Iraq

George W. Bush needs to be held accountable.

George W. Bush stated that Saddam Hussein had:
1. ties to al-Qaeda,
2. was somehow involved in the 9/11 tragedy, and
3. had weapons of mass destruction.
It was all a big lie.

drobac

Bring our troops home.
Send George W. Bush to Iraq.

Bill Clinton lied, but George W. Bush told bigger lies that cost lives.

Because George W. Bush lied, over 800 American soldiers are dead.
Please do not vote for George W. Bush in November of 2004.

Where in the United States Constitution does it mandate future generations of Americans to spread democracy and liberate oppressed citizens of other countries?

Why is it important for us to spread capitalism and democracy considering the fact that some of our largest trading partners are China (a communist country) and Japan (socialistic but democratic country)?

drobac

Letter to the Editor - Bush should repent for his lies

ŠBeaver County Times/Allegheny Times 2004, 20 July 2004, page A6

In the Bible, Exodus 20:16, one of God's Ten Commandments, it is written, "You must not testify falsely as a witness against your fellow man."

Before God and county, in an effort to convince Americans and the world that Saddam Hussein was a grave and growing threat to the United States, George W. Bush stated that Hussein had:

* Ties to al-Qaeda.

* Was somehow involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, tragedy.

* Had weapons of mass destruction that he was about to use against the people of the United States.

None of it was true.

The day the war in Iraq began, Bush sent a letter to Congress stating that the war was justified under legislation permitting the use of force against those who "planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."

On July 9, the Republican-dominated bipartisan Senate Select Intelligence Committee, in a 512-page investigative report that was adopted unanimously, said that the United States went to war on false WMD info.

It also concluded that Iraq posed no imminent threat to the United States and that there was no solid evidence that Hussein was cooperating with the al-Qaeda terror network.

Does that report now mean that Bush bore false witness against Hussein and the people of Iraq?
Does that report now mean that Bush broke one of the Lord's Ten Commandments?

On the campaign trail, Bush continues to preach his false information in an attempt to justify the war.
Vice President Cheney continues to say that Saddam "had long-established ties with al-Qaeda."

Is there anyway to stop these people from lying? Should Bush be held accountable?

Should Bush now repent?
As Christians, the self-proclaimed "Party of God" (the Grand Old Party) should now look at Bush and demand an explanation.

Nikola (Nick) Drobac
Aliquippa

http://www.timesonline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12401475&BRD=2305&PAG=461&dept_id=478566&rfi=6

ALSO IN:
http://www.therepublicannews.com/letters.html

drobac

Letter to the Editor - Bush hurt war on terror effort

ŠBeaver County Times/Allegheny Times 2004, 15 July 2004, page 6A

On March 9, 1916, 400 Mexican desperados led by Pancho Villa crossed the border into New Mexico and killed many civilians of the United States.
As a result, President Woodrow Wilson sent more than 10,000 American troops into Mexico in an effort to capture and/or kill Villa.

They never did.
However, in 1923, a group of men led by a Texas Ranger were credited for gunning down the infamous Mexican terrorist in Mexico.

The same situation exists today.
No one has ever said that the United States should not be in Afghanistan.
No one has ever said that the United States should not go after Osama bin Laden and the terrorist network.

As an example, there was a picture in The Times several weeks ago of French troops in Afghanistan helping the Americans fight terrorism.

It would have been a mistake in 1916 for Wilson to have attacked some other Central American country or Canada for something that Villa did to the people of the United States.

Just as it was a mistake in March 2003 for George W. Bush and the United States to attack Iraq for something that bin Laden did to the people of the United States.

There was no connection between Villa and the leaders/people from other Central American countries or Canada.
There was no connection between bin Laden from Afghanistan and the leaders/people from Iraq.

By attacking Iraq, Bush has tied up thousands of American troops in a country that was no threat to the people of the United States.
These same American troops should be fighting terrorists in Afghanistan and other countries like Saudi Arabia but cannot because of Bush's folly.

