Bush II Suppressed the 09/11 Report in order to blame Saddam

[ClosedCaption]

Uncensored is going with an interesting strategy. They found several officials who lied and made a connection with Iraq. But Uncensored says that none of their statements have anything to do with the Commander in Chief. He's just the Commander in Chief not someones boss or leader. Lol

 

[initforme]

In the end how did we end up invading iraq when bin laden was the culprit? Congress voting for iraq was wrong including clinton. Definition of sham.

 

[ClosedCaption]

In the end how did we end up invading iraq when bin laden was the culprit? Congress voting for iraq was wrong including clinton. Definition of sham.

This is how


Topics of the Statements. The 237 misleading statements can be divided into
four categories. The five officials made 11 statements that claimed that Iraq
posed an urgent threat; 81 statements that exaggerated Iraq’s nuclear activities; 84
statements that overstated Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons capabilities;
and 61 statements that misrepresented Iraq’s ties to al Qaeda.

 

[Londoner]

Washington frequently misrepresents what it is doing for a billion reasons, the majority of which can't be guessed at.

The fact that Republicans both trusted the official story on Iraq, and the fact that they believed Washington has the competence to nation build without making things worse is all you need to know about their true philosophy on government power.

We know the Dems are pushovers for giving government power, but nobody grows government power, surveillance and budgets more than a Republican preaching national security.

 

[Contumacious]

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t "pile on." Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did."


.

We were clearly sending mixed signals as the State Department warned that we were against violence. I'm sure Saddam took that as a good sign. Just like the mixed signal we sent when it was discovered and reported that he had gassed that Kurdish village. Did we sanction him? Take away his favored Nation trading status? Nope, just more mixed signals.

It was NEVER discovered that Saddam gassed a Kurdish Village


Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Scott C Pelletiere
War College


.

 

[ShaklesOfBigGov]

The Saudis Did 9/11

That's what the 28 pages tell us

Why did our government cover up this shocking evidence for so long?

The reason is because they had no desire to retaliate against the real perpetrators of 9/11. Instead, as we now know, they were determined to pin the blame on Saddam Hussein: indeed, the Bush administration pressed this talking point relentlessly, until it was forced to backtrack. We attacked Iraq, in the words of neocon grise eminenceand top Bush administration official Paul Wolfowitz, because it was “doable.” A years long neoconservative campaign to target Iraq gained new impetus in the wake of 9/11, and the administration and its journalistic camarilla pushed the lie that Iraq was behind the attack. The evidence that the Saudis were involved had to be suppressed – because the Bush administration’s war plans depended on it."


.

President George W Bush believed Iraq had WMDs, a belief ORIGINALLY started in 1998 with then President Clinton's belief in the need to remove Saddam and supported through the opinion of a number of Democrats to include Hillary Clinton.


A LIST OF FACTS SURROUNDING IRAQ

Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Declares that it should be the policy of the United States to seek to remove the Saddam Hussein regime from power in Iraq and to replace it with a democratic government.

H.R.4655 - 105th Congress (1997-1998): Iraq Liberation Act of 1998

http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/?pid=55205


"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.

"There is no doubt that . 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 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, Dec, 5, 2001.

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

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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.

"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. 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."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002


Now the war with Iraq ended and the push for inspections began under President George H W Bush. Had President Clinton enforced UN Resolution inspections on Saddam, after all Clinton DID have 8 years from which to do so, then the UN as well as the public would know where Iraq stood on WMDs well before 9-11 even occurred. However, much like the first World Trade Center attack, much like the Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia, the U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, as well as the USS Cole Bombing, nothing would ever get done.

 

[BlindBoo]

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t "pile on." Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did."


.

We were clearly sending mixed signals as the State Department warned that we were against violence. I'm sure Saddam took that as a good sign. Just like the mixed signal we sent when it was discovered and reported that he had gassed that Kurdish village. Did we sanction him? Take away his favored Nation trading status? Nope, just more mixed signals.

It was NEVER discovered that Saddam gassed a Kurdish Village


Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Scott C Pelletiere
War College


.

Sure thing.


U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

 

[Contumacious]

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t "pile on." Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did."


.

We were clearly sending mixed signals as the State Department warned that we were against violence. I'm sure Saddam took that as a good sign. Just like the mixed signal we sent when it was discovered and reported that he had gassed that Kurdish village. Did we sanction him? Take away his favored Nation trading status? Nope, just more mixed signals.

It was NEVER discovered that Saddam gassed a Kurdish Village


Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Scott C Pelletiere
War College


.

Sure thing.


U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

"According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

From your article:


According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story."


.

 

[LaDexter]

In the end how did we end up invading iraq when bin laden was the culprit?

Follow Hillary supporter Dianne Feinstein, who was for an invasion of Iraq for 20 years until it happened. She spearheaded the debate in the Senate, gave the final push with a floor speech thunderously cheered by Hillary, Schumer, and the rest of the AIPAC funded traitors.

