Not from K-Tel, but from (friend of the show) Rep. Henry Waxman.Prepared at the the congressman's direction, Iraq on the Record is a searchable collection of 237 specific misleading statements made by Bush Administration officials about the threat posed by Iraq. It contains statements that were misleading based on what was known to the Administration at the time the statements were made. It does not include statements that appear mistaken only in hindsight. If a statement was an accurate reflection of U.S. intelligence at the time it was made, it was excluded even if it now appears erroneous. For more information on how the statements were selected, see the full methodology. The Iraq on the Record Report is a comprehensive examination of these statements.
Iraq on the Record is searchable by the the five Administration officials most responsible for providing public information and shaping public opinion on Iraq:
President George W. Bush
Vice President Dick Cheney
Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld
Then-Secretary of State Colin Powell
Then-National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice
It is also searchable by issue area:
Iraq's Nuclear Capabilities
Chemical and Biological Weapons
Iraq and Al-Qaeda
Iraq as an Urgent Threat
It is also searchable by keyword, such as "mushroom cloud", "uranium", "bin Laden", or "bonehead".
If they lied about the WMDs, it stands to reason that they lied about the WTCs.
20 comments:
"Bonehead" -- that could be referring to anyone in this mis-administration, past and present.
Great work, Rep. Waxman!!
At the urging of the President of the Senate, (Dick Cheney, Senator Arlen Specter) has begun hearings on the Asbestos trust fund bill. The bill would establish a $140 billion trust fund paid for by the asbestos industry to compensate the more than 2 million victims of asbestos poisoning. Susan Vento, the widow of Bruce Vento, the former congressman from St. Paul who died from asbestos poisoning, said, “This bill was already a bad bill for asbestos victims. It has now become considerably worse.” (Star Tribune, June 8, 2006) Now the chair of the Committee to Protect Mesothelioma Victims, she said the revised bill would “cruelly and coldly” force victims to settle for reduced compensation before they die.
And who is the biggest beneficiary of this new bill? Why, Halliburton, of course. Halliburton has more than 200,000 asbestos lawsuits pending against it. Only $1.6 billion of that is covered by insurance. Halliburton estimates its liability at $2.2 billion, but Wall Street analysts say it’s closer to $4.5 billion. The new legislation would limit that liability to $450 million.
Cheney was CEO of Halliburton in 1998 when he purchased Dresser Industries for $7.7 billion. Dresser had been owned and controlled by the Bush family since the 1920s. There is no record of loads of cash trading hands, so we can reasonably assume the Bush family ended up with $7.7 billion in stock in Halliburton. That’s a lot of stock. They probably control Halliburton. What Halliburton got along with Dresser was Dresser’s liabilities in the form of the 200,000 asbestos injury lawsuits. Wall Street was not amused. The stock immediately took a hit of $4.5 billion.
But George and Dick, once they got elected in 2000, immediately went to work to try to save the company. A multi-billion dollar no-bid contract to reconstruct Iraq was a good start. Also, it didn’t hurt that Halliburton got exclusive rights to sell Iraqi oil. Then, when tragedy struck in New Orleans, Halliburton was given most of the contracts for cleanup. The Bush-Cheney Presidency has been very, very good to Halliburton.
I don't get why some Republicans are still so insulted by attempts to expose Bush and Cheney for what they are. It's not like these two criminals are Republicans. They don't even deserve to be US citizens at this point.
Most true Republicans I know have disowned Bush/Cheney for their behavior, but I guess you always get a few stragglers here and there. The fact that it has taken so long even to get to this point, though, goes a long way toward explaining how the holocaust went on for so long right before the eyes of the world. People see what they want to see.
Although this "Iraq on the Record" is great stuff, I have obviously made up my mind that Bush/Cheney have done a lot worse than just misled the US. It is increasingly obvious that they most likely used WMD's (the ones apparently missing from Iraq) to kill their own citizens on 9/11/01.
Dr. Judy Wood has already presented the prosecution's case, and this jurist has seen all that she needs at this point. What I would like to see now is a chance for Bush and Cheney to defend themselves from these accusations in open court. After all, this is still the USA where poeple are supposedly innocent until proven guilty. Hope it happens in my lifetime.
LB200, your "argument" is a joke. So what if other people thought Iraq was a threat? None of them squandered almost 4,000 LIVES and ONE TRILLION DOLLARS of taxpayer money on a war that has created a WHOLE NEW GROUP OF TERRORISTS.
LB@200 -- if you are saying that Bush/Cheney are not the only ones who should be put on trial, if there is a trial, well, hurray to that! Gotta start somewhere, though. Do you want to start with Clinton and then work our way to Bush/Cheney? We'll all be dead by then.
Lots of accomplices in this crime scene, no doubt, but Bush/Cheney pulled the trigger. They are up first.