In addition, Bush has adversely affected our relationship with foreign countries.
The above and other mistakes by the Bush regime have seriously affected our ability to fight the war on terror.

Nikola (Nick) Drobac
Aliquippa

http://www.timesonline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12349281&BRD=2305&PAG=461&dept_id=478566&rfi=6

ALSO IN:
http://www.therepublicannews.com/letters.html

drobac

CIA berated for bad Iraq intelligence

Senate report says U.S. went to war on false WMD info

By Ann McFeatters, Post-Gazette National Bureau, Saturday, July 10, 2004

WASHINGTON -- The Senate Select Intelligence Committee yesterday released a blistering bipartisan indictment of the CIA that said the agency had overstated the extent of former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's weapons programs and provided reams of faulty intelligence used to justify the war in Iraq.

"In the end, what the president and the Congress used to send the country to war was information that was provided by the intelligence community and that information was flawed," said committee Chairman Pat Roberts, R-Kansas.

Roberts said he did not know if the vote in Congress authorizing President Bush to go to war would have been different if the intelligence had been accurate.

But Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the ranking Democrat on the committee, said Congress never would have authorized war if the CIA had said it didn't know whether Saddam had stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

Clearly upset, Rockefeller told reporters at a briefing on the 512-page investigative report, "Tragically, the intelligence failures set forth in this report will affect our national security for generations to come.
Our credibility is diminished.
Our standing in the world has never been lower.
We have fostered a deep hatred of Americans in the Muslim world, and that will grow.
As a direct consequence, our nation is more vulnerable today than ever before."

The report was adopted unanimously by the GOP-dominated committee, but Democrats were highly critical that the report does not address whether there was pressure from the White House on the CIA to skew its intelligence reporting.
Roberts said that the pressure of time will keep that part of the report from being prepared until after the Nov. 2 elections.
"We simply couldn't get it done," he said. "It is my top priority."

Rockefeller strenuously disagreed.
"I have one comment I need to make, and that is that if we're serious about doing intelligence reforms, why do we have to be somehow limited by the fact that the leadership in the Senate and the House are saying that we're out of here after 20 legislative days?
We could work through August.
We can work through September. ...

"This is the most dangerous moment in American history," he added.
"The thought that somehow we can't get this done before the end of the year simply escapes me as an adequate rationale to honor the families of those who died and to protect the families and people who are still living, but may be in a lot more danger."

...Roberts said the CIA fell victim to "group think" and from the start adopted the false premise that Iraq did have chemical and biological weapon stockpiles and was actively pursuing a nuclear program.
None of that was true, he said.

President Bush defended the war during a campaign trip to Lancaster, Pa., and said that while it is important to find out what "went wrong" with intelligence, he would fight the war again.
The choice, he said, was "either trust this madman [Saddam Hussein] who clearly hated America and was fooling around with terrorists" or do nothing.
"I chose to defend the country and that's exactly what I would do again.
America is a more secure place because Saddam Hussein is no longer in power."

Bush SEEMED to indicate that it still is possible that weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq.
He said it is important not to forget that Saddam Hussein had the capacity to make such weapons.

But Roberts said there is no evidence that Saddam Hussein was planning to use such weapons, that he had stockpiled them or that he was capable of making a nuclear weapon before the end of the decade, as the Bush administration insisted.

In October of 2002, the intelligence community put out a then-secret intelligence assessment that said that "Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction program in defiance of U.N. resolutions and restrictions.
Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade."

Roberts said the committee report shows none of that was true.

The report said that the CIA believed Iraqis who said there were such weapons programs and purposefully did not believe Iraqis who said there were no such programs.
One Iraqi defector code-named "Curve Ball" falsely told the CIA that there were mobile labs roaming around Iraq making biological and chemical weapons, and the CIA accepted his statement, the report says.
The report faults many in the administration for letting Bush falsely say in his State of the Union speech that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Africa, saying that Tenet, for one, should have vetted the speech more closely.

