Bush Fires Back at Critics of Iraq War
By Warren Vieth and James Gerstenzang
LA Times Staff Writers
2:19 PM PST, November 11, 2005
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-111105bush_lat,0,1695012.story?coll=la-home-headlines
TOBYHANNA, Pa. — Knocked on the defensive over allegations that he launched the Iraq war based on faulty intelligence, President Bush accused his critics today of trying to rewrite the history of how and why the war began. [JR: REEEALLY? I thought thats what he has been doing ever since HE ILLEGALLY INVADED IRAQ?]
Launching a White House offensive to counter growing criticism of the war effort, Bush told soldiers and civilians that Democrats should reassure American troops that the nation stands behind them rather than revive a divisive debate over the war's origins.
"While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the story of how that war began,"[???] Bush said in a Veterans Day address inside a military warehouse at Tobyhanna Army Depot in northeast Pennsylvania.
Bush did not respond directly to criticism that the intelligence that Saddam Hussein was seeking to develop nuclear and other unconventional weapons was wrong.
Rather, he said that others, including Democrats who are now highly critical of his decision to invade Iraq, had cited that same intelligence in announcing their support for the war in 2003. [WHICH CAME THROUGH THE WHITE HOUSE!]
His aggressive rhetoric reflected growing White House concern about signs that the public's confidence in the president is slipping and that misgivings about Iraq are among the principle causes of his credibility problems.
The White House campaign also demonstrates the extent to which Democrats, many of whom initially supported the war effort, have managed to frame the debate on their terms, and force the president to defend past actions rather than pursue a new agenda.
Democrats seemed unfazed by Bush's counterattack, which set off a daylong series of rhetorical volleys between the White House and its critics.
"It's time for the president to restore the trust of the American people in their leaders by coming clean about the war," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). "Today's speech didn't do that. It only further tarnished this White House and further damaged his presidency."
Hours later, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, under the heading "Setting the Record Straight," distributed by e-mail a reminder of two Kennedy votes opposing the authorization to use force against Hussein — one shortly before the first Gulf War began, and the second several months ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He also cited Kennedy's statements raising concern about Hussein and weapons of mass destruction.
The rare, direct response suggested the sensitivity the White House is showing to its critics, and demonstrated a heightened concern about the falling support for the war.
"It is regrettable that Sen. Kennedy has chosen Veterans Day to continue leveling baseless and false attacks that send the wrong signal to our troops and our enemy during a time of [HIS] war," McClellan said. "It is also regrettable that Sen. Kennedy has found more time to say negative things about President Bush than he ever did about Saddam Hussein. If America were to follow Sen. Kennedy's foreign policy, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, he would be oppressing and occupying Kuwait."
Bush also spoke harshly of Syrian President Bashar Assad. U.N. investigators suspect that three of Assad's relatives, including Gen. Asef Shawkat, the president's brother-in-law and head of Syrian military intelligence, planned the bombing that assassinated former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri this year.
But most of Bush's remarks were focused on the administration's broader campaign against terrorism and its relationship to the administration's decision to invade Iraq and topple Hussein's government in 2003.
"Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war," he added. "These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs. They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessments of Saddam Hussein." [NOT SO]
In addition, Bush said, his critics know that the United Nations approved "more than a dozen resolutions" that cited Hussein's weapons programs.
The bipartisan Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction — the panel headed by Judge Laurence H. Silberman and former Sen. Charles S. Robb (D-Va.) that examined the pre-war intelligence — reported that U.S. intelligence "was dead wrong in almost all of its prewar judgments" about Iraq's illicit weapons.
"This was a major intelligence failure," the panel members wrote.
However, it found no evidence that White House officials or other administration figures pressured intelligence analysts to shade or change their reports for political reasons.
Bush spoke as questions about the start of the war — in particular, the reasons he cited for seeking to overthrow Hussein — have taken greater hold across the country.
Several polls have shown skepticism about whether Bush told the truth in outlining his case for war.
An ABC News/Washington Post survey, conducted Oct. 30 through Nov. 2, found that 44% of those surveyed thought the administration had told the American public what it believed to be true, and 55% thought it had intentionally misled the public.
Other surveys have turned up doubts within the public about the ethics of the Bush administration. An Associated Press survey made public today found that 57% of those questioned did not think the administration has high ethical standards and the same percentage said Bush himself is not honest. [Thats why all members of Bush's administration must attend classes on ethics.]
The polls follow several reports from former administration insiders raising questions about the prewar intelligence, and how Bush and his senior advisors used it.
