Sen. Roberts doubts there would have been a vote for war? Lets Email him!

[orleans]

This was said by ray mcgovern at the Thursday "meeting" with Conyers:

"RAY McGOVERN: Apropos your remark about Congressmen and Senators feeling misled, I would point out that even Senator Pat Roberts, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, no liberal he, has admitted that had he known some of the things that came out since, he has strong doubts as to whether there would have been a vote for war."
http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m12709&l=i&size=1&hd=0

Senator Pat Roberts is a republican senator from Kansas. He is on the committees for the armed services and ethics, and is also chairman for the intelligence committee.

HOWEVER, this statement is on his website, dated march 31, 2005:

"SENATOR ROBERTS REMARKS ON THE WMD COMMISSION REPORT
WASHINGTON, DC– U.S. Senator Pat Roberts today made the following statement:

“I don’t think there should be any doubt that we have now heard it all regarding prewar intelligence. I think that it would be a monumental waste of time to replow this ground any further."
http://intelligence.senate.gov/050331.htm

sounds to me as if roberts is on the verge of having a change of heart thanks to the DSM. maybe we should email him and encourage him to "replow" some of that ground--that it may not be a waste of time after all.

http://roberts.senate.gov/e-mail_pat.html

[orleans]

1. Can't we ask/demand that he reopen this investigation

now that Downing Street has hit???

[chaz4jazz]

2. I wrote him this

thank you for your deep thoughts concerning the congressional votes to support a war in iraq. as we now come to understand, this war was set up by this administration without the consultation of congress and that the "need" to overthrow saddam hussein was hatched a long time before the actual invasion and long before we were attacked by saudi and egyptian arabs. your thoughts that had you, and many other congrssional senators and representatives, known how the "books were being cooked" to make it look as though this awful conflict was necessary, that had you known that tens of thousands of american fighting men and women would be disabled and killed, that nearly a hundred thousand iraqi innocents would be injured, rendered homeless, starved, assaulted, raped, kidnapped and beheaded, you would never have supported this madness from buss, cheney and their minions. sir, please reconsider the kind of support you are rendering. I know that this president is a leader of your party - but country comes before party. if bush and the others lied to you, to the UN, to the american people, they need to be investigated and impeached and thrown in jail. it take a strong man or woman to face these "profiles in courage" but i believe you have already stepped over the line and would be willing to do the right thing.

for peace, for fairness, for love of the united states,

chuck ***** (veteran - 2 years - 1961-1963, us army)

[orleans]

6. thanks for writing to him

i really think he might be one of the keys to take this to another level!

[orleans]

3. okay, here is my email to roberts

Dear Senator Roberts,
I am very concerned about the Downing Street Memos that have come to light recently and the fact that this administration may have been misleading the people of this country and our Congress with the information they were giving us in order to start a war with Iraq.

I was reading a press release on your website that carried your remarks on the WMD Commission Report where you stated: "I don't think there should be any doubt that we have now heard it all regarding prewar intelligence. I think that it would be a monumental waste of time to replow this ground any further."

HOWEVER, in light of recent developments, specifically the Downing Street Memos, I believe that perhaps the American people and the Congress have not heard or learned all there is to know about how we went to war.

This past Thursday, at the "meeting" John Conyers held regarding the Downing Street Memos, before he walked a petition of over 550,000 signatures to the White House, Ray McGovern (former C.I.A. analyst) said that "Senator Pat Roberts, head of the Senate Intelligence Committee, no liberal he, has admitted that had he known some of the things that came out since, he has strong doubts as to whether there would have been a vote for war."

Greg Palast, journalist, wrote: February 2001: "Only one month after the first Bush-Cheney inauguration, the State Department's Pam Quanrud organizes a secret confab in California to make plans for the invasion of Iraq and removal of Saddam. US oil industry advisor Falah Aljibury and others are asked to interview would-be replacements for a new US-installed dictator. On BBC Television's Newsnight, Aljibury himself explained,"It is an invasion, but it will act like a coup. The original plan was to liberate Iraq from the Saddamists and from the regime.""

and

October/November 2001: "An easy military victory in Afghanistan emboldens then-Dep. Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz to convince the Administration to junk the State Department "coup" plan in favor of an invasion and occupation that could remake the economy of Iraq. And elaborate plan, ultimately summarized in a 101-page document, scopes out the "sale of all state enterprises" -- that is, most of the nation's assets, "… especially in the oil and supporting industries.""

and

Fall 2002: "Philip Carroll, former CEO of Shell Oil USA, is brought in by the Pentagon to plan the management of Iraq's oil fields. He works directly with Paul Wolfowitz and Douglas Feith. "There were plans," says Carroll, "maybe even too many plans" -- but none disclosed to the public nor even the US Congress."

Because the Downing Street Memo says the "facts were fixed around the policy", because of the high cost of this war (cost in lives, in dollars, in the reputation of the United States), I am writing to ask you to please begin an investigation on the Downing Street Memo in order to determine if, in fact, the "facts" were made up to suit the administration's desire to go into Iraq--even if that meant taking our country into an unnecessary war.

The American people deserve to know the truth.
Thank you.

[ellenfl]

4. at the very least, this country and congress may not

be so quick to back the admin with their next war. that's a very good thing.

ellen fl

[dad]

7. Yes, they will

I will not forget how easily the country was led into an anti-France frenzy over basically nothing. War is popular.

[orleans]

5. n/t

:kick: