling chemical weapons or where Iraq has or will establish its
chemical warfare agent production facilities".

DOD private briefing to Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida according to Nelson's
2/4/2002 Senate Armed Services Committee testimony:: "I was told not only
that (Iraq) had weapons of mass destruction .... but there were also
unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) that could be put on ships off the Eastern
Seaboard and flown over Eastern Seaboard cities with weapons of mass
destruction". "However, I was not told that there was a dispute in the
intelligence community over the veracity of that information". "...it was
Air Force intelligence that specifically discounted that, ... it was not
true". "...Why was I not told that there was this disagreement in the
intelligence community instead of being told that it was gospel truth that
those UAVs could be flown over Eastern Seaboard cities?" DOD requested to
answer in a closed session even though Nelson's question and the answer
should not be classified.

Douglas Feith - Letter to Senate Intelligence Committee Chairs - October 27,
2003: (Stated still classified connections between Iraq and Al Qaeda)
DOD statement on news reports of Al Qaeda and Iraq connection - November 15,
2003: (Referencing Feith Oct. 27 letter) "News reports that the Defense
Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts
between Al Qaeda and Iraq are inaccurate". "The classified annex was not an
analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and Al
Qaeda, and it drew no conclusions"
U.N. Monitoring Group on Al Qaeda - June 2003: "Nothing has come to our
notice that would indicate links…"

*5B. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE CHARGES TO THE UNITED NATIONS (U.N.)*

Colin Powell - U.N. Security Council address - February 5, 2003: "Saddam
Hussein is determined to get his hands on a nuclear bomb. He is so
determined that he has made repeated attempts to acquire high-specification
aluminum tubes from 11 different countries even after the inspections
resumed" "We also have intelligence from multiple sources that Iraq is
attempting to acquire magnets and high-speed balancing machines to enrich
uranium"

Mohammed Elbaredei - U.N. Security Council testimony- March 7, 2003: "The
nuclear weapons program is defunct". "There is no indication of resumed
nuclear activities or prohibited activities". There is no indication that
Iraq is attempting to import enriched uranium"; "There is no indication that
Iraq is attempting to import tubes for uranium enrichment". "There is no
indication to date that Iraq imported magnets for use in centrifuge
development"

Colin Powell U.N Security Council Address - February 5, 2003: "We have first
hand descriptions of biological weapons on wheels and rails", "We know that
Iraq has at least 7 of these mobile biological facilities", "There can be no
doubt that Saddam Hussein has biological weapons and the capability to
rapidly produce more, many more"

Hans Blix - U.N. Security Council testimony- March 7, 2003: "No evidence so
far has been found for mobile biological weapons units"; "No underground
facilities were found for chemical and biological weapons…"

Colin Powell - Address to U.N. Security Council - February 5, 2003: "The
issue before us is not how much time we are willing to give the inspectors
to be frustrated by Iraqi obstruction. But how much longer are we willing to
put up with Iraq's non-compliance before we as a council, we as the United
Nations, say 'Enough is Enough' "

Mohammed Elbaredei, Hans Blix - U.N. Security Council testimony - March 7,
2003: "Iraq has been forthcoming", "inspections are moving forward", they
have made "important progress" and have had "few difficulties".

Colin Powell - U.N. Security Council address- February 5, 2003: " "Our
conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and
500 tons of chemical weapons agent".

David Kay - Congressional Intelligence Committee testimony - October 2,
2003: "Multiple sources with varied access and reliability have told ISG
that Iraq did not have a large, ongoing, centrally controlled CW program
after 1991. Information found to date suggests that Iraq's large-scale
capability to develop, produce and fill new CW munitions was reduced, if not
completely destroyed…".

*5C. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT IRAQ OBSTRUCTION OF U.N. WEAPONS
INSPECTORS*

Condoleezza Rice - NBC Meet the Press - February 16, 2003: "We have sources
who tell us that the Iraqis, through their intelligence efforts, are working
very hard to frustrate the inspectors"

Colin Powell - Center for Strategic and International Studies speech - March
5, 2003: "Inspections will amount to little more than casting at shadows
unless Iraq lifts the fog of denial and deception that prevents inspectors
from seeing the true magnitude of what they are up against"

Mohammed Elbaredei, Hans Blix - U.N. Security Council testimony - March 7,
2003: "Iraq has been forthcoming", "inspections are moving forward", they
have made "important progress" and have had "few difficulties".

