John Kerry and the "Downing Street Memo"
Posted by Mark Noonan
Blogs for Bush
For about a month now, the leftwing blogosphere has been atwitter about the Downing Street Memo. For the Michael Moore/DU crowd, this memo offers rock solid proof that "BUSH LIED!!!!" about the liberation of Iraq. The bit in the memo which has leftwingers salviating over the prospect of an impeachment is this:
<<<
Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.
>>>
It is said that this is the proof...that bit about intelligence and facts being "fixed" is the "smoking gun" and we're now well into the new Watergate. There are a couple problems I see with this:
First off, we've had ample evidence that there was not political manipulation of the intelligence data prior to the liberation of Iraq. As we reported here, the WMD commission concluded there was no such "fixing" of the facts as the Memo claims.
Secondly, that sentence "But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy" seems a bit odd, doesn't it? Why would one say "But the intelligence" right after merely stating that the President is justying action by tying terrorism to WMD threats? It seems an interpolation; that someone added the sentence post-liberation in order to make the Memo say something it never said. We'd have to get the original Memo into the hands of document experts to determine the accuracy of the document.
What is being reported now both on al-Jazeera (no links to hate sites) and Newsmax, is that Senator Kerry will bring the issue up on Monday in the Senate.
<<<
Failed presidential candidate John Kerry said Thursday that he intends to confront Congress with a document touted by critics of President Bush as evidence that he committed impeachable crimes by falsifying evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
"When I go back [to Washington] on Monday, I am going to raise the issue," Kerry said, referring to the Downing Street Memo in an interview with Massachusetts' Standard Times newspaper.
>>>
This is the same Senator Kerry who was on the intelligence committee, saw the same intelligence data the President saw, and voted for the liberation which President Bush advocated...though, as we know, he was for the war before he was against it.
Up until now, the demand for an impeachment of President Bush has been confined to the fever swamps of the left...but as the fever swamps of the left have gained control of the Democratic Party via goups like MoveOn, we've seen ever more Democrats acting entirely irreponsibly. It has been a long term goal of the left to impeach President Bush...and now here comes John Kerry, still smarting from his trouncing at the polls, to feed the fires of the fever swamps. This is not a bolt from the blue from John Kerry, however...as we reported earlier, Kerry was saying in mid-April that the intelligence data was manipulated to support the liberation. Kerry lacked any proof then to make such a claim, but he still made it...he still lacks proof, but he and the rest of the left think that the Downing Street Memo will be all they need to bring down a President.
The Memo, itself, was intially leaked to, then reported in British newspapers just days before the recent British elections; what we might have here is just a thing designed to hurt Tony Blair's re-election prospects now being used to smear President Bush. Never think that the left gives up its clubs when they don't work...they'll just keep using them figuring that eventually the hammer will match the nail.
I don't know if Kerry will really bring the matter up or if he was just throwing a bone to the far left in preparation for his re-try for the White House in 2008...you know, give 'em something to make them think that Kerry is with them. But, you never know...when you start down the path of political irresponsibility, you never know where it might lead. The white-hot hatred the Democrats feel for President Bush could lead them into all sorts of stupidity.
As an example of this, we can take this same John Kerry's words:
<<<
With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
Does he do all of these things because he wants to live by international standards of behavior? Because he respects international law? Because he is a nice guy underneath it all and the world should trust him?
>>>
So said John Kerry on October 9, 2002. That was back before Kerry opposed the war...in that statement, he clearly and concisely stated the case for war based upon the information available at the time...and this still stands the test of time. Or is it, now, that we are supposed to believe that Saddam's only problem was WMD?
One should keep in mind some salient facts when considering claims from the left that "BUSH LIED!!!!". Things such as Saddam bribing UN weapons inspectors; why bribe to cover up what the left says were never there? Reports that Saddamite WMD's may have been moved to Syria prior to the liberation. Reports that Saddam was determined to reconstitute his WMD program. That WMD's were, you know, found in Iraq. And, of course, that WMD's were not the sole reason for liberation.
As the resolution authorising the liberation says:
<<<
Whereas Iraq persists in violating resolutions of the United Nations Security Council by continuing to engage in brutal repression of its civilian population thereby threatening international peace and security in the region, by refusing to release, repatriate, or account for non-Iraqi citizens wrongfully detained by Iraq, including an American serviceman, and by failing to return property wrongfully seized by Iraq from Kuwait;
...Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its continuing hostility toward, and willingness to attack, the United States, including by attempting in 1993 to assassinate former President Bush and by firing on many thousands of occasions on United States and Coalition Armed Forces engaged in enforcing the resolutions of the United Nations Security Council;
Whereas members of al Qaida, an organization bearing responsibility for attacks on the United States, its citizens, and interests, including the attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, are known to be in Iraq;
Whereas Iraq continues to aid and harbor other international terrorist organizations, including organizations that threaten the lives and safety of American citizens;
Whereas United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 authorizes the use of all necessary means to enforce United Nations Security Council Resolution 660 and subsequent relevant resolutions and to compel Iraq to cease certain activities that threaten international peace and security...
Whereas Congress in the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1) has authorized the President "to use United States Armed Forces pursuant to United Nations Security Council Resolution 678 (1990) in order to achieve implementation of Security Council Resolutions 660, 661, 662, 664, 665, 666, 667, 669, 670, 674, and 677";
Whereas in December 1991, Congress expressed its sense that it "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 687 as being consistent with the Authorization of Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution (Public Law 102-1)," that Iraq's repression of its civilian population violates United Nations Security Council Resolution 688 and "constitutes a continuing threat to the peace, security, and stability of the Persian Gulf region," and that Congress, "supports the use of all necessary means to achieve the goals of United Nations Security Council Resolution 688";
Whereas the Iraq Liberation Act (Public Law 105-338) expressed the sense of Congress that it should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime and promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime;
Whereas the United States is determined to prosecute the war on terrorism and Iraq's ongoing support for international terrorist groups...
>>>
There is, of course, a bit about WMD's in the resolution too...but this clearly shows that WMD were not ever the only reason for the liberation. President Bush, even if he wanted, didn't need to cook the books on WMD intelligence...first off, because the entire world intelligence community 100% agreed with the American view on Saddam's WMD programs and, secondly, because we had ample grounds for military action even if Saddam had come clean on WMD's.
The Democrats have been playing a reckless, dirty game in their attacks upon the President vis a vis the War on Terrorism; in addition to their playing the part of traitor by providing propaganda fodder for the terrorist media outlets, they have also slowed down and weakened the necessary actions in the War on Terrorism.
Part of the reason for the delay in liberating Iraq was because the President felt compelled to address the absurd complaints raised by the left about the proposed liberation...think about that; we had a brutal tyrant who was mass murdering his own people, had used WMD's in the past, had given no indication that he was out of the WMD business and he was harboring known terrorists...and there was the left saying that we should have left him alone...and now saying that we needed to lie to convince people to get him out of power. We didn't need to lie; the President didn't need to lie...no lie was uttered because simple common sense and humanity compelled our liberation of Iraq.
blogsforbush.com
timesonline.co.uk
newsmax.com
independentsforkerry.org
blogsforbush.com
blogsforbush.com
blogsforbush.com
blogsforbush.com
whitehouse.gov |
