Dems lie WRT "imminent threat"---talking point that won't go away

[buycitgo]

one of the pugs' "best"--read last--defenses of the WMD justification for invading Iraq, is, of course, to turn the tables and portray administration critics as liars.

they do this by repeating again and again that Bush never, ever used the phrase "imminent threat" in characterizing Saddams various weapons program (the "mushroom cloud" now reduced to "program-related activities").

it's apparently effective in shaping the disccourse, cause I hear it all the time on talk radio, and occasionally on the tube.

point is, it's a load of huge BS, as, even if Bush himself didn't say it, his minions have, at the very least, acceded to the idea that SH's threat was, indeed, imminent, and the dems who allow their pug counterparts to insist that he NEVER said it should be able to come back with THESE quotes from the likes of Ari and Dan Bartlett, WH communications director.

Last October, a reporter put this to Ari Fleischer: “Ari, the president has been saying that the threat from Iraq is imminent, that we have to act now to disarm the country of its weapons of mass destruction, and that it has to allow the U.N. inspectors in, unfettered, no conditions, so forth.”

Fleischer’s answer? “Yes.”

In January, Wolf Blitzer asked Dan Bartlett: “Is an imminent threat to U.S. interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home.”
Bartlett’s answer? “Well, of course he is.”

A month after the war, another reporter asked Fleischer, “Well, we went to war, didn’t we, to find these — because we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn’t that true?”

Fleischer’s answer? “Absolutely.”

these from JM Marshall
http://216.239.37.104/search?q=cache:rXcecjP5-UcJ:www.hillnews.com/marshall/110503.aspx++bush+called+Iraq+imminent+threat&hl=en&start=2&ie=UTF-8

there's also one from Rumsfeld, from september, 2002:

Testifying before the House armed services committee, he added: "No terrorist state poses a greater and more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein.



googled that, but google's down for me now (if it's working for you, try Rumsfeld+Iraq+immediate+threat)

so, how bout this, from Cheney (August, 2002).......MORTAL threat

is that more, or less, dire than a mere imminent threat?

“What we must not do in the face of a mortal threat is give in to wishful thinking or willful blindness.”

so as the admin goes around, trying to spin David Kay's resignation in a positive light (clueless moron Tom Brokaw characterized hard-right SAIC employee today on MTP as nonpartisan), I'm sure this ridiculous attempt to turn any WMD discussion in their favor will surface once again.

Dems should be prepared with the above quotes to SLAP pugs down when they try to put them on the defensive....I'm so sick of them getting away with this unchallenged EVERY single time...don't dems have ANY research groups backing them up with the most superficial talking points?

[buycitgo]

1. more unadulterated, since refuted BS from Rumsfeld

"(The Iraqis) have amassed large clandestine stocks of biological weapons, including anthrax and possibly smallpox," he said.

He said Iraq also has a large and active program to develop nuclear weapons. In 1991, the Iraqis "were far closer" to building a nuclear weapon than anyone had thought, Rumsfeld said

then, he blows apart his case for not believing the effectiveness of Blix, etal, in the third paragraph below:

American officials are concerned that even the most intrusive inspections would have difficulty getting at Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.

"His facilities are mobile; they have been widely dispersed … to a number of locations; (he has) vast underground networks and facilities, and sophisticated denial and deception techniques," Rumsfeld said. "In addition, (weapons and military facilities) have been placed in close proximity to hospitals, schools and mosques."

The secretary told the business leaders that inspections can be useful when the target country is cooperating. "The purpose of inspection is to validate something that the country to be inspected wants validated," Rumsfeld said. "Saddam Hussein's regime is not interested in disarming. It has demonstrated that over some 20 years."

http://www.defenselink.mil/news/Sep2002/n09272002_200209275.html

old stuff, but bears reiteration in the face of constant wingnut disingenuosness/outright lying

[judy]

2. You should see "Uncovered"...

There is a great montage of quotes by Smirk, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Condi and Powell that makes it so evident that they are liars...When I saw it people in the audience were laughing their heads off!
You can hear them use the same stock phrases, (like the "mushroom cloud" thing), contradict themselves, say "I never said there were WMDs" interspersed with them saying just that, etc.
If it wasn't so tragic, it would be just hilarious. It's like a SNL skit.

Why do we even talk about these people like they are normal?

[buycitgo]

3. good point, judy......one of these days, I'll see it

Karen Kwiatkowski, on thisishell, last year, talked about all this, from her perspective as an insider on the OSP. she's interveiwed in the movie, right?

then there's this fairly well-encompassing article about the run up from formerly "respected journalist" jason leopold, who's been relegated to the pages of Counterpunch for daring to expose the likes of Thomas White's Enron ties:

In just seven short months, beginning as early as February 2001, Bush administration officials said Iraq went from being a threat only to its own people to posing an imminent threat to the world. Indeed, in a Feb. 12, 2001 interview with the Fox News Channel Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said: "Iraq is probably not a nuclear threat at the present time." But Rumsfeld testified before the House Armed Services Committee on Sept. 18, 2002 that Iraq is close to acquiring the materials needed to build a nuclear bomb.

"Some have argued that the nuclear threat from Iraq is not imminent -- that Saddam is at least 5-7 years away from having nuclear weapons," Rumsfeld testified before the committee. "I would not be so certain... He has, at this moment, stockpiles chemical and biological weapons, and is pursuing nuclear weapons."

Rumsfeld never offered any evidence to support his claims, but his dire warnings of a nuclear catastrophe caused by Saddam Hussein was enough to convince most lawmakers, both Democrat and Republican, that Saddam's Iraq was doomed. Shortly after his remarks before the House Armed Services Committee, Congress passed a resolution authorizing President Bush to use "all appropriate means" to remove Saddam from power.

http://www.counterpunch.org/leopold06272003.html

[buycitgo]

4. did uncovered do anything with this page?

hard to top....it's been linked, repeated here a bunch of times

http://billmon.org.v.sabren.com/archives/000172.html

don't the dems ever use stuff like this?

it runs the gamut from this

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction.

Dick Cheney
Speech to VFW National Convention
August 26, 2002

to this

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.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003

to this
We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

to this But make no mistake -- as I said earlier -- we have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found.

Ari Fleischer
Press Briefing
April 10, 2003

to this
I'm not surprised if we begin to uncover the weapons program of Saddam Hussein -- because he had a weapons program.

George W. Bush
Remarks to Reporters
May 6, 2003

U.S. officials never expected that "we were going to open garages and find" weapons of mass destruction.

Condoleeza Rice
Reuters Interview
May 12, 2003


to this, with LOTS in between
It was a surprise to me then — it remains a surprise to me now — that we have not uncovered weapons, as you say, in some of the forward dispersal sites. Believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're simply not there.

Lt. Gen. James Conway, 1st Marine Expeditionary Force
Press Interview
May 30, 2003

and where were the media in all this?

just think back to those bad old days of Clinton admin disingenuousness. what would the press made of all these statements?

we'd never have heard the end...when will we start hearing the beginning?

oops, what am I thinking?