Study: False statements preceded war

[SLCPUNK]

By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.

"The cumulative effect of these false statements ? amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts ? was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists ? indeed, even some entire news organizations ? have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq," it said.

[polluxlm]

Complicity to commit genocide I call it. Should be jailed for life on grounds of treason.

[SLCPUNK]

Complicity to commit genocide I call it. Should be jailed for life on grounds of treason.

I agree with you for a change.

[The Dog]

Unfortunately this will barely be a blip on peoples radars.   The country is just completely war weary and is now focused on the economy.

while this doesn't shock me, it still is outrageous.  and the most mind blowing part is they are able to get away with it.

[Jessica]

I do hope Bush can be sentenced once he is not president anymore, because not only did he lie ( all of europe knew as we knew at the time of his father's first incursion there) to HIS nation, but he is also a criminal of war.

He literally invaded a country and dozens of thousands of people have been raped, injured, massacred.

And the country didn't ask for anything.

And don't give me Sadam bullshit, because a commando of 6 people could have done it discreetly after 1 or 2 years infiltration in the iraki police.

[loretian]

I don't really understand the point of this article.  Yeah, we all know there were no WMDs in Iraq by the time we got in there.  Clearly the information the Bush administration presented was false, in my regards, that we all know about.

However, isn't the real question whether the Bush administration actually knew they were false, and why they made those statements?  I'm just saying, that's a separate argument and only the real way someone can argue whether or not Bush should be impeached, or whatever.

I think the study would actually be more interesting if they included the number of false statements about the Iraq war made by those people who now completely oppose it.  Or, how about the number of statements made by those same people arguing or contradicting the information we now know is false before the war started.  That would actually be interesting and informative...

[SLCPUNK]

I think the study would actually be more interesting if they included the number of false statements about the Iraq war made by those people who now completely oppose it.  Or, how about the number of statements made by those same people arguing or contradicting the information we now know is false before the war started.  That would actually be interesting and informative...

Well that's quite interesting.

What type of statements would those be? That we should have allowed more time for the inspectors to do their jobs? That Iraq had nothing to do with 9-11? Or that they were not threatening us? Those false statements? 

[fuckin crazy]

"The first casualty of war is truth"

I do hope Bush can be sentenced once he is not president anymore

I think that he will face indictments 5 or 10 years after he leaves office. Though, I doubt it will be for war crimes. The administration is pressing for changes now that will absolve their culpability for crimes committed.

... not only did he lie ( all of europe knew as we knew at the time of his father's first incursion there)

That is two separate issues. The former was a UN action ... fully justified. Once the goals of the action was fulfilled, Operations were suspended, articles were signed, and the fruits of those instruments were enacted.

[Tatiana Kudrin]

( all of europe knew as we knew at the time of his father's first incursion there)

I don't agree with this Jessica. I was pretty young at the time but it seemed justified to me... and it still seems. 
On the contrary, Bush Jr's offensive appeared to be a total nonsense from the very beginning. To me, it was like he was trying to comfort his  country with a taste for revenge after 09/11.... but it was aimed at the wrong person. He couldn't  get Bin Laden ( !)  so he chose to fight something else. Hussein was a dictator, he had lots of people killed...Yeah, he was some kind of monster. But he hadn't done anything offensive. Many countries are potentially dangerous because they own weapons. And some are not very US friendly. Yet Bush didn't regard them as a threat... and he did all he could to justify himself. The more  your motivations are vague and irrelevant, the more you need to work on convincing other people.

[SLCPUNK]

Anybody catch 60 minutes last night? They had the FBI field officer on there that worked Saddam for months while under US custody. Saddam told him that he thought OBL was a fanatic and had nothing to do with him. He also said the UN destroyed most of his weapons in the 90's and what they missed he destroyed. He went on to say that he did not think Bush would invade, but rather use some sort of air campaign instead. He also stated that his bravado was to fend off surrounding countries, in particular Iran.

Just as I've said for years....chumps.

[Bodhi]

By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer 44 minutes ago

A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.

The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.

"The cumulative effect of these false statements ? amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts ? was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists ? indeed, even some entire news organizations ? have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq," it said.

so where in this article does it say that Saddam DID NOT prevent weapons inspectors from going into certain areas of Iraq??  Had he done that, all the false statements Bush supposedly made before the war would not have been enough to get this country behind him to go to war....

[Bodhi]

I do hope Bush can be sentenced once he is not president anymore, because not only did he lie ( all of europe knew as we knew at the time of his father's first incursion there) to HIS nation, but he is also a criminal of war.

He literally invaded a country and dozens of thousands of people have been raped, injured, massacred.