*5D. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT IRAQ CONNECTIONS AL QAEDA AND
TERRORISM
*
George W. Bush - State of the Union - January 28, 2003: "Evidence from
intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in
custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists including
members of Al Qaeda.

George W. Bush - Radio Address - February 8, 2003: "Saddam Hussein has
longstanding, direct and continuing ties to terrorist networks".

George Tenet - Senate Testimony - February 11, 2003: "Iraq is harboring
senior members of a terrorist network led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a close
associate of Osama Bin Laden.

U.N. Monitoring Group on Al Qaeda - June 2003: "Nothing has come to our
notice that would indicate links…"

*5E. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT IRAQI NUCLEAR WEAPONS*

Dick Cheney - Veterans of Foreign Wars 103rd National Convention - August
26, 2002: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has
weapons of mass destruction", "We now know that Saddam has resumed his
efforts to acquire nuclear weapons. Many of us are convinced that Saddam
will acquire nuclear weapons fairly soon"

Dick Cheney - NBC's Meet the Press - September 8, 2002: "We do know with
absolute certainty that he is using his procurement system to acquire the
equipment he needs in order to enrich uranium to build a nuclear weapon"

George W. Bush - Address on Iraq - October 7, 2002: "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"

George W. Bush - Address to the Nation on War with Iraq - March 17, 2003:
"Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that
the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal
weapons ever devised"

George W. Bush - Address to Iraq - October 7, 2002: "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"

Mohammed Elbaredei - U.N. Security Council testimony- March 7, 2003: "The
nuclear weapons program is defunct". "There is no indication of resumed
nuclear activities or prohibited activities". There is no indication that
Iraq is attempting to import enriched uranium"; "There is no indication that
Iraq is attempting to import tubes for uranium enrichment". "There is no
indication to date that Iraq imported magnets for use in centrifuge
development"

*5F. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT IRAQI CHEMICAL WEAPONS*

Colin Powell - Fox News Sunday, September 8, 2002: "There is no doubt that
he has chemical weapons stocks"
George W. Bush - Address on Iraq October 7, 2002: "We know that the regime
has produced thousands of tons of chemical agents, including mustard gas,
sarin nerve gas, and VX nerve gas" (repeated with 500 tons in January 28,
2003 State of the Union)
George W. Bush - Radio Address - February 8, 2003: "We have sources that
tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to
use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not
have."
Donald Rumsfeld - Press Conference - March 30, 2003: "We know where they
are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad." referring to the
100-500 metric tons of chemical weapons which have never been found.
Hans Blix - U.N. Security Council testimony- March 7, 2003: "No underground
facilities were found for chemical and biological weapons…"

*5G. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE STATEMENTS ABOUT IRAQI BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS*
George W. Bush - United Nations Address Sept 12, 2002: Right now Iraq is
expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of
biological weapons
Hans Blix - U.N. Security Council testimony- March 7, 2003: "No evidence so
far has been found for mobile biological weapons units"; "No underground
facilities were found for chemical and biological weapons…"

*5H. FALSE OR DECEPTIVE GENERAL STATEMENTS TO THE MEDIA*

Tommy Franks - Pentagon Press Briefing - March 22, 2003: "There is no doubt
that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As
this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along
with the people who have produced them and who guard them." -
Victoria Clark - Pentagon Press Briefing - March 22, 2003: "One of our top
objectives is to find and destroy the WMD. There are a number of sites:"
Colin Powell - (Response to U.N. Weapons Inspectors Testimony) - Mar 8,
2003: "So has the strategic decision been made to disarm Iraq of its weapons
of mass destruction by the leadership in Baghdad? I think our judgment has
to be clearly not."
Ari Fleisher - White House Press Briefing - December 2, 2002: "If he
declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again
misleading the world."
Ari Fleisher - White House Press Briefing - January 9, 2003: "We know for a
fact that there are weapons there."
Ari Fleisher - White House Press Briefing - March 21, 2003: "Well, there is
no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of
mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly ... all this will be
made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes"
David Kay - Senate Armed Services Committee testimony - October 2, 2003: "We
were all wrong…"

