Not surprisingly, The Wall Street Journal editorial board thinks Democrats are playing politics in demanding an investigation of the Bush administration’s use of Iraq intelligence. An editorial Thursday argues: “The scandal here isn’t what happened before the war. The scandal is that the same Democrats who saw the same intelligence that Mr. Bush saw, who drew the same conclusions, and who voted to go to war are now using the difficulties we’ve encountered in that conflict as an excuse to rewrite history. Are Republicans really going to let them get away with it?”
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- JimJohnson on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Late-night laughs
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- JimJohnson on Late-night laughs
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- thomaswitt on Let immigrants run
- ANTI on Open thread 11/23
- minutelady on Open thread 11/23
30 Comments
Crimes, tantamount to treason, have been committed by the neoconservative controlled White House. There is no grandstanding by democrats, but rather a responsible lawful demand.
Those who might choose not to consider the seriousness of these violations of constitutional law are either a part of cabal committing the violations, or those not paying attention.
The threat neoconsevatives represent to these United States are far more dangerous than the distraction or diversion or farce known as the so-called “war on terrorism.”
Never has this constitutional government been under greater attack, in its 229 year history, then from the forces inside our government at the present time.
The current editorial board of the Wall Street Journal is an accomplice in the threat to overthrow our constitutional government.
There opinion is worthless.
Democrats in the United States Senate, still loyal to America, should be given all the support true Americans can muster, along with any republicans whose loyalty has not been compromised by the White House.
All the finger pointing and mud slinging in the world won’t bring back the war casualties.I thought the senate dems want to get to the reasons (or lack of) for all this mess.
Phillip is getting better at flame war baiting.
Whose trying to bring back the dead?
The idea is to stop the killing of American soldiers and Iraq civilians and get off this world conquest kick.
Something wrong with that?
And that isn’t going to happen until the cause is out of the White House. Elections are too far away, but the jailhouse isn’t.
Of course there’s a big difference between mud-slinging and truth-telling, except in the White House, where whatever helps world conquest is said, without regard for fact.
{ They lie }
Withdraw our troops tomorrow, then the blood bath will really begin. Happy conscience.
Is the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal the least bit concerned that their quest for world conquest cost 6 more American soldiers their lives today in Iraq? And the “generals” say there’s no end in sight?
I don’t have any figures on how many soldier’s arms and legs were blown-off today, as that information is about as difficult to get, on a timely basis, as the number of flag-draped coffins { or Iraqi civilians deaths, Rumsfeld says he doesn’t count them, though }.
Perhaps the bloodthirsty creeps on the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal will just have to suffer or look at old { yesterdays } pictures.
I don’t have any figures on how many soldier’s arms and legs were blown-off today, as that information is about as difficult to get, on a timely basis, as a flag-draped coffins { or Iraqi civilians deaths, Rumsfeld says he doesn’t count them, though }.
Perhaps the bloodthirsty creeps on the editorial board of the Wall Street Journal will just have to suffer or look at old { yesterdays } pictures.Let’s hear that again about democrat’s “grandstanding.”
Our aircraft bomb civilians to death everyday, our soldiers die and are blown apart everyday, all because we are there.
When we leave they’ll work it out, better than we’re working it out for them, that’s for sure.
Now what’s the real reason for staying? It’s anything but a happy conscience.
LET ‘EM KILL EACH OTHER WITHOUT OUR PEOPLE IN THE WAY, JOE BLOW!ED, the finger comment was directed at the fools on the hill.
The Point is that they’ll stop killing each other. They killing those turncoats helping the Americans.
We call them traitors, you know, like Bush, Rove, Rumsfeld, and the whole gaggle of Pansy Wansy neoconseratives.
Actually, the Journal is correct for a change: the same democrats that supported the war, and knew the reasons for invading Iraq, are now the same ones crying foul. It’s a game called “CMA” or cover my a**. As in, I need to get reelected, so I’ll go with the flow.Smoke and mirrors, Washington style.If there is going to be an investigation, it should include BOTH Republicans and Democrats as the object of the investigation. There might be a few more “turncoats” than people now realize
The Achilles heel of the Bush administration is the lies they used to justify this Iraqi civilian slaughter and the consequence of having so many American soldiers killed and maimed.
Those of us who wish to bring down the Bush administration, will find that the chink in their armor is through the legal system. There, they have exposure. They have committed crimes, and if vigorously prosecuted, the neoconservatives, AIPAC, and the Israeli connection can all be brought out into the open. The American public will do the rest next November.
Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. has open the door and we all need to write to him and find out how to help.
Senator Reid:
“For more than two years, Senate Democrats have pressed Republicans to address the misuse of intelligence. At every turn, Republicans have blocked efforts to investigate how intelligence was used in the run-up to the war in Iraq. Below details the long record established by Democrats to investigate this matter.”
http://reid.senate.gov/record2.cfm?id=248135
Even Mr. Brownlee knows there were no Bush lies to get us into the war. But some of you would like us to turn tail and run. Like ‘Nam that would cost millions of allies lives.Terrorists would have the entire Iraq for training grounds and all the oil money.Ed would say GREAT, Kill the Zionists. The rest of us would be next.
In a perfect the arabs and the israelis would wipe each other out and in the process do mankind a great service.
Joe don’t tell me what I would say. I’ll speak for myself, and do when needed, and I certainly wouldn’t be jabbering the nonsense you’re spouting.
You sound like the death throes of your precious Zionism.
Ah, Joe C. is back to the old “we could have won ‘Nam if the peacenicks hadn’t gotten us to cut and run.”
You notice that Joe never took me up on my offer to have HIM go back and try to win ‘Nam.
58,000 men. Ten years.
Talk about “rewriting history,” hoo boy!
Remember, the Democrats didn’t vote that Bush should go to war. They voted to give the president the AUTHORITY to go to war–with the intention that it would scare and pressure Saddam.
It did. But that wasn’t good enough for BushCo. They wanted their war.
And they got it.
I never trusted Bush from day one on this, so I partly blame the Dems for trusting him.
But it’s not re-writing history to say that Bush is the prime mover of this debacle. He should have had a plan to rebuild Iraq once we got it, and an exit plan to get out.
I don’t remember the Democrats getting any say about any of that, because they didn’t.
History is rewritten ALL the time, that’s a given. As more information surfaces, the understanding of an event must be adjusted to allow the incorporation of the new data. Often, that means that some of the old must be jettisonned, due to their being found false. Just look at the chaos surrounding the aftermath of Katrina, looting or simply trying to survive, lawlessness or desperation to attract help from the outside, food donations from abroad that end up being incinerated because it doesn’t fulfill USDA requirements. The path leading to the invasion of Iraq is the same, withheld information that can influence decisions, gross appeal at the emotional level but not at the rational level. These can be used to argue that the junta deliberately mislead the Congress.
Let’s get this straight: The intelligence reports presented to congress were concocted by the Bush/Karl Rove/ Israelis/ neoconservative’s cabal, and were deliberately made false in order to facilitate Israel’s war. That is criminal, and should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and all those involved, including AIPAC members, the Israeli Embassy and whatever Israeli spies can be flushed-out.
The judgments being made by congress, both democrats and republicans, were made using deliberately falsified documents. The only avenue open to congress to verify that falsified data was its source.
Congress has a reasonable expectation that the White House and Intelligent services will not counterfeit documents, barring, of course, those documents openly coming from Israel.
So much for democrats signing-off on this so-called contrived war on “terrorism ” { the Israeli misnaming for Palestinian resistance to Israeli disgusting brutality and sickening war-crimes.
BTW The WSJ post: There, opinion is worthless { left-out comma }
JM you can’t blame anyone for their support of the invasion when they were given reasons to do so that were all wrong.
An artillery shell.
If an artillery shell is fired from an artillery piece { A cannon } 10 miles away and hits a humvee, then it’s an act of war.
If the same artillery shell is exploded alongside a road and hits a humvee, then it’s an act of ” terrorism.”
The Israelis seem to have their own dictionary.
{ It’s pronounced ” tarrrrarrrismmm ” }
Oh, BTW, now that Israel is firing huge artillery shells into the Gaza refugee camps, filled with women and chilrden, it’s called “a millitary operation.”
OK, From the CSM….Here it is:
“Democrats have called on Bush to fire Rove, and Republican Sen. Trent Lott of Mississippi has questioned whether Rove should retain his policy-making role at the White House. The White House has rebuffed calls for a staff overhaul.
“I understand the anxiety and angst by the press corps to talk about this. On the other hand it’s a serious investigation and we take it seriously, and we’re cooperating to the extent that the special prosecutor wants us to cooperate,” Bush said.
Notice the qualifying operative phrase: ” and we’re cooperating to the extent that the special prosecutor wants us to cooperate,” Bush said.”