And the country didn't ask for anything.

And don't give me Sadam bullshit, because a commando of 6 people could have done it discreetly after 1 or 2 years infiltration in the iraki police.

you scare the shit out of me......

[SLCPUNK]

so where in this article does it say that Saddam DID NOT prevent weapons inspectors from going into certain areas of Iraq??  Had he done that, all the false statements Bush supposedly made before the war would not have been enough to get this country behind him to go to war....

You're way off on the facts. Saddam was working with Blix, and Bush kicked the inspectors out.

[SLCPUNK]

you scare the shit out of me......

Psychos like you scare the shit out of me.

[The Dog]

Clowns scare me 

[SLCPUNK]

Clowns scare me 

I hate clowns and midgets.

[lynn1961]

I don't usually reply to this stuff because I don't know where to begin - it's so much to think about!!  But, this didn't surprise me, at all.  And, maybe this sound "simple minded" or like, I didn't get the point, but all I've ever thought is, "Why did we attack Iraq, again?  Weapons of Mass what?  What happened to the OBL thing again?  Where is he now?  Wasn't that what it was about in the first place?  What happened?  Did I miss something?"  And here we are, almost 6 yrs later.......the only thing that ever made even half way sense, to me, was when Hussain was brought down - because he was a scary fucker when I was in high school.  We still haven't found THE one who was supposedly responsible for the biggest attack on our country.  Kind of get the feeling that it no longer matters.  Security was huge, after that, such as, at airports, etc.  We've become way lax again.  Sitting ducks........   

ok - time for another sip of wine.  Aaahh..

[The Dog]

Anybody catch 60 minutes last night? They had the FBI field officer on there that worked Saddam for months while under US custody. Saddam told him that he thought OBL was a fanatic and had nothing to do with him. He also said the UN destroyed most of his weapons in the 90's and what they missed he destroyed. He went on to say that he did not think Bush would invade, but rather use some sort of air campaign instead. He also stated that his bravado was to fend off surrounding countries, in particular Iran.

Just as I've said for years....chumps.

I saw it (or most of it).  Where was this guy for the 2004 election??

[fuckin crazy]

As bad as Hussein was, he was a secular bulwark against Islamic extremists in the region.

[sandman]

the 60 minutes interview actually supports Bush. it describes how Saddam was not fully cooperating, and was actually TRYING to make everyone believe that he had WMDs.

he also stated he planned to start a WMD program again.

from the AP...

NEW YORK - Saddam Hussein allowed the world to believe he had weapons of mass destruction to deter rival Iran and did not think the United States would stage a major invasion, according to an FBI interrogator who questioned the Iraqi leader after his capture.
 
Saddam expected only a limited aerial attack by the United States and thought he could remain in control, the FBI special agent, George Piro, told CBS's "60 Minutes" program in an interview to be broadcast Sunday.

"He told me he initially miscalculated ... President Bush's intentions," said Piro. "He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998 ... a four-day aerial attack."

"He survived that one and he was willing to accept that type of attack," Piro said.

The Associated Press spoke to a close aide of Saddam's in August 2003, who said that Saddam did not expect a U.S. invasion and deliberately kept the world guessing about his weapons program, although he already had gotten rid of it.

Saddam publicly denied having unconventional weapons before the U.S. invasion, but prevented U.N. inspectors from working in the country from 1998 until 2002 and when they finally returned in November 2002, they often complained that Iraq wasn't fully cooperating.

Piro, a Lebanese-American who speaks Arabic, debriefed Saddam after he was found hiding in an underground hideout near his home city north of Baghdad in December 2003, nine months after the U.S. invasion.

Piro said Saddam also said that he wanted to keep up the illusion that he had the program in part because he thought it would deter a likely Iranian invasion.

"For him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam. He thought that (faking having the weapons) would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq," Piro told Scott Pelley of "60 Minutes."

Piro added that Saddam had the intention of restarting an Iraqi weapons program at the time, and had engineers available for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Piro also mentioned Saddam's revelation during questioning that what pushed him to invade Kuwait in 1990 was a dishonorable swipe at Iraqi women made by the Kuwaiti leader, Sheik Jaber Al Ahmed Al Sabah.

During the buildup to the invasion, Iraq had accused Kuwait of flooding the world market with oil and demanded compensation for oil produced from a disputed area on the border of the two countries.

Piro said that Al Sabah told the foreign minister of Iraq during a discussion aimed at resolving some of those conflicts that "he would not stop doing what he was doing until he turned every Iraqi woman into a $10 prostitute. And that really sealed it for him, to invade Kuwait," said Piro.