LB@200 -I guess along that line, it would be okay for me to say that Dims supported women and children being treated like cattle under Saddam. Uday and Qusay could go out and pick up women at random and then when they were done with them, have them executed. You're against women owning business' in Iraq and children going to school also?
So we should have invaded IRAQ for women's and children's rights issues? pulllleeeezzz gawd Lb@200, you sound, for the most part, like you're somewhat intelligent, and then you make goofy statements like that.
The Clinton Admin. may have lied/been mistaken as well. The UN sent inspectors and OOPS...No WMD's....Bush/Cheney convinced the world that they should still be attacked.
I absolutely feel that a humanitarian effort was needed to save women, children and the freedom of innocents. But that's not what Bushyboy was doing.
He attacked because he thought the UN was wrong. He said that Saddam sheltered/supported Al Qaeda...oh and he said some stuff about liberating the country.
Hussein's dead. The oil is still flowing. Halliburton keeps getting richer. No WMD ever found. Iraq is liberated from uday and qusay and booday and falluladay and whoever...yet the war is still going on. With a 2 year exit strategy???
Is that so a war can be started with Iran on Jan 19th, 2009 in a bid to condemn the Dems and get, maybe Jeb Bush into the Oval Office?
Yikes.
Meanwhile, back at Congress...
Closed door sessions to determine who is going to be hung for treason for continuing to allow Bush/Cheney to carry on this modern day holocaust:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070803/ap_on_go_pr_wh/terrorism_surveillance
The citizens of the United States of America are watching you, Congress. You will be held accountable.
Oops -- let's try that link again:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070803/ap_on_go_pr_wh/terrorism_surveillance
How about without the http:// in there?
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070803/ap_on_go_pr_wh/terrorism_surveillance
Okay, faggedabboudid! Here's the damn article. I've chopped up the link below into three pieces, so it probably still won't work...
http://news.yahoo.com/
s/ap/20070803/ap_on_go_pr_wh/
terrorism_surveillance
Bush jawbones Democrats on surveillance By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer
1 hour, 37 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - President Bush said Friday that Congress must stay in session until it approves legislation modernizing a U.S. law governing eavesdropping on foreigners.
"So far the Democrats in Congress have not drafted a bill I can sign," Bush said at FBI headquarters, where he was meeting with counterterror and homeland security officials. "We've worked hard and in good faith with the Democrats to find a solution, but we are not going to put our national security at risk. Time is short."
The president said lawmakers cannot leave for their August recess this weekend as planned unless they "pass a bill that will give our intelligence community the tools they need to protect the United States."
Bush has the authority under the Constitution to call Congress back into session once it has recessed or adjourned, but White House spokeswoman Dana Perrino said talk of him doing that is premature.
"We cannot imagine that Congress would leave without fixing the problem," she said.
As of early afternoon, however, it was clear that no deal was imminent.
"It's up in the air; I think we're going to be here for awhile," Sen. Charles E. Schumer, D-N.Y., said upon emerging from a closed-door meeting of Senate Democrats on the issue.
Sen. Kit Bond, top Republican on the Intelligence Committee, said the White House's offer included several concessions; among them to let the plan expire in six months, giving lawmakers time to work out a more comprehensive law.
National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell "has put on the table this last best offer," Bond said.
Earlier Friday, the White House offered an eleventh-hour accord to Democrats in the negotiations over the matter, saying it would agree to a court review of its foreign intelligence activities instead of leaving certification up to the attorney general and director of national intelligence.
But it attached several conditions that could be unacceptable to Democrats: that the review would only be after-the-fact and would only involve the administration's general process of collecting the intelligence, not individual cases, said a senior administration official speaking on condition of anonymity to more freely discuss internal deliberations.
Sen. Ben Nelson, D-Neb., said other issues in the dispute include whether the new eavesdropping powers Bush wants be made permanent — or temporary — and whether this new authority could be used against intelligence targets other than al-Qaida terrorists, such as Iran or Syria.
Bush said the administration offer is a "a narrow and targeted piece of legislation that will close the gaps in intelligence."
"This is what we need to do our job to protect the American people," the president said. "It's the bare minimum."
The two sides, however, still are far from striking a deal on what all agree needs to happen, and soon: an update of the 1978 Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act.
At issue is how the government would spy on foreign terror suspects overseas without invading Americans' privacy rights. Democrats want the special FISA Court to review the eavesdropping process to make sure the surveillance does not focus on communications that might be sent to and from Americans.
The law now generally requires court review of government surveillance of suspected terrorists in the United States. It does not specifically address the government's ability to intercept messages believed to come from suspects who are overseas, opening what the White House considers a significant gap in protecting against attacks by foreigners targeting the U.S.
Negotiations broke off shortly before midnight Thursday and resumed Friday morning.