Lawrence B. Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell from 2002 to the start of this year, wrote in an op-ed article in the Los Angeles Times last month that "some of the most important decisions about U.S. national security — including vital decisions about postwar Iraq — were made by a secretive, little-known cabal" made up of a small group led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
In addition, Robin Raphel, the State Department's coordinator for Iraq assistance, has said that the invasion's timing was driven by "clear political pressure."
In his speech, Bush cited his Democratic opponent in the 2004 presidential election, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, "who explained his position to support the resolution [on the use of force in Iraq] in Congress this way: 'When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our society.'"
Bush added: "That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
"The stakes in the global war on terror are too high and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges," Bush said. "These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will."
In a statement, Kerry said the administration "misled a nation into war by cherry-picking intelligence and stretching the truth beyond recognition."
He pointed to the effort to discredit a leading critic of the administration, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, in which Cheney's then-chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., played a central role, and said: "That's why Scooter Libby has been indicted…. It's a dangerous day for our national security when an administration's word is no good."
Vieth reported from Pennsylvania and Gerstenzang from Washington.
[JR: All were duped, even at the highest levels. The "intelligence", if it can be found in Washington was flawed, just like the rest of Washington and the embedded media, which must means they were all in bed together.]
Bush Takes Aim At Iraq Critics
WJZ - 35 minutes ago
(CBS) TOBYHANNA, Pa. President Bush fired back at critics of the war in Iraq on Friday, accusing them of trying to rewrite history and charging that their actions "send the wrong signal to our troops.".
In ...Bush assails Iraq critics as skewing war history all 731 related »
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I
can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will
not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do,
I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God,
I will do." - Edward Everett Hale
By Warren Vieth and James Gerstenzang
LA Times Staff Writers
2:19 PM PST, November 11, 2005
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-111105bush_lat,0,1695012.story?coll=la-home-headlines
TOBYHANNA, Pa. — Knocked on the defensive over allegations that he launched the Iraq war based on faulty intelligence, President Bush accused his critics today of trying to rewrite the history of how and why the war began. [JR: REEEALLY? I thought thats what he has been doing ever since HE ILLEGALLY INVADED IRAQ?]
Launching a White House offensive to counter growing criticism of the war effort, Bush told soldiers and civilians that Democrats should reassure American troops that the nation stands behind them rather than revive a divisive debate over the war's origins.
"While it is perfectly legitimate to criticize my decision or the conduct of the war, it is deeply irresponsible to rewrite the story of how that war began,"[???] Bush said in a Veterans Day address inside a military warehouse at Tobyhanna Army Depot in northeast Pennsylvania.
Bush did not respond directly to criticism that the intelligence that Saddam Hussein was seeking to develop nuclear and other unconventional weapons was wrong.
Rather, he said that others, including Democrats who are now highly critical of his decision to invade Iraq, had cited that same intelligence in announcing their support for the war in 2003. [WHICH CAME THROUGH THE WHITE HOUSE!]
His aggressive rhetoric reflected growing White House concern about signs that the public's confidence in the president is slipping and that misgivings about Iraq are among the principle causes of his credibility problems.
The White House campaign also demonstrates the extent to which Democrats, many of whom initially supported the war effort, have managed to frame the debate on their terms, and force the president to defend past actions rather than pursue a new agenda.
Democrats seemed unfazed by Bush's counterattack, which set off a daylong series of rhetorical volleys between the White House and its critics.
"It's time for the president to restore the trust of the American people in their leaders by coming clean about the war," said Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.). "Today's speech didn't do that. It only further tarnished this White House and further damaged his presidency."
Hours later, White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan, under the heading "Setting the Record Straight," distributed by e-mail a reminder of two Kennedy votes opposing the authorization to use force against Hussein — one shortly before the first Gulf War began, and the second several months ahead of the 2003 invasion of Iraq. He also cited Kennedy's statements raising concern about Hussein and weapons of mass destruction.
The rare, direct response suggested the sensitivity the White House is showing to its critics, and demonstrated a heightened concern about the falling support for the war.
"It is regrettable that Sen. Kennedy has chosen Veterans Day to continue leveling baseless and false attacks that send the wrong signal to our troops and our enemy during a time of [HIS] war," McClellan said. "It is also regrettable that Sen. Kennedy has found more time to say negative things about President Bush than he ever did about Saddam Hussein. If America were to follow Sen. Kennedy's foreign policy, Saddam Hussein would not only still be in power, he would be oppressing and occupying Kuwait."
