General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsBush and His Aides Made 935 False Statements about Iraq In the 2 Years After 9/11
Given the Republican obsession with Benghazi talking points, its time for a very specific flashback. In 2008, two non partisan groups released a study that determined that President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001.
These statements were part of a deliberate campaign, according to the study conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and the Fund for Independence in Journalism. They concluded, The false statements dramatically increased in August 2002, with congressional consideration of a war resolution, then escalated through the mid-term elections and spiked even higher from January 2003 to the eve of the invasion
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.
..................
An investigation into the administrations use of the intelligence was delayed for three years due to Republicans claiming it wasnt as important (Senator Roberts, R-KS) as other pending items. Phase two of the investigation was released in 2007, but not all of the report was released. It determined, our Committee has concluded that the Administration made significant claims that were not supported by the intelligence.
................
MORE:
http://www.politicususa.com/bush-aides-935-false-statements-iraq-2-years-911.html
http://www.publicintegrity.org/2008/01/23/5641/false-pretenses
ProSense
(116,464 posts)"Bush and His Aides Made 935 False Statements about Iraq In the 2 Years After 9/11"
...they launched an illegal war and committed other war crimes.
Pressure Mounts On Obama To Investigate Torture
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022752702
OnyxCollie
(9,958 posts)Those are policy differences, and policy differences are not to be criminalized.
Your NewSpeak dictionary is out of date.
beijingyank
(2 posts)Oh yes, no question, Bush and his 911 Neocon gang are mass murdering war criminals.
hrmjustin
(71,265 posts)SoCalDem
(103,856 posts)Our Dem leaders were cowed into silence or timid "attacks", followed by mea-culpas for daring to ask.
It's been very apparent that since 1998 (and even before), the media (in general) has NOT been "on our side", even a little bit.
"Scandals" (faux or otherwise) are the lifeblood of media, and when there is not a ferocious pushback (when we are attacked) or a deadly onslaught when we are attacking them, we lose (historically speaking).
The offenses of GWB's administration have been whitewashed by time, and there are plenty of people around who believe the spin they were fed at the time, and no amount of correcting will fix it or change their minds.
niyad
(113,930 posts)Sheepshank
(12,504 posts)Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)Q: The most popular question on your own website is related to this. On change.gov it comes from Bob Fertik of New York City and he asks,
Will you appoint a special prosecutor ideally Patrick Fitzgerald to independently investigate the greatest crimes of the Bush administration, including torture and warrantless wiretapping.
OBAMA:Were still evaluating how were going to approach the whole issue of interrogations, detentions, and so forth. And obviously were going to be looking at past practices and I dont believe that anybody is above the law.
On the other hand, I also have a belief that we need to look forward as opposed to looking backwards.
My orientation is
going to be moving forward.
http://thinkprogress.org/security/2009/01/11/34654/obama-special-prosecutor-torture/
That Door is closed and was never opened
Lenomsky
(340 posts)President Bush and his top aides made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001.
I demand a recount as surely it's a few more (thousand).
indepat
(20,899 posts)their supporters and an indifferent public willingly accept.
Blue Owl
(50,575 posts)n/t
rhett o rick
(55,981 posts)And the answer cant be that it's better for the nation because it isnt.
spanone
(135,929 posts)Initech
(100,144 posts)Despite the fact that four out of five Republicans don't actually know where Benghazi is.
Brother Buzz
(36,501 posts)About Iraq on the Record
Presented by Rep. Henry A. Waxman
On March 19, 2003, U.S. forces began military operations in Iraq. Addressing the nation about the purpose of the war on the day the bombing began, President Bush stated: The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder. Two years later, many doubts have been raised regarding the Administrations assertions about the threat posed by Iraq.
Prepared at the direction of Rep. Henry A. Waxman, Iraq on the Record is a searchable collection of 237 specific misleading statements made by Bush Administration officials about the threat posed by Iraq. It contains statements that were misleading based on what was known to the Administration at the time the statements were made. It does not include statements that appear mistaken only in hindsight. If a statement was an accurate reflection of U.S. intelligence at the time it was made, it was excluded even if it now appears erroneous. For more information on how the statements were selected, see the full methodology. The Iraq on the Record Report is a comprehensive examination of these statements.
http://oversight-archive.waxman.house.gov/IraqOnTheRecord/pdf_admin_iraq_on_the_record_rep.pdf
Uncle Joe
(58,545 posts)Thanks for the thread, kpete.