| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"reeder" |
| Date: |
01 Nov 2005 02:52:17 PM |
| Object: |
Troops and Security First |
Statement by Senator Reid
Troops and Security First
This past weekend, we witnessed the indictment of the I. Lewis Libby,
the Vice President’s Chief of Staff and a senior Advisor to President
Bush. Libby is the first sitting White House staffer to be indicted in
135 years. This indictment raises very serious charges. It asserts
this Administration engaged in actions that both harmed our national
security and are morally repugnant.
The decision to place U.S. soldiers in harm’s way is the most
significant responsibility the Constitution invests in the Congress.
The Libby indictment provides a window into what this is really about:
how the Administration manufactured and manipulated intelligence in
order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared
to challenge its actions.
As a result of its improper conduct, a cloud now hangs over this
Administration. This cloud is further darkened by the Administration’s
mistakes in prisoner abuse scandal, Hurricane Katrina, and the
cronyism and corruption in numerous agencies.
And, unfortunately, it must be said that a cloud also hangs over this
Republican-controlled Congress for its unwillingness to hold this
Republican Administration accountable for its misdeeds on all of these
issues.
Let’s take a look back at how we got here with respect to Iraq Mr.
President. The record will show that within hours of the terrorist
attacks on 9/11, senior officials in this Administration recognized
these attacks could be used as a pretext to invade Iraq.
The record will also show that in the months and years after 9/11, the
Administration engaged in a pattern of manipulation of the facts and
retribution against anyone who got in its way as it made the case for
attacking Iraq.
There are numerous examples of how the Administration misstated and
manipulated the facts as it made the case for war. Administration
statements on Saddam’s alleged nuclear weapons capabilities and ties
with Al Qaeda represent the best examples of how it consistently and
repeatedly manipulated the facts.
The American people were warned time and again by the President, the
Vice President, and the current Secretary of State about Saddam’s
nuclear weapons capabilities. The Vice President said Iraq “has
reconstituted its nuclear weapons.” Playing upon the fears of
Americans after September 11, these officials and others raised the
specter that, left unchecked, Saddam could soon attack America with
nuclear weapons.
Obviously we know now their nuclear claims were wholly inaccurate. But
more troubling is the fact that a lot of intelligence experts were
telling the Administration then that its claims about Saddam’s nuclear
capabilities were false.
The situation was very similar with respect to Saddam’s links to Al
Qaeda. The Vice President told the American people, “We know he’s out
trying once again to produce nuclear weapons and we know he has a
longstanding relationship with various terrorist groups including the
Al Qaeda organization.”
The Administration’s assertions on this score have been totally
discredited. But again, the Administration went ahead with these
assertions in spite of the fact that the government’s top experts did
not agree with these claims.
What has been the response of this Republican-controlled Congress to
the Administration’s manipulation of intelligence that led to this
protracted war in Iraq? Basically nothing. Did the
Republican-controlled Congress carry out its constitutional
obligations to conduct oversight? No. Did it support our troops and
their families by providing them the answers to many important
questions? No. Did it even attempt to force this Administration to
answer the most basic questions about its behavior? No.
Unfortunately the unwillingness of the Republican-controlled Congress
to exercise its oversight responsibilities is not limited to just
Iraq. We see it with respect to the prisoner abuse scandal. We see it
with respect to Katrina. And we see it with respect to the cronyism
and corruption that permeates this Administration.
Time and time again, this Republican-controlled Congress has
consistently chosen to put its political interests ahead of our
national security. They have repeatedly chosen to protect the
Republican Administration rather than get to the bottom of what
happened and why.
There is also another disturbing pattern here, namely about how the
Administration responded to those who challenged its assertions. Time
and again this Administration has actively sought to attack and
undercut those who dared to raise questions about its preferred
course.
For example, when General Shinseki indicated several hundred thousand
troops would be needed in Iraq, his military career came to an end.