“to the extent” means this: If the prosecutor misses something we’re not going to bring it up. And that smells like some arm-twisting is going on in the background, for the prosecutor not to bring it up. Rove gave Bush that slick-answer, bet your boots on that. Do I trust the Bush administration to be forthcoming, Hell no, not as far as I could throw a grand piano.
Stay tuned.
The far right element of the Republican party turn up their nose at the thought of “historical revisionism” – a topic Roo mentions above. The anti-revisionism folk seem to think that history happens a given way and that is the end of the story.
Actually, the job of historians is historical revisionism. The past is seen from the unique perspective of the present. As an example, when I was real young, General Custer was thought of as a hero, who met with some bad luck that Sitting Bull helped deliver to him. This prevailing notion was challenged during the anti-military period of the Viet Nam war, and was helped by the Dustin Hoffman movie, Little Big Man. Also, during the 60’s and 70’s the fate of American Indians at the hands of Whites, gained more sympathy. Thus, a previously revered Indian Fighter was reconsidered as maybe not being such a great fellow.
The present affects our view of history. Also, rather than more being known about historical events, the enhanced perspective that distance in time provides, also helps with the revisionary process.
So in summary, I agree with Roo, history is re-written all the time. And I would add, that is how it is supposed to be.
No, Steven, that’s not how it’s supposed to be.
History is always the same, though viewed through different eyes.
But the moving hand writes and having writ moves on.
I have said it before but, one more time, you are liars and know you are lying.
Joe C. You are one stupid man.
Joe C,
Liars, huh? The following will be published tomorrow in NYT.
“Tomorrow, The New York Times answers the question, with reporter Doug Jehl disclosing the contents of a newly declassified memo apparently passed to him by Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
It shows that an al-Qaeda official in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained al-Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons, according to this Defense Intelligence Agency document from February 2002.
It declared that it was probable that the prisoner, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, “was intentionally misleading the debriefers” in making claims about Iraqi support for al-Qaeda’s work with illicit weapons, Jehl reports.
“The document provides the earliest and strongest indication of doubts voiced by American intelligence agencies about Mr. Libi’s credibility,” Jehl writes. “Without mentioning him by name, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Colin L. Powell, then secretary of state, and other administration officials repeatedly cited Mr. Libi’s information as ‘credible’ evidence that Iraq was training Al Qaeda members in the use of explosives and illicit weapons.”
The people close ro you are in Iraq because of a pack of lies, Joe C. And as if that weren’t sad enough, you defend the people who go on lying to you and put your relatives in harm’s way, while attacking those of us who have stood up to denounce the lies.
I feel very, very, very sorry for you.
If the Dems are re-writing history, they have plenty of examples from the Republicans.Kansas Republican congressman Todd Tiahrt. All images of gay gatherings at national sites, including the Millennium March on the Washington Mall have been ordered removed fromvideotapes that have been shown at the Lincoln Memorial since 1995 according to a civil service group. Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) said that the directive came from National Parks Service Deputy Director Donald Murphy. Murphy is said to have been concerned about pictures in the video that showed same-sex couples kissing and holding hands after conservative groups complained.In their place, the Park Service is inserting scenes of the Christian group Promise Keepers and pro-Gulf War demonstrators though these events did not take place at the Memorial in what Murphy called a “more balanced” version. So how are we supposed to teach proper history to students when our elected representatives are rewriting it.
Another example is Tiahrt’s push to switch, in the Washington DC hall of statues, from George W. Glick, a forgotten figure in 19th-century Kansas politics, to Gen. Dwight Eisenhower, the supreme allied commander in Europe from Abilene, Kan. His only ties to Kanas was that he grew up in Abilene. He never returned to Kansas.“Every Kansan that I brought here had the same problem,” said Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), who spearheaded the effort to replace the statues. “They didn’t understand who these people were.”But Glick was no political slouch. A lawyer, farmer and statesman, he fought for the Union in the Civil War and was elected governor of Kansas as a Democrat.And that’s just one Republican. Their pundits, such as Ann Coulter, have also rewritten history. She has tried to justify Senetor Joseph McCarthy’s witch hunts.
To the victors belongs the history.
Thank you, Steven. I’d like to point out that while Ed has a point by saying that historical events, once happen, stay static. But, to whom do those “moving hands” belong? The likelihood is that they belong to the winning side, and the losing side’s account are often conveniently swept under the rug, even to the point of cultural genocide.
Our present are shaped by our past. In order to have clearer vision of our future, a clearer knowledge of our past is sorely needed. Moving hands do move in circles, more often than one may think.