The only rational explanation that President George W. Bush could possibly
offer to justify so many false statements or deceptive reports by people in
his administration is that they were deceived by the October 2002 National
Intelligence Estimate produced by the CIA. However, the President has been
very supportive of Director Tenet throughout the ordeal of trying to explain
all the discrepancies. Perhaps the best indicator to determine whether the
deception originated solely from the CIA or from the Bush administration in
general can be found in the Project For the New American Century (PNAC).

*6. THE INVASION OF IRAQ ON THE PREMISE WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION WAS
PLANNED BY PNAC IN 1997*

PNAC, is a very powerful non-profit organization founded in 1997 on
principles that include "American global leadership", "national leadership
that accepts the United States' global responsibilities" and "America's
unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to
our security, our prosperity, and our principles". The 25 signatures on the
statement of principles include Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, Paul
Wolfowitz, Jeb Bush, Steve Forbes and Gary Bauer.
www.newamericancentury.org/statementofprinciples.htm

PNAC began advocating the overthrow of Saddam Hussein shortly after its
inception. In its open January 26, 1998 letter to President Bill Clinton the
authors wrote: "Given the magnitude of the threat, the current policy, which
depends for its success upon the steadfastness of our coalition partners and
upon the cooperation of Saddam Hussein, is dangerously inadequate. The only
acceptable strategy is one that eliminates the possibility that Iraq will be
able to use, or threaten to use, weapons of mass destruction. In the near
term, this means a willingness to undertake military action as diplomacy is
clearly failing. In the long term, it means removing Saddam Hussein and his
regime from power. That now needs to become the aim of American foreign
policy". "We urge you to articulate this aim, and to turn your
Administration's attention to implementing a strategy for removing Saddam's
regime from power. This will require a full complement of diplomatic,
political and military efforts". Some of the 18 signatures included Donald
Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Richard Armitage and co-founder
William Kristol. http://www.newamericancentury.org/iraqclintonletter.htm

(Note: PNAC's power is illustrated by another open letter to Bill Clinton
dated September 20, 1998, advocating the overthrow of Yugoslavian president
Slobodan Milosevic in advance of the March 24, 1999 attack. It stated: "We
are certain, however, that after seven years of aggression and genocide in
the Balkans, the removal of Milosevic represents the only genuine
possibility of a durable peace".
www.newamericancentury.org/balkans_pdf_04.pdf. Like Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction, the charges of genocide were known by many to be false at the
time of the initial bombing campaign. There were roughly a couple of dozen
deaths in Kosovo during 1999 before the bombing began and the March 25, 1999
Senate Armed Services briefing given by the Clinton administration indicated
that a third of the deaths in 1998 were Serbians who were normally aligned
with Milosevic. Many of these deaths occurred from a civil war between the
Yugoslavian government and the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA). The KLA was
backed by both the CIA and Osama Bin Laden, who was working with U.S.,
British, German and Canadian intelligence agencies to arm, train and equip
the KLA at the same time he was accused of the African embassy bombings. On
August 14, 2001, under the guise of "environmental concerns", NATO "defense"
forces confiscated the Trepca mining complex from the Yugoslavian people for
a French, Swedish and American based partnership named ITT Kosovo.)

After the letter to Bill Clinton did not result in action against Iraq,
Kristol, Rumsfeld, Perle, and Wolfowitz signed and sent another open letter
on May 29,1998 to Senate Majority Leader, Trent Lott and Speaker of the
House, Newt Gingrich. That letter again advocated the overthrow of the Iraqi
leader: "U.S. policy should have as its explicit goal removing Saddam
Hussein's regime from power and establishing a peaceful and democratic Iraq
in its place". On September 20, 2001, just 9 days after the 9/11 attacks,
PNAC members drafted yet another letter, this time to President George W,
Bush, stating: "But even if evidence does not link Iraq directly to the
attack, any strategy aiming at the eradication of terrorism and its sponsors
must include a determined effort to remove Saddam Hussein from power in
Iraq".