When then OMB Director Larry Lindsay suggested the cost of this war
would approach $200 billion, his career in the Administration came to
an end. When U.N. Chief Weapons Inspector Hans Blix challenged
conclusions about Saddam’s WMD capabilities, the Administration pulled
out his inspectors. When Nobel Prize winner and IAEA head Mohammed
el-Baridei raised questions about the Administration’s claims of
Saddam’s nuclear capabilities, the Administration attempted to remove
him from his post. When Joe Wilson stated that there was no attempt by
Saddam to acquire uranium from Niger, the Administration launched a
vicious and coordinated campaign to demean and discredit him, going so
far as to expose the fact that his wife worked as a CIA agent.
Given this Administration’s pattern of squashing those who challenge
its misstatements, what has been the response of this
Republican-controlled Congress? Again, absolutely nothing. And with
their inactions, they provide political cover for this Administration
at the same time they keep the truth from our troops who continue to
make large sacrifices in Iraq.
This behavior is unacceptable. The toll in Iraq is as staggering as it
is solemn. More than 2,000 Americans have lost their lives. Over 90
Americans have paid the ultimate sacrifice this month alone – the
fourth deadliest month since the war began. More than 15,000 have been
wounded. More than 150,000 remain in harm’s way. Enormous sacrifices
have been and continue to be made.
The troops and the American people have a right to expect answers and
accountability worthy of that sacrifice. For example, 40 Senate
Democrats wrote a substantive and detailed letter to the President
asking four basic questions about the Administration’s Iraq policy and
received a four sentence answer in response. These Senators and the
American people deserve better.
They also deserve a searching and comprehensive investigation about
how the Bush Administration brought this country to war. Key questions
that need to be answered include:
- How did the Bush Administration assemble its case for war against
Iraq?
- Who did Bush Administration officials listen to and who did they
ignore?
- How did senior Administration officials manipulate or manufacture
intelligence presented to the Congress and the American people?
- What was the role of the White House Iraq Group or WHIG, a group of
senior White House officials tasked with marketing the war and taking
down its critics?
- How did the Administration coordinate its efforts to attack
individuals who dared to challenge the Administration’s assertions?
- Why has the Administration failed to provide Congress with the
documents that will shed light on their misconduct and misstatements?
Unfortunately the Senate committee that should be taking the lead in
providing these answers is not. Despite the fact that the chairman of
the Senate Intelligence Committee publicly committed to examine many
of these questions more than 1 and ½ years ago, he has chosen not to
keep this commitment. Despite the fact that he restated that
commitment earlier this year on national television, he has still done
nothing.
At this point, we can only conclude he will continue to put politics
ahead of our national security. If he does anything at this point, I
suspect he will play political games by producing an analysis that
fails to answer any of these important questions. Instead, if history
is any guide, this analysis will attempt to disperse and deflect blame
away from the Administration.
We demand that the Intelligence Committee and other committees in this
body with jurisdiction over these matters carry out a full and
complete investigation immediately as called for by Democrats in the
committee’s annual intelligence authorization report. Our troops and
the American people have sacrificed too much. It is time this
Republican-controlled Congress put the interests of the American
people ahead of their own political interests.
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops and Security First |
01 Nov 2005 03:18:59 PM |
|
|
Statement by Senator Reid
Nice way to pass the buck Mr. Reid, but the Congress is supposed to ask
these question before starts wars, not after. All Reid is really
saying that the Democrats voted for the war and are trying to get out
from under it to escape the shared blame for it.
Balance of powers dude, Dems didn't do their job.
The real question is this, why did Harry Reid vote for the war to begin
with.
Dumbass.
.
|
|
|
| User: "XTS" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops and Security First |
01 Nov 2005 03:54:18 PM |
|
|
<stork@storkyak.com> wrote in message
news:1130879939.226513.110810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Statement by Senator Reid
Nice way to pass the buck Mr. Reid, but the Congress is supposed to ask
these question before starts wars, not after. All Reid is really
saying that the Democrats voted for the war and are trying to get out
from under it to escape the shared blame for it.
Balance of powers dude, Dems didn't do their job.
The real question is this, why did Harry Reid vote for the war to begin
with.
Simple answer. Bush lied about the intelligence..."smoking guns...mushroom
clouds, yellow cake...drone aircrat...mobile chem and bio labs"...on and on,
nothing but lies on top of lies. You chose to protect the lairs, so that
makes you a traitor to our country and an accomplice in the deaths of
thousands of innocent people. Now, that their accountablity moment is
knocking at their door, you cant face it, like Bush or Cheney could not face
the war in Vietnam, you, like them chose the low road of the coward.