Rockefeller said, "There is simply no question that the mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq rank among the most devastating intelligence failures with the most grave consequences -- in the history of our nation."

REFERENCE:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/04192/344428.stm

drobac

Letter To The Editor - Why the June 30 handover?

ŠBeaver County Times/Allegheny Times 2004, 07/01/2004

Did you ever wonder how the Bush regime came up with the June 30 date to hand over power to an interim Iraqi government?

In 2002, the U.N. Security Council passed a resolution that exempted American peacekeepers from international prosecution for war crimes.
The exemption was renewed in 2003 and is set to expire June 30.

The Bush regime needs at least nine of 15 Security Council members to vote "yes" for the exemption to be renewed.

As a result of the March 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq without U.N. Security Council approval and the abuse of prisoners by U.S. soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan, many members of the Security Council openly expressed their unwillingness to vote to extend the resolution for a third time.

Last week, U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan asked Security Council members to oppose the exemption.
France, Germany, Spain and as many as six other countries indicated that they would abstain from voting.

All of this means that after today, the International Criminal Court in The Hague, Netherlands, could prosecute George W. Bush and American troops for their involvement in Iraq or other parts of the world.

Now, June 30 starts to make sense.
And everybody thought that George W. Bush was stupid.
In an effort to justify the war, George W. Bush convinced less knowledgeable Americans that Iraq was a grave and growing threat to the nation's national security.

George W. Bush stated that Saddam Hussein had ties to al-Qaeda, was somehow involved in the Sept. 11, 2001, tragedy and had weapons of mass destruction.
It was all a big lie.

Wouldn't it be great to see George W. Bush in a cell next to Slobodan Milosevic?

Nikola (Nick) Drobac
Aliquippa, PA

http://www.timesonline.com/site/news.cfm?newsid=12171312&BRD=2305&PAG=461&dept_id=478569&rfi=8

drobac

Panel says Saddam didn't help al-Qaeda

Link used as justification for war; Bush officials stand by statements

By Mimi Hall
USA TODAY, 17 June 2004, page 6A

WASHINGTON -- There is ''no credible evidence'' that Saddam Hussein helped al-Qaeda plan and train for attacks against the United States, the commission investigating the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks said Wednesday. That finding disputes a rationale the Bush administration gave for invading Iraq.

Osama bin Laden sought Iraq's help in obtaining weapons and setting up terrorist training camps in the early 1990s, and he reportedly met with a top Iraqi intelligence officer. But Iraq ''apparently never responded'' to al-Qaeda's requests for help, a preliminary report by the commission says. The meetings ''do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship.''

The White House has used al-Qaeda's purported ties to Iraq to justify the war since before it was launched in March 2003. As recently as Monday, Vice President Cheney said in a speech that Saddam ''had long-established ties with al-Qaeda.''

Some intelligence officials and Middle East experts have questioned the connection between Iraq and al-Qaeda for months.

The commission's conclusions, though not definitive, reflect the work of an independent, bipartisan panel that has a staff of more than 80 investigators. They have interviewed 1,000 witnesses and reviewed more than 2 million documents.

Secretary of State Colin Powell said the administration stands by its statements that Iraq and al-Qaeda are linked.

''I think we have said, and it is clear, that there is a connection, and we have seen these connections between al-Qaeda and the regime of Saddam Hussein, and we stick with that,'' he said in an interview with the Arab TV news network Al-Jazeera. ''We have not said it was related to 9/11. So, you know, this is the commission that was looking into 9/11.''

But President Bush's political opponents accused administration officials of being so bent on toppling Saddam that they purposefully deceived the public.

''The administration misled America,'' Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry said. The Massachusetts senator voted to authorize the war but has criticized how Bush has conducted it.

In an interview with a Detroit radio station, Kerry called the commission's information ''a very, very serious finding.''

