Bushlies and War Crimes

Bush's Campaign of Lies to Conceal War Crimes

Posted 11 October 2007

During his recent, hour-long interview on Al-Arabiya TV, President Bush denied "the U.S. is gearing up to attack Iran" and dismissed as "'gossip' reports in the Arab press that he has issued orders to senior U.S. military officials to prepare for an attack on Iran at the end of January or in February." [AP, Arizona Daily Star, Oct. 6, 2007] He then added: "Evidently, there's a lot of gossip in parts of the country - world that try to scare people about me personally or my country or what we stand for."

Gossip is it? Or has the Decider simply repressed or forgotten all the lies he told during the run-up to his illegal, immoral invasion and murderous occupation of Iraq? For example, has Bush simply repressed or forgotten his lie on December 28, 2001, when, after an extensive secret briefing by General Tommy Franks about a future invasion of Iraq, he told the press that his discussion with Franks focused on the General's recent trip to Afghanistan and events occurring in that country? [Bob Woodward, Plan of Attack, p. 65]

Perhaps Bush also has repressed or has forgotten his interview with British reporter Trevor McDonald in early April 2002, during which he asserted, "I made up my mind that Saddam needs to go." When pressed by McDonald, Bush added: "People think that Saddam Hussein has no links with the al Qaeda network, and I'm wondering why you have� The worst thing that could happen would be to allow a nation, like Iraq, run by Saddam Hussein, to develop weapons of mass destruction, and then team up with terrorist organizations so they can blackmail the world." [Woodward, pp. 120-121]

When pressed further about how he would remove Saddam, Bush dissembled by asserting: "I have no plans of attack on my desk." (Maybe the plan was under his desk or in the Map Room?) [Woodward, p. 121] Moreover, although Bush already was hip deep in planning the invasion of Iraq, he would dissemble on two additional occasions, asserting "I have no war plans on my desk," at press conferences in Germany and France on May 23 and May 26, 2002. [Ibid, p. 129]

Mr. Bush also seems to have repressed or forgotten his October 2, 2002 speech to Congressional leaders who had just presented their resolution on Iraq. Bush asserted: "None of us here today desire to see military conflict." Yet, more than a month earlier, on August 29, 2002, Bush had given the green light for war by affixing his signature to a Top Secret National Security Presidential Directive titled, "Iraq: Goals, Objectives and Strategy."

Not only did his signature cause the train of "military conflict" to leave the station, one element of his NSPD highlighted the inevitable conflict by emphasizing the need "to work with the Iraqi opposition to demonstrate that we are liberating, not invading Iraq." [Ibid, p. 155] Moreover, if Bush genuinely had no desire to see military conflict, why was he "pumping his fist as though instead of initiating a war he had kicked a winning field goal or hit a home run" just moments before his nationwide TV announcement that the war had begun? [Paul Waldman, Fraud, p. 8]

As I've written elsewhere, "Bush also lied in mid-July 2003, when he told reporters that 'we gave him [Saddam] a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in.' In fact, Saddam did let the inspectors in. But, the Bush administration made them leave, lest they discover that no WMD existed and scotch the invasion."

Bush's numerous lies about why the United States needed to invade Iraq have been compounded by lies concealing other war crimes, most notably torture. As Andrew Sullivan has recently written, "Classic torture techniques, such as waterboarding, hypothermia, beatings, excruciating stress positions, days and days of sleep deprivation, and threats to family members (even children of terror suspects) were approved by Bush." [Sullivan, "We Must Confess," New York Post, Oct. 7, 2007]

A New York Times editorial got it right when it noted: "President Bush and his aides have not only condoned torture and abuse at secret prisons, but they have conducted a systematic campaign to mislead Congress, the American people and the world about those policies." [NYT, 7 Oct. 2007] Perhaps, such lies engender all the "gossip." But they certainly demonstrate that Bush "can't stand the truth!"

Many of the people who now doubt Bush's denial of plans to attack Iran probably recall his lie about Iran's nuclear program. On August 6, 2007, while speaking about Iran, Bush asserted: "This is a government that has proclaimed its desire to build a nuclear weapon." Sounds too eerily similar to Bush's lies about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, doesn't it? Yet, as any honest person with a brain in his head already knows, the Iranian government has repeatedly denied such a desire. Perhaps, Iran's leaders have been lying. But, Bush certainly lied.