Bush also spoke harshly of Syrian President Bashar Assad. U.N. investigators suspect that three of Assad's relatives, including Gen. Asef Shawkat, the president's brother-in-law and head of Syrian military intelligence, planned the bombing that assassinated former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri this year.
But most of Bush's remarks were focused on the administration's broader campaign against terrorism and its relationship to the administration's decision to invade Iraq and topple Hussein's government in 2003.
"Some Democrats and anti-war critics are now claiming we manipulated the intelligence and misled the American people about why we went to war," he added. "These critics are fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community's judgments related to Iraq's weapons programs. They also know that intelligence agencies from around the world agreed with our assessments of Saddam Hussein." [NOT SO]
In addition, Bush said, his critics know that the United Nations approved "more than a dozen resolutions" that cited Hussein's weapons programs.
The bipartisan Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction — the panel headed by Judge Laurence H. Silberman and former Sen. Charles S. Robb (D-Va.) that examined the pre-war intelligence — reported that U.S. intelligence "was dead wrong in almost all of its prewar judgments" about Iraq's illicit weapons.
"This was a major intelligence failure," the panel members wrote.
However, it found no evidence that White House officials or other administration figures pressured intelligence analysts to shade or change their reports for political reasons.
Bush spoke as questions about the start of the war — in particular, the reasons he cited for seeking to overthrow Hussein — have taken greater hold across the country.
Several polls have shown skepticism about whether Bush told the truth in outlining his case for war.
An ABC News/Washington Post survey, conducted Oct. 30 through Nov. 2, found that 44% of those surveyed thought the administration had told the American public what it believed to be true, and 55% thought it had intentionally misled the public.
Other surveys have turned up doubts within the public about the ethics of the Bush administration. An Associated Press survey made public today found that 57% of those questioned did not think the administration has high ethical standards and the same percentage said Bush himself is not honest. [Thats why all members of Bush's administration must attend classes on ethics.]
The polls follow several reports from former administration insiders raising questions about the prewar intelligence, and how Bush and his senior advisors used it.
Lawrence B. Wilkerson, who was chief of staff to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell from 2002 to the start of this year, wrote in an op-ed article in the Los Angeles Times last month that "some of the most important decisions about U.S. national security — including vital decisions about postwar Iraq — were made by a secretive, little-known cabal" made up of a small group led by Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld.
In addition, Robin Raphel, the State Department's coordinator for Iraq assistance, has said that the invasion's timing was driven by "clear political pressure."
In his speech, Bush cited his Democratic opponent in the 2004 presidential election, Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts, "who explained his position to support the resolution [on the use of force in Iraq] in Congress this way: 'When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat and a grave threat to our society.'"
Bush added: "That's why more than 100 Democrats in the House and the Senate, who had access to the same intelligence, voted to support removing Saddam Hussein from power.
"The stakes in the global war on terror are too high and the national interest is too important for politicians to throw out false charges," Bush said. "These baseless attacks send the wrong signal to our troops and to an enemy that is questioning America's will."
In a statement, Kerry said the administration "misled a nation into war by cherry-picking intelligence and stretching the truth beyond recognition."
He pointed to the effort to discredit a leading critic of the administration, former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV, in which Cheney's then-chief of staff, I. Lewis Libby Jr., played a central role, and said: "That's why Scooter Libby has been indicted…. It's a dangerous day for our national security when an administration's word is no good."
Vieth reported from Pennsylvania and Gerstenzang from Washington.
[JR: All were duped, even at the highest levels. The "intelligence", if it can be found in Washington was flawed, just like the rest of Washington and the embedded media, which must means they were all in bed together.]
Bush Takes Aim At Iraq Critics
WJZ - 35 minutes ago
(CBS) TOBYHANNA, Pa. President Bush fired back at critics of the war in Iraq on Friday, accusing them of trying to rewrite history and charging that their actions "send the wrong signal to our troops.".
In ...Bush assails Iraq critics as skewing war history all 731 related »
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"I am only one, but I am one. I cannot do everything, but I
can do something. And because I cannot do everything, I will
not refuse to do the something that I can do. What I can do,
I should do. And what I should do, by the grace of God,
I will do." - Edward Everett Hale
- Patriot Action Alert: The TRUTH about Iraq's WMD —FederalistPatriot.US, Fri Nov 11 23:59
Main Page -
Saturday, 11/12/05
Message Board by American Patriot Friends Network [APFN]