He said Bush ''owed it to America to be completely candid when the lives of young men and women are at stake.''

On Tuesday, Bush defended Cheney's remarks. He said the presence of Islamist militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq is ''the best evidence'' of Iraq's ties to al-Qaeda.

''We did the absolute right thing in removing him (Saddam) from power,'' Bush said. ''The world is better off.''

On Wednesday, White House press secretary Scott McClellan defended the president's previous comments. ''What we've always said is that Saddam Hussein's regime harbored and supported terrorists,'' he said.

However, Bush and Cheney also have sought to tie Iraq specifically to the 9/11 attacks. In a letter to Congress on March 19, 2003 -- the day the war in Iraq began -- Bush said that the war was permitted under legislation authorizing force against those who ''planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.''

Cheney said on NBC's Meet the Press in September 2003 that ''I think it's not surprising that people make that connection'' between Saddam and Sept. 11.

In its report, the commission says that although bin Laden opposed Saddam's ''secular regime,'' he ''explored possible cooperation with Iraq'' after he moved to Sudan in 1991. Saddam sent an intelligence officer to meet with bin Laden in 1994. But the report says Iraq never responded to his requests. Further, it says that ''two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al-Qaeda and Iraq.''

The commission also dismissed a report cited by Cheney last fall that Mohamed Atta, leader of the 9/11 hijackers, met a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague, Czech Republic, a few months before the attacks on New York and the Pentagon. ''We do not believe that such a meeting occurred,'' the report said.

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040617/6294563s.htm

drobac

World

Report: Iraq was not imminent threat

Powell disputes group's findings

From wire reports, USA Today, 9 January 2004, page 6A

WASHINGTON - Iraq posed no imminent threat to the United States and there was no solid evidence that President Saddam Hussein was cooperating with the al-Qaeda terror network, a private think tank said Thursday.

The administration systematically misrepresented a weapons threat from Iraq, and U.S. strategy should be revised to eliminate the policy of unilateral preventive war, said Jessica Mathews, Joseph Cirincione and George Perkovich of the liberal-leaning Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

"It is unlikely that Iraq could have destroyed, hidden or sent out of the country the hundreds of tons of chemical and biological weapons, dozens of Scud missiles and facilities engaged in the ongoing production of chemical and biological weapons that officials claimed were present without the United States detecting some sign of this activity," the report said.

Secretary of State Colin Powell disagreed, saying he was confident in the case against Iraq that he presented to the United Nations last February. He said Saddam used such weapons in the late 1980s, then refused for a decade to assure the world he'd gotten rid of them.

Meanwhile, the White House played down the withdrawal from Iraq of a 400-member military team that specializes in the disposal of weapons of mass destruction. Scott McClellan, spokesman for President Bush, said that even though the disposal team was leaving, the group focused on hunting weapons remained in Iraq. Searchers have turned up no banned weapons after months of hunting them.

At a State Department news conference, Powell acknowledged that he had seen no hard evidence of ties between Saddam and the al-Qaeda terror network, but he insisted Iraq needed to be disarmed by force.

Powell defended the case he made before the United Nations for a war to force Saddam from power. "My presentation ...made it clear that we had seen some links and connections to terrorist organizations over time," Powell said. "I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I think the possibility of such connections did exist, and it was prudent to consider them at the time that we did."

Iraq's nuclear program had been dismantled, and there was no convincing evidence it was being revived, the Carnegie report said. The U.S.-led war on Iraq in 1991 combined with U.N. sanctions and inspections destroyed Iraq's ability to produce chemical weapons on a large scale, the report said.

The real threat, according to the report, was posed by what Iraq might have been able to do in the future. Iraq apparently was expanding its capability to build missiles beyond the range permitted by the U.N. Security Council, the report said.