It is astounding that PNAC members would continually advocate the removal of
Saddam Hussein even while there was almost no evidence of weapons of mass
destruction in Iraq and no links between Saddam Hussein and the 9/11
attacks. In fact, the evidence presented in the previous sections show that
Iraq actually had no such weapons when PNAC continually advocated the
removal of Saddam Hussein in 1998 on the false weapons of mass destruction
premise. The PNAC documents clearly identify some of the men behind this
false premise became key officials in the Bush administration. These include
Vice President Dick Cheney, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, former
Defense Policy Board Chairman Richard Perle, Deputy Secretary of Defense
Paull Wolfowitz and Assistant Secretary of State Richard Armitage. Since
these men were all appointed as high-level officials of the Bush
administration, it is clear that the CIA was not sole source of deception
regarding Iraq. The CIA merely gave the President the exact report that the
these administration officials wanted when it handed over the blatantly
false October 2002 NIE.

*7. DEMOCRATS CANNOT TRUTHFULLY CLAIM TO BE MISINFORMED BY THE BUSH
ADMINISTRATION*
Several Democrats, including presidential candidates who assisted the Bush
administration in the invasion, have implied that Bush officials misinformed
them or that they otherwise oppose what the Bush administration did. Sen.
John Kerry voted for the resolution to allow George W. Bush to invade Iraq
at his discretion and then claimed Bush "did not do it right". Former House
Speaker Dick Gephart co-authored the resolution and got many Democrats in
the House to vote for it. Sen. John Edwards, a member the Senate
Intelligence Committee, had access to previously mentioned U.S. intelligence
indicating Iraq was not an imminent threat to American security but voted to
allow the Bush administration to invade anyway. Sen. Joe Lieberman also
voted for the measure and still claims Saddam Hussein was a threat to
America despite overwhelming evidence presented in this and other
documents.

All of these individuals had access to the March 7, 2003 public testimony of
the head U.N. weapons inspectors representing over 100 inspectors who were
onsite for over four months just prior to the invasion. The inspectors
specifically refuted every charge that the U.S. government made against Iraq
in regards to nuclear weapons and testified that every charge the U.S. made
against Iraq regarding chemical and biological weapons was unsubstantiated.
Any one of these four Democrats mentioned could have pointed this out BEFORE
the invasion and took a stand against it but none did. Therefore, they are
also culpable for what the invasion has done to both Iraq and America. None
can honestly claim that they were misinformed, particularly John Kerry, the
Skull and Bones fraternity brother of George W. Bush.


*8. MOTIVATIONS FOR THE IRAQ INVASION*
The extent of false statements and deception by so many high level Bush
administration officials naturally raises the question as to what would be
their motives for going to such an extreme to invade Iraq. The key to
answering such as question is to determine who benefits from the invasion.
Defining the exact motives that these individuals may have had is outside
the scope of this analysis. However, the following obvious potential motives
should be evaluated by anyone who chooses to perform such a further
investigation. These include:
· Oil - Iraq has the second largest untapped oil reserves in the world,
which fell under the firm control of Bush administration officials, several
of whom, such as Dick Cheney and Condoeezza Rice, previously held key
positions in the oil business;

· Contracts - Dick Cheney was the former CEO of Haliburton whose parent
company Kellogg, Brown and Root is allocated to receive up to 2.3 billion
dollars in grants for reconstruction and oil servicing contracts after the
Iraq and Afghanistan invasions;

· Investments - Former President George H.W. Bush and several of his
colleagues, such as Frank Carlucci, who signed the PNAC letter on
Yugoslavia, have undisclosed amounts of investments in private funds of the
Carlyle Group which, in turn, invests secretly in aerospace and defense
companies who profit by supplying U.S. military equipment and replenishing
it during times of conflict;

· Zionism - Key participants of the Iraqi invasion, Donald Rumsfeld, Richard
Perle, Paul Wolfowitz, and Doug Feith are four of 25 Zionists appointed to
key Bush administration posts as identified by Free American magazine.
Perle, Wolfowitz and Feith had been previously reprimanded, investigated or
fired, respectively, for leaking classified information to representatives
of the Israeli government. Zionists place allegiance to Israel over and
above allegiance to the U.S. interests. Israel has considered Iraq one of
its greatest adversaries ever since Saddam Hussein removed known Zionists
from the Iraqi government when the Revolutionary Command Council granted him
power in 1979.