Were Bush ever to step outside his delusional bubble, he'd learn that most people in the world, including most Americans, connect his lies about Iraq to his war in Iraq, as well as his lies denying torture to the continuation of such torture. Given Bush's track record, it's only natural for the world to conclude that his lies about Iran virtually guarantee that this reckless and dangerous war criminal will attack the Persians next. It's called "logic," not "gossip."

Walter C. Uhler is an independent scholar and freelance writer whose work has been published in numerous publications, including The Nation, the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, the Journal of Military History, the Moscow Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. He also is President of the Russian-American International Studies Association (RAISA).

waltuhler@aol.com

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

WaPo On Bush Inconsistiencies

In other words, he's lying again.

Big Freakin' Surprise!

Go to Original

The President Asserted Progress on Security and Political Issues.

Recent Reports Weren't Often So Upbeat.

By Glenn Kessler
The Washington Post

Friday 14 September 2007

In his speech last night, President Bush made a case for progress in Iraq by citing facts and statistics that at times contradicted recent government reports or his own words.

For instance, Bush asserted that "Iraq's national leaders are getting some things done," such as "sharing oil revenues with the provinces" and allowing "former Baathists to rejoin Iraq's military or receive government pensions."

Yet his statement ignored the fact that U.S. officials have been frustrated that none of those actions have been enshrined into law - and that reports from Baghdad this week indicated that a potential deal on sharing oil revenue is collapsing.

In a radio address to the nation less than a month ago, the president himself complained that the Iraqi government was failing to address these issues. "Unfortunately, political progress at the national level has not matched the pace of progress at the local level," Bush said on Aug. 18. "The Iraqi government in Baghdad has many important measures left to address, such as reforming the de-Baathification laws, organizing provincial elections and passing a law to formalize the sharing of oil revenues."

Bush also asserted that Baqubah, the capital of Diyala province, was once an al-Qaeda stronghold but that "today, Baqubah is cleared." But in a meeting with reporters on Aug. 27, the head of the State Department team in Diyala said the security situation was not stable, hampering access to food and energy, though he acknowledged that commerce was returning to Baqubah.

"Everything is based around security; if we have security, then we can bring in agencies like USAID," John Melvin Jones said, referring to the U.S. Agency for International Development. "It's going to take a while before the security situation gets stable enough so that you can have a lot of these other agencies involved."

Bush also thanked "the 36 nations who have troops on the ground in Iraq." But the State Department's most recent weekly report on Iraq said there are 25 countries supplying 11,685 troops - about 7 percent of the size of the U.S. forces.

At one point, the president cited a recent report by a commission headed by retired Marine Gen. James Jones, saying that "the Iraqi army is becoming more capable, although there is still a great deal of work to be done to improve the national police."

But the report said Iraq's army will be unable to take over internal security from U.S. forces in the next 12 to 18 months and "cannot yet meaningfully contribute to denying terrorists safe haven." It also described the 25,000-member national police force as riddled with sectarianism and corruption, and it recommended that it be disbanded.

The commission also recommended that U.S. troops in Iraq be "retasked" in early 2008 to protect critical infrastructure and guard against border threats from Iran and Syria, while gradually turning responsibility for security over to Iraqi forces despite their deficiencies - advice the president did not follow in last night's speech.

The president also painted a relatively favorable picture of Baghdad, saying that a year ago much of it "was under siege" but that today "ordinary life is beginning to return." He did not mention that much of the once-heterogeneous city has been divided into Shiite and Sunni enclaves.

The president also said that groups of "Iranian-backed militants" are "being broken up, and many of their leaders are being captured or killed." In congressional testimony this week, Gen. David H. Petraeus and Ambassador Ryan C. Crocker emphasized that Iran poses a looming menace in Iraq.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Obama: Dems Don't Have Votes

Obama, that is not the point.

This is a matter for all of Congress, not just Democrats. It is a matter for all Americans, not just Democrats.

As independents, we will be taking names and kicking ass!

Obama: Democrats don't have Iraq votes

By MIKE GLOVER, Associated Press Writer

Fri Sep 14, 6:18 AM ET

Despite the Iraq war's unpopularity, Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama said Thursday that Congress lacks the votes to force a timetable for withdrawing U.S. troops and will focus instead on putting a ceiling on the number deployed.