It also said years of U.N. inspections to determine whether Saddam was harboring weapons of mass destruction were working well.

drobac

USA Today, 05 February 2004, Page 12A
By Bill Nichols and Barbara Slavin

Secretary of State's case against Saddam takes hits

One year ago today, Secretary of State Colin Powell went before the United Nations Security Council to make the case that Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed a threat to its neighbors:

Powell said: Iraq had at least 18 trailer trucks that it was using for mobile biological weapons production.

Evidence so far: U.S. forces found two trailers that the CIA initially concluded were for making biological weapons.
David Kay, the former chief U.S. weapons inspector, now says the consensus in U.S. intelligence is that the vehicles were used to manufacture hydrogen for weather balloons.

Powell said: Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs) could deliver biological agents on neighboring countries or ''if transported, to other countries, including the United States.''

Evidence so far: UAVs found in Iraq were too small to be used to spread biological agents.
Instead, they appear to have been designed for spy missions.

Powell said: Iraq had a stockpile of ''between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent.''

Evidence so far: No stockpiles have been found.
Kay says he believes none existed after the early 1990s.

Powell said: Telephone intercepts showed Iraqi military officers discussing the hiding of prohibited vehicles from U.N. weapons inspectors and removing a reference to nerve agents from written instructions.

Evidence so far: No prohibited vehicles or nerve agents have been found.

Powell said: Terrorist followers of Abu Musab Zarqawi, a senior associate of Osama bin Laden, were in Baghdad with the approval of Saddam Hussein. Powell also said Zarqawi had set up a terrorist camp in northeastern Iraq that specialized in the use of ricin, a deadly poison.

Evidence so far: No definitive links between Saddam's regime and al-Qaeda have been discovered.
A camp in northeastern Iraq was found, but it was unclear whether it had ties to Saddam because it was in a part of Iraq outside his control. U.S. inspectors say Iraq was experimenting with ricin.

Powell said: Iraq ''bulldozed and graded to conceal chemical weapons evidence'' at the Al-Musayyib chemical complex in 2002.

Evidence so far: No significant evidence of chemical weapons stocks has been found.

Powell said: Iraq was working on developing missiles that violated U.N. range limits and had 20 prohibited Scud missiles left over from the Persian Gulf War.

Evidence so far: No Scuds have been found.
U.N. inspectors found and destroyed missiles that a panel of international experts found to be capable of exceeding by about 20 miles the 93-mile limit set by the U.N. after the Gulf War in 1991.

Kay's search team found evidence of substantial research and development of longer-range rockets.

Powell said: Iraq was dispersing rockets armed with biological weapons in western Iraq.
''Most of the launchers and warheads had been hidden in large groves of palm trees and were to be moved every one to four weeks to escape detection.''

Evidence so far: No such rockets were used in the war, and none has been found.

Powell said: Four bunkers in Iraq had active chemical munitions inside.

Evidence so far: No chemical munitions have been found.

Powell said: Chemical decontamination trucks were on hand whenever Iraq was moving chemical munitions.

Evidence so far: No decontamination trucks have been found.
Just before the war, U.N. inspectors found similar trucks that they said were water tankers or fire trucks.

Powell said: Iraq had attempted to acquire aluminum tubes capable of being used to construct centrifuges used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons.
Powell did note that there were differences of opinion about whether the tubes could be used for centrifuges.

Evidence so far: CIA operatives intercepted a shipment of tubes bound for Iraq in 2001.

But no evidence has been found to confirm the view of some U.S. intelligence agencies that they were for centrifuges.

http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20040205/5900285s.htm

drobac

Blix: Saddam didn't have WMD

USA Today
By Sven Nackstrand, AFP
Posted 12/16/2003 9:16 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2003-12-16-blix-iraq_x.htm

Blix: "I think many of the things that were said were not sufficiently well-based."

STOCKHOLM, Sweden (AP) Former chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix said Tuesday it's becoming "increasingly clear" that Saddam Hussein's regime did not have any weapons of mass destruction.