Iraq is all about THE PROMISED LAND, Ch1 of Book of Joshua. There, God tells Joshua the borders of country ISRAEL, the Promised Land, which includes "river Euphrates" (v4), Israel's NE border. Now does it make sense? The Iraq War was the start of the second Crusades... to re-conquer the Promised Land for Israel... and bring Jesus back to life via Book of Revelations ("and the stars fell from the sky like fig leaves" - author of Revelations doesn't know was a STAR is.... thinks it is tiny tiny tiny)

 

[BlindBoo]

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t "pile on." Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did."


.

We were clearly sending mixed signals as the State Department warned that we were against violence. I'm sure Saddam took that as a good sign. Just like the mixed signal we sent when it was discovered and reported that he had gassed that Kurdish village. Did we sanction him? Take away his favored Nation trading status? Nope, just more mixed signals.

It was NEVER discovered that Saddam gassed a Kurdish Village


Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Scott C Pelletiere
War College


.

Sure thing.


U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

"According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

From your article:


According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story."


.

Iran lacked the evidence that the US had. The CIA knew it's ally Iraq, was using chemical weapons.

 

[LaDexter]

Iran lacked the evidence that the US had. The CIA knew it's ally Iraq, was using chemical weapons.

A good piece of advice - if you have no clue, shut up until you get one.

The CIA was behind 911. The CIA, under Tenet, knew Saddam wasn't doing jack. The CIA just wanted Iraq's land for ISRAEL, and told whatever lies it needed to get that invasion underway.

Look who was really HAPPY about the worst ever traitor to run the CIA...

Former CIA Director George Tenet Presented With ADL'S Highest Honor

"Palm Beach, FL, February 11, 2005 … Citing his career accomplishments in intelligence, national security and international affairs and his commitment to diversity issues and anti-bias training in the workplace, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) presented former CIA Director George J. Tenet with its highest honor, the America's Democratic Legacy Award

"All of us, as citizens of this great country (meaning ISRAEL), were incredibly fortunate to have our national security and intelligence operations in such skilled, knowledgeable and capable hands," said Abraham H. Foxman, ADL National Director. "George Tenet is one of the most warm, gracious men any of us have ever met, and while I am not suggesting he conducted the CIA's vital business in the full glare of the public spotlight, he opened it up more than any director in its history or that of its predecessor, the OSS."

"In a videotaped greeting from Israel, Avi Dichter, Director of the Shin Bet, Israel's internal security service, offered his personal congratulations and wished Mr. Tenet well. "You are certainly worthy of this honor," said Mr. Dichter. "I have learned to appreciate you as the head of an intelligence organization at a time of difficulty for both the United States and Israel. Thank you, George, for your great contribution to the world's intelligence community (thank you for lying your ass off to get the Americans to do our wars for us)."

 

[Contumacious]

First, we never accused Glaspie of diplomatic incompetence, and we certainly didn’t "pile on." Here’s what we actually said in our 2003 piece:

In a now famous interview with the Iraqi leader, U.S. Ambassador April Glaspie told Saddam, ‘[W]e have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.’ The U.S. State Department had earlier told Saddam that Washington had ‘no special defense or security commitments to Kuwait.’ The United States may not have intended to give Iraq a green light, but that is effectively what it did."


.

We were clearly sending mixed signals as the State Department warned that we were against violence. I'm sure Saddam took that as a good sign. Just like the mixed signal we sent when it was discovered and reported that he had gassed that Kurdish village. Did we sanction him? Take away his favored Nation trading status? Nope, just more mixed signals.

It was NEVER discovered that Saddam gassed a Kurdish Village


Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department's claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.


Scott C Pelletiere
War College


.

Sure thing.


U.S. officials have long denied acquiescing to Iraqi chemical attacks, insisting that Hussein’s government never announced he was going to use the weapons. But retired Air Force Col. Rick Francona, who was a military attaché in Baghdad during the 1988 strikes, paints a different picture.

"The Iraqis never told us that they intended to use nerve gas. They didn’t have to. We already knew," he told Foreign Policy.

"According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story.

Exclusive: CIA Files Prove America Helped Saddam as He Gassed Iran

From your article:


According to recently declassified CIA documents and interviews with former intelligence officials like Francona, the U.S. had firm evidence of Iraqi chemical attacks beginning in 1983. At the time, Iran was publicly alleging that illegal chemical attacks were carried out on its forces, and was building a case to present to the United Nations. But it lacked the evidence implicating Iraq, much of which was contained in top secret reports and memoranda sent to the most senior intelligence officials in the U.S. government. The CIA declined to comment for this story."


.

Iran lacked the evidence that the US had. The CIA knew it's ally Iraq, was using chemical weapons.

Produce a LINK to the CIA documents NOT to a third party's opinion.


.

 

[LaDexter]

Who could possibly trust any "CIA Document" from Tenet's era??

 

[Contumacious]

Who could possibly trust any "CIA Document" from Tenet's era??

Ditto


Slam-Dunk Tenet

.