In a statement late Thursday, McConnell said he would agree to a review by the FISA court, but only after the surveillance had begun, not before as some Democrats are demanding.
"To acknowledge the interests of all, I could agree to a procedure that provides for court review — after needed collection has begun — of our procedures for gathering foreign intelligence through classified methods directed at foreigners located overseas," McConnell wrote.
"While I would strongly prefer not to engage in such a process, I am prepared to take these additional steps to keep the confidence of members of Congress and the American people that our processes have been subject to court review and approval," he wrote.
The FISA court review would happen 120 days after the surveillance began, another senior administration official said Friday. Until then, McConnell and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales would oversee and approve the process of targeting foreign terrorists, said the official who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing negotiations.
The administration is demanding that this apply to monitoring of all foreign targets, no matter whether they end up communicating with another foreigner or someone in the U.S, and no matter whether they are a suspected terrorist or a target for some other reason, said the first official.
Democrats leery of Gonzales' involvement said that seemed far too long a period of time before the FISA court could step in.
Bush said that he would judge any bill sent to him by one measure alone: McConnell's judgment as to whether it provides "what you need to prevent an attack on the country."
"If the answer's `no,' I'm going to veto the bill," he said.
The urgent push to update FISA may stem from a recent ruling by the court that oversees it, according to remarks earlier this week by House Republican Leader John Boehner during an interview with Fox News.
"There's been a ruling, over the last four or five months, that prohibits the ability of our intelligence services and our counterintelligence people from listening in to two terrorists in other parts of the world where the communication could come through the United States," said Boehner, going further that most officials have in explaining the pressing need for change.
___
AP White House reporter Jennifer Loven contributed to this story.
LB, the issue is not who believed what. The issue is that we are at war with a country that posed absolutely no threat to us. Yes, Saddam's gone. But since this "war" began hundreds of thousands of Iraqis have been killed or wounded, thousands of American troops are dead, and many thousands more are seriously wounded. We have a massive deficit because of this "war" and absolutely nothing to show for it. And all the above was caused by bush/cheney and the repugnicans. Don't even try to blame any of it on the Democrats or your usual scapegoat, Clinton.
9/11 happened when the repugnicans were in the White Haus, and now they're telling us they're the only ones who can keep us safe. Talk about twisted logic -- why didn't they save us from the "terrorists" the first time?
Meanwhile, back at Congress...
Interpretation of the following article: "If you don't give me what I want, I am going to blow parts of this country to smitherines and blame it on you. If you do give me what I want, I am going to blow parts of this country to smitherines and might consider giving you a cut in the new regime."
http://news.yahoo.com/
s/ap/20070803/ap_on_go_pr_wh/
terrorism_surveillance
Bush, Democrats struggle for spy deal By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer
18 minutes ago
WASHINGTON - Congress and the White House struggled Friday over expanding authority to eavesdrop on suspected foreign terrorists in a high-stakes showdown over national security.
"We're still hopeful that something can be worked out," said Ellen Cioccio, a spokeswoman for Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell, after a day of fitful negotiations. "They're still talking."
Democratic leaders cleared the way for votes on different measures — at least two in the Senate and one in the House.
That left the outcome in doubt hours after Bush implored Congress to send him a bill before leaving this weekend on a monthlong vacation.
In the House, Democrats claimed they had acceded to White House requests, but Bush's aides disputed that.
Two bills emerged in the Senate, one with White House support, the other without.
In his remarks, Bush coupled his demand for legislation with a threat. He said would veto any bill by the Democratic-led Congress that his intelligence director deemed unable "to prevent an attack on the country."
"We've worked hard and in good faith with the Democrats to find a solution, but we are not going to put our national security at risk," Bush said after meeting with counterterror and homeland security officials at FBI headquarters. "Time is short."
Nicole is a little TOO LOOOOOOOOONG winded!
LOL -- I agree Anon! Working on it. I am supposed to be a respected scientist (I am a Ph.D. chemist and academic granddaughter of Linus Pauling, two-time Nobel Laureate), but these posts! Geez Louise. I suspect I am really just a frustrated investigative journalist deep down.
Nicole:WOW! Are we supposed to be impressed? Besides, no one likes a bragger & it doesn't change the fact that you are TOOOOOOOOO LOOOONG winded.
Well WE are impressed and if Anon knew the contributions Linus Pauling as made to the world of science, maybe they would be too.
Anon, no one is forcing you to read these posts. nicole is providing a lot of useful information. If they're too long, just skim and go on to the next one. And I don't think she's bragging, just explaining her background. Let's try not to beat up on each other, please.
MoneyS.: No, let's not beat up on each other let's just beat up on Bush, his administration and conseratives.
Hey, anon, with one of the lowest approval ratings of any president in history, I don't think we're the only ones who are unhappy with bush. It's most of the "reality-based" community.
Post a Comment