"One way of ending the war would be setting a timetable. We're about 15 votes short. Right now it doesn't look like we're going to get that many votes," Obama said, referring to the number needed to override an expected veto by President Bush.

The Illinois senator said the most likely scenario would be to grant troops more time at home between deployments, a politically popular step that's difficult to oppose and one that would have a practical impact.

"You have to at least give people a one-year break for every year served in Iraq," Obama said. "At least that would put a ceiling on how many troops could be sent there at any given time."

In his speech before about 300 people at a park in this eastern Iowa town of 6,100 people, Obama focused on his plan to begin pulling troops out of Iraq immediately and complete the withdrawal by the end of next year.

Later, at a town hall-style meeting in Anamosa, Obama vowed to press Congress to confront the president. Voters, Obama argued, are demanding action and candidates must spell out their views clearly.

"They are very frustrated over a disastrous war," said Obama. "I think it's very important for everybody to take home a record of where these candidates stand on this war."

Obama said Congress should at least try to reverse course on the war.

"We should not wait until George Bush is out of office to start bringing this war to a close," said Obama. "I believe that Congress should not and must not give George Bush a blank check. I believe Congress should impose a timetable and some constraints."

With only a thin Democratic majority in both chambers of Congress, Obama said the effort may fall short.

"I cannot guarantee we can get all the Republicans we need, but we have to try," said Obama.

Obama spoke on the same day Bush was to address the nation, seeking support for his plan to maintain troop levels in Iraq until next summer, then withdraw about 30,000 troops if conditions are favorable. Bush has said he's basing his plan on the advice of the nation's military leaders.

Speaking with reporters, Obama dismissed Bush administration claims that an increase in troops has brought progress to Iraq.

"After an additional 30,000 troops and enormous sacrifice, we are back to where we were in June 2006," said Obama. "We have not made progress politically."

Obama argued that Bush's plan "is not a change in course. We need to start a more substantial withdrawal and we need to start it now."

Obama also rejected arguments from some of his Democratic rivals that his plan to pull troops out of Iraq is not aggressive enough.

"If anybody disputes that we can get more than one or two brigades out per month, then they should talk to the military experts," said Obama. "There is a strong consensus among the military that that is the quickest we can do it."

Obama's proposals come amid frustration among many Democrats that the narrowly divided Congress has been unable to take decisive action to end the war.

Obama ended his swing at a rally in Dubuque with about 500 people, where he defended his plan to withdraw troops in phases. He returns to the state on Sunday to speak at Sen. Tom Harkin's annual steak fry near Indianola.

Copyright © 2007 The Associated Press.

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

John Edwards: No Funding, No Excuses, Bring 'em Home

Edwards: Bush, Congress fail to end war

By NEDRA PICKLER,

Associated Press

WriterFri Sep 14, 6:16 AM ET

White House candidate John Edwards criticized President Bush in a televised response Thursday for failing to pull out of Iraq, but also spread some of the blame to the Democratic-led Congress.

Edwards' dual criticisms came in a unique two-minute ad that he paid for on MSNBC and that aired after Bush addressed the nation. Bush said he has agreed to reduce the number of U.S. troops from their highest level of the war, but rejected calls to leave Iraq.

Edwards, a former senator from North Carolina and the 2004 vice presidential nominee, said Congress has the power to end the war by withholding funding that isn't contingent on a timeline for withdrawal.

"Our troops are stuck between a president without a plan to succeed and a Congress without the courage to bring them home," Edwards said in the video. It was shot at his home in Chapel Hill, N.C., with an American flag in the background.

"No timeline, no funding. No excuses," Edwards said. "It is time to end this war."

Edwards' campaign refused to say how much it paid for the ad, but industry experts estimated the spot would cost between $100,000 and $150,000. The campaign sent an e-mail to supporters Thursday morning, asking for donations to help pay for it.

Edwards' criticism of Congress is an indirect challenge to his primary rivals, including Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, Barack Obama of Illinois, Chris Dodd of Connecticut and Joe Biden of Delaware.

Dodd spokeswoman Colleen Flanagan responded, "While we admire Mr. Edwards' willingness to speak out against the war, it would be better if he were still in the Senate, fighting along with Senator Dodd, working to make a real world difference rather than more commentary from the sidelines."

___

On the Net:

Edwards: http://www.johnedwards.com

(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)


The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.