Additional highly reasonable motives come from Air Force Lt. Col. Karen
Kwiatkowski, A DOD insider who worked in the Near East South Asia policy
office from which Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld spun off the notoriously
deceptive Office of Special Plans, headed by Doug Feith. She suggests:
· "One of those reasons is that sanctions and containment were working and
everybody pretty much knew it. Many companies around the world were
preparing to do business with Iraq in anticipation of a lifting of
sanctions. But the U.S. and the U.K. had been bombing northern and southern
Iraq since 1991. So it was very unlikely that we would be in any kind of
position to gain significant contracts in any post-sanctions Iraq. And those
sanctions were going to be lifted soon, Saddam would still be in place, and
we would get no financial benefit."

· "The second reason has to do with our military-basing posture in the
region. We had been very dissatisfied with our relations with Saudi Arabia,
particularly the restrictions on our basing. And also there was
dissatisfaction from the people of Saudi Arabia. So we were looking for
alternate strategic locations beyond Kuwait, beyond Qatar, to secure
something we had been searching for since the days of Carter - to secure the
energy lines of communication in the region. Bases in Iraq, then, were very
important - that is, if you hold that is America's role in the world. Saddam
Hussein was not about to invite us in."

· "The last reason is the conversion, the switch Saddam Hussein made in the
Food for Oil program, from the dollar to the euro. He did this, by the way,
long before 9/11, in November 2000 - selling his oil for euros. The oil
sales permitted in that program aren't very much. But when the sanctions
would be lifted, the sales from the country with the second largest oil
reserves on the planet would have been moving to the euro. The U.S. dollar
is in a sensitive period because we are a debtor nation now. Our currency is
still popular, but it's not backed up like it used to be. If oil, a very
solid commodity, is traded on the euro that could cause massive, almost
glacial, shifts in confidence in trading on the dollar. So one of the first
executive orders that Bush signed in May [2003] switched trading on Iraq's
oil back to the dollar."

Whatever the motives of these individuals were it is clear that they were in
direct conflict with the interests of American citizens. The unprecedented,
preemptive American invasion of a nation that never attacked us has resulted
in the slaughter of thousands of Iraqis, deaths of 500+ U.S. soldiers and
costs to the American taxpayers that will probably exceed 100 billion
dollars or over $300 per person. Such an act is a far more treasonous and
impeachable offense than even the charges leveled against former President
Bill Clinton for selling dual use technology to the Communist Chinese
military in exchange for millions of dollars in campaign contributions. If
we are to maintain a viable federal government, President George W. Bush and
the officials who orchestrated this deception must be held accountable to
the American citizens.

Garland Favorito <garlandf at msn.com>
Out Nation Betrayed
www.blackforestpress.com/cat_law_politics.htm
-----------
Vision2020 Post: Ted Moffett

On 9/6/07, deb <debismith at moscow.com> wrote:
>
> Yep. As if Pat had done any research, and could have unwittingly entered
> into entertaining a thought that wasn't right wing, let alone her very own
> thoughts, ouch, ouch, stop, stop---oooooo spare me the spasms!!! ADVICE:
> just delete anything from Pat, spare youirself the repeat, and you will
> feel
> much better in the am, and she likely will fare better as well without
> your
> response... regurgitation of right wing crap is not fun, and she is
> impelled
> to do it way too often----that esophogus must be burning----------
> Debi R-S
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
> To: "Pat Kraut" <pkraut at moscow.com>
> Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
> Sent: Thursday, September 06, 2007 12:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Kucinich Introduces Impeachment Articles
> AgainstCheney
>
>
> > On 9/6/07, Pat Kraut <pkraut at moscow.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> What a colossal waste of time, money and energy...it is not going to
> >> happen
> >> and there is no reason why it should. We have some real issues to work
> on
> >> and this is not one of them but it sure helps me know more about who to
> >> vote
> >> for this election.
> >
> > Pat --
> >
> >
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070907/9aefa676/attachment-0001.html