Blix, who announced the members of a new Stockholm-based independent commission on weapons of mass destruction, said he didn't think Saddam's capture would result in the discovery of any such weapons in Iraq.

"My guess is that there are no weapons of mass destruction left," said Blix, who headed the team of U.N. inspectors that searched Iraq for more than three months before the war without making any significant finds. "I think many of the things that were said (about Iraq having them) were not sufficiently well-based."

Blix said he thought most of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were destroyed in 1991.

When his inspection teams found a crate of warheads in January, he said they asked themselves "whether this was the tip of an iceberg, or was it just an ice floe floating around" as a remnant.

"I think it's getting safer and safer to say that it was just an ice floe," Blix said.

The international commission was established this year in Stockholm and aims to provide a new impetus for international efforts to curtail or stop the use of weapons of mass destruction.

Blix is head of the body. The former Swedish foreign minister led the International Atomic Energy Agency from 1981-97 and retired from the United Nations in June.

The body, which was proposed by U.N. Undersecretary-General Jayantha Dhanapala in 2002, is the first international commission focused on weapons of mass destruction since the Tokyo Forum in 1999.

drobac

Report criticizes administration's assessments of Iraq dangers

USA Today
By J. Scott Applewhite, AP
Posted 1/8/2004 2:09 PM Updated 1/8/2004 5:28 PM
http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-01-08-report_x.htm

WASHINGTON (AP) Secretary of State Colin Powell acknowledged Thursday that he saw no "smoking gun, concrete evidence" of ties between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda terror network, but insisted that Iraq had dangerous weapons and needed to be disarmed by force.

Speaking at a State Department news conference, Powell openly disagreed with a private think tank report which maintained that Iraq was not an imminent threat to the United States. And the secretary defended the case he made before the United Nations for a U.S.-led war to force Saddam from power.

"My presentation ... made it clear that we had seen some links and connections to terrorists organizations over time," Powell said. "I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed."

Three experts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace said in a report Thursday that the Bush administration systematically misrepresented a weapons threat from Iraq, and U.S. strategy should be revised to eliminate the policy of unilateral preventive war.

Powell noted that Saddam obviously had, and used, destructive weapons in the late 1980s, then refused for a decade to assure the world he'd gotten rid of them.

"In terms of intention, he always had it," Powell said. Of Carnegie's finding that Iraq posed no imminent threat, Powell said: "They did not say it wasn't there."

Iraq's nuclear program had been dismantled and there was no convincing evidence it was being revived, the report said.

And the U.S.-led war on Iraq in 1991 combined with U.N. sanctions and inspections effectively destroyed Iraq's ability to produce chemical weapons on a large scale, it said.

The real threat was posed by what Iraq might have been able to do in the future, such as starting production of biological weapons quickly in the event of war, Carnegie said.

Also, Iraq apparently was expanding its capability to build missiles beyond the range permitted by the U.N. Security Council, the report said. "The missile program appears to have been the one program in active development in 2002," it said.

Years of U.N. inspections to determine whether Saddam was harboring weapons of mass destruction were working well, and the United States should set up jointly with the United Nations a permanent system to guard against the spread of dangerous technology, the report said.

It recommended that consideration be given to making the job of CIA director a career post instead of a political appointment.

Mathews is president, Cirincione is director of the proliferation project, and Perkovich is vice president for studies at Carnegie, an independent research group.

Citing the CIA and other U.S. intelligence offices, the Bush administration contended that Iraq had caches of weapons of mass destruction and plans to produce more.

The Carnegie report said the U.S. intelligence process failed on Iraq and that Bush administration officials dropped qualifications and expressions of uncertainty presented by U.S. intelligence analysts.

In the weeks before the war, the administration also intensified its allegations of links between Saddam and the al-Qaeda terror network headed by Osama bin Laden.

drobac

drobac

If you have any comments or information that you might like added to this page, please e-mail the typed information to:

Nikola (Nick) Drobac

drobac@mailcity.com

Information may be edited before posting.

drobac