Dumbass.
You should talk you fuckin murderer.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops and Security First |
01 Nov 2005 05:53:40 PM |
|
|
stork replied to:
Simple answer. Bush lied about the intelligence..."smoking guns...mushroom
clouds, yellow cake...drone aircrat...mobile chem and bio labs"...on and on,
nothing but lies on top of lies.
Simple answers for simple people, but the bottom line is that the
Congress declares war, not the President, and the Congress exists to
CHECK the powers of the President. It is a deliberately adversarial
body designed to do this.
It's not as if the Democrats on the Hill do not have their own
connections and their own people within the CIA - after all, they had
control of the white house for the previous 8 years and could stuff the
CIA with their analysts.
And, it's not even as if there wasn't disputes AT THE TIME that the
intelligence was bogus.
You chose to protect the lairs, so that
makes you a traitor to our country and an accomplice in the deaths of
thousands of innocent people.
I don't believe Bush lied. Period. I think Bush told the truth as he
saw or at worst made a gut call. It was the job of the Congress to
oppose him or to challenge his facts and they didn't do it. Period.
That means that Bush is to blame for this war, Republicans are to blame
for this war, but so are the Democrats.
Now, that their accountablity moment is
knocking at their door, you cant face it, like Bush or Cheney could not face
the war in Vietnam, you, like them chose the low road of the coward.
You should talk you fuckin murderer.
If the Democrats so strongly believe that they were "lied to", then why
did they continue to support the war RIGHT UP UNTIL THE POLLS SWUNG THE
OTHER WAY.
It would be all fine and jack dandy to go and circulate this *****
lie story, but the bottom line is that DEMOCRATS DELIBERATELY VOTED FOR
THE WAR SOLELY TO SCORE POLITICAL POINTS, AND WORSE, THEY VOTED FOR IT
FULLY BELIEVING THAT IT WOULD FAIL SO THAT THEY COULD TRY AND TAKE BACK
THE HOUSE WHEN IT DID.
That's right, keep cheering on for your Democrats dude.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Krustys Mom" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops and Security First |
01 Nov 2005 03:45:26 PM |
|
|
<stork@storkyak.com> wrote in message
news:1130879939.226513.110810@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
Statement by Senator Reid
Nice way to pass the buck Mr. Reid, but the Congress is supposed to ask
these question before starts wars, not after. All Reid is really
saying that the Democrats voted for the war and are trying to get out
from under it to escape the shared blame for it.
Balance of powers dude, Dems didn't do their job.
The real question is this, why did Harry Reid vote for the war to begin
with.
Cause they were lied too and thought they were protecting us.
Dumbass.
Yes you are.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Troops and Security First |
01 Nov 2005 06:04:01 PM |
|
|
Cause they were lied too and thought they were protecting us.
It's Harry Reids job to not trust the President. If, as you argue,
that you could just "trust the president", then why even bother with
the formality of having a congressional debate about war to begin with?
The bottom line is that all the warning signs were there for everyone
to see. The French and the Germans at the time of the debate told us
there were no WMD. The Russians told us there were no WMD. The
British flat out said there were no WMD and even went out of their way
to deny the 16 words. The head of the UN said that such a war was
wrong, several heads of the Arms Inspection regimes, Scott Ritter and
Al Baderia (sp?), both said there was no WMD. The fricking chairmen
of the Joint Chiefs of Staff said that we needed 500,000 troops to do
the job and Bush's own Treasury Secretary said the war would cost 200
billion dollars.
I know I blew off all of that as a Republican becuase I wanted Saddam
gone and I was still so frigging ***** after 9/11 and the Anthrax
and all other crap that I wanted to see us stick it to the Arabs
regardless of the reason. And the ugly truth is, that was the national
sentiment of the United States at the time and what did the Democrats
do? They caved into it.
But, if you look at the record, there were plenty of warning signs on
the way into this war, and this country, Democrats, Republicans and the
vast majority of its citizens, chose to completely ignore them. Bush
could have said Saddam was an alien from Betelguese, and we would have
been screaming for war at the time.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