Associated Press Fact Checks Bush

Too bad the news media, both teevee and press, didn't do more of this prior to the illegal, immoral invasion and occupation of Iraq; before the deaths of thousands and the maiming of thousands more, including children, all based on lies, exaggerations and cynical manipulation of a traumatized citizenry in the U.S.

Published: September 13, 2007 11"45 PM ET

WASHINGTON Political realignment in Iraq's volatile Anbar province was Exhibit A for President Bush's argument Thursday that Iraq is a fight that the United States is winning.

A look at some of Bush's assertions.


BUSH SAID:

"Anbar province is a good example of how our strategy is working," Bush said, noting that just last year U.S. intelligence analysts had written off the Sunni area as "lost to al-Qaida."

FACT CHECK:

Early Thursday, the most prominent figure in a U.S.-backed revolt of Sunni sheiks against al-Qaida in Iraq was killed by a bomb planted near his home.

The killing of a chief Anbar ally hours before Bush spoke showed the tenuous and changeable nature of success in Anbar and Iraq at large.

Although Sunni sheiks have defied al-Qaida and largely allied with U.S. forces in Anbar, the province remains violent and al-Qaida remains a threat.

Abdul-Sattar Abu Risha died 10 days after he met with Bush during a surprise visit the U.S. leader made to highlight the turnaround in Anbar. The charismatic young sheik led the Anbar Salvation Council, also known as the Anbar Awakening - an alliance of clans backing the Iraqi government and U.S. forces.

The Sunni revolt against al-Qaida led to a dramatic improvement in security in Anbar cities such as Fallujah and Ramadi. Iraqis who had been sitting on the sidelines - or planting roadside bombs to kill Americans - have now joined with U.S. forces to hunt down al-Qaida in Iraq, whose links to Osama bin Laden's terror network are unclear.

Anbar is not secure, accounting for 18 percent of the U.S. deaths in Iraq so far this year - making it the second deadliest province after Baghdad.

Bush's top military commander in Iraq, Gen. David Petraeus, told Congress this week that Anbar's circumstances are unique and its model cannot be replicated everywhere in Iraq, but "it does demonstrate the dramatic change in security that is possible with the support and participation of local citizens."

BUSH SAID:

Progress in Iraq, including improvement in the performance of the Iraqi army, led to Petraeus' recommendation that "we have now reached the point where we can maintain our security gains with fewer American forces."

Bush said there is still work to be done to improve the Iraqi national police.

FACT CHECK:

A new White House report on Iraq shows slim progress, moving just one more political and security goal into the satisfactory column. Efforts to let former members of Saddam Hussein's Baath Party rejoin the political process earned the upgrade, a senior administration official told The Associated Press.

The report largely tracks a comparable poor assessment in July on 18 benchmarks. The earlier White House report said the Iraqi government had made satisfactory gains toward eight benchmarks, unsatisfactory marks on eight and mixed results on two.

Although the benchmark list is the rubric that the White House and the Iraqi government proposed earlier this year, the Bush administration has recently said it offers a skewed or incomplete view of progress in Iraq.

BUSH SAID:

Bush noted that the government has not met its own legislative benchmarks, but he pointed to limited political progress among Iraq's national leaders. He said Iraq has passed a budget and is sharing oil wealth.

FACT CHECK:

The General Accountability Office reported last month that Iraq has only partially met a test involving reformation of its budget process, although the State Department, Pentagon and White House disputed the finding.

Some proceeds from Iraq's vast oil and gas resources are being shared among regions, but the country lacks a national framework agreement for the distribution of oil revenues.

A national oil law, which would also invite foreign investment, has been repeatedly promised by Iraq's leaders and frequently mentioned by U.S. officials as a crucial marker of the country's ability to reconcile its ethnic and religious groups.

Iraq's main political parties are deadlocked over the law and the legislation has been sent back to party leaders to see if they can salvage it, an official involved in the talks said Thursday.

BUSH SAID:

"We thank the 36 nations who have troops on the ground in Iraq and the many others who are helping that young democracy."

FACT CHECK:

There may well be 36 nations contributing to the cause, but the overwhelming majority of troops come from the United States. For example, Albania has 120 soldiers there and Bulgaria has 150 non-combat troops in Iraq. Bush visited both nations this summer as a thank you.

The United States has 168,000 troops in Iraq.


(In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. I.U. has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is I.U endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

The Nazis, Fascists and Communists were political parties before they became enemies of liberty and mass murderers.