Study: False statements preceded war

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
An article up on Yahoo about a study that quantified the number of false statements made by Mr Bush et al before the Iraqi invasion.

In his willingness to say anything to justify going to war with Iraq, Mr Bush has pushed pass Mr Nixon in the abuse of the powers of the Executive branch.


Study: False statements preceded war By DOUGLASS K. DANIEL, Associated Press Writer
58 minutes ago



WASHINGTON - A study by two nonprofit journalism organizations found that President Bush and top administration officials issued hundreds of false statements about the national security threat from Iraq in the two years following the 2001 terrorist attacks.


The study concluded that the statements "were part of an orchestrated campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the nation to war under decidedly false pretenses."

The study was posted Tuesday on the Web site of the Center for Public Integrity, which worked with the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel did not comment on the merits of the study Tuesday night but reiterated the administration's position that the world community viewed Iraq's leader, Saddam Hussein, as a threat.

"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

The study counted 935 false statements in the two-year period. It found that in speeches, briefings, interviews and other venues, Bush and administration officials stated unequivocally on at least 532 occasions that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or was trying to produce or obtain them or had links to al-Qaida or both.

"It is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction or have meaningful ties to al-Qaida," according to Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith of the Fund for Independence in Journalism staff members, writing an overview of the study. "In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."

Named in the study along with Bush were top officials of the administration during the period studied: Vice President Dick Cheney, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Secretary of State Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz and White House press secretaries Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan.

Bush led with 259 false statements, 231 about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 28 about Iraq's links to al-Qaida, the study found. That was second only to Powell's 244 false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq and al-Qaida.

The center said the study was based on a database created with public statements over the two years beginning on Sept. 11, 2001, and information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches and interviews.

"The cumulative effect of these false statements ? amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts ? was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists ? indeed, even some entire news organizations ? have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq," it said.
 

alchemize

Lifer
Mar 24, 2000
11,486
0
0
Hmm, I believe they missed a few statements by some other politicians....surely a mistake by this completely non-biased study :)

/cue Pabster's list.

The great dems, they can't admit they were complicit in this trainwreck, so they have to say they were stupid.
 

First

Lifer
Jun 3, 2002
10,518
271
136
"The cumulative effect of these false statements ? amplified by thousands of news stories and broadcasts ? was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war," the study concluded.

"Some journalists ? indeed, even some entire news organizations ? have since acknowledged that their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical. These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided additional, 'independent' validation of the Bush administration's false statements about Iraq," it said.

The above conclusions are almost as bad as the distortions and misjudgments perpetuated by the administration themselves. The state of the media has been and continues to be horrid in terms of analysis, research, or honesty. What's worse is that it doesn't seem to be getting any better. I think we need some sort of catastrophic media failure (worse than the acceptance of Iraq) for the American people to force the media's hand. At the moment, I don't quite know what that will be, though.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is a tragedy.

Let's go back to 2002 and fix it.

My wayback machine is broken.. can we use yours? not right now.. it can wait until after the Superbowl, right? and the new American Idol just started up again... DARNITALL!
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,541
9,761
136
Tip: Fire/remove/do not elect anyone who buys into nation building and expanding democracy to Sharia loving people.
 

ProfJohn

Lifer
Jul 28, 2006
18,161
7
0
The only thing that really matters is were these ?false? statements knowingly ?false? when they were made?

There people all over the political spectrum make the same types of statements going way back into Clinton?s term and his own justification for bombing Iraq.

Someone find me a statement by Bush that we know was 100% false and he knew it to be false when he made it. (good luck)
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Tip: Fire/remove/do not elect anyone who buys into nation building and expanding democracy to Sharia loving people.

Except Bush ran on a platform of no nation building. How do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.
 
Sep 12, 2004
16,852
59
86
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is a tragedy.

Let's go back to 2002 and fix it.

My wayback machine is broken.. can we use yours? not right now.. it can wait until after the Superbowl, right? and the new American Idol just started up again... DARNITALL!
I rent out my wayback machine and it's already booked years into the future by right-wingers going back before 2000 and listening to Democrats crow about how Saddam and his WMDs are such a dire threat. The Clintons, Pelosi, Kennedy...they revisit them all.

Who knows why they find that so interesting? But it pays the bills.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
35,541
9,761
136
Originally posted by: xj0hnx
Originally posted by: Jaskalas
Tip: Fire/remove/do not elect anyone who buys into nation building and expanding democracy to Sharia loving people.

Except Bush ran on a platform of no nation building. How do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.

By how they reflect on the current situation. Most certainly give themsleves away as either hating the idea or loving it.
 

Craig234

Lifer
May 1, 2006
38,548
350
126
"The actions taken in 2003 were based on the collective judgment of intelligence agencies around the world," Stanzel said.

Man, what a 180 from Truman's "the buck stops here". As if the Bush administration bases its policies on other nations' opinions. No it just abdicates responsibility and scapegoats them when convenient.

And it's false - the other intelligence agencies had put up warning signals ignored by the US, and none of them said the inspections should be prevented from completing, as Bush decided to do.
 

Farang

Lifer
Jul 7, 2003
10,913
3
0
This has always been in the back of people's minds, but with a comprehensive study like this and it being plastered on the front pages, I wonder if this may open up some sort of scandal. I highly doubt it since these accusations have been around for years, but this seems to be the last chance. Must be the political junkie in me that wants to see heads roll :p
 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is a tragedy.

Let's go back to 2002 and fix it.

My wayback machine is broken.. can we use yours? not right now.. it can wait until after the Superbowl, right? and the new American Idol just started up again... DARNITALL!
I rent out my wayback machine and it's already booked years into the future by right-wingers going back before 2000 and listening to Democrats crow about how Saddam and his WMDs are such a dire threat. The Clintons, Pelosi, Kennedy...they revisit them all.

Who knows why they find that so interesting? But it pays the bills.

Did you cry about the "way back machine" when Saddam was being executed? Didn't think so. So therefore Bush should face the lies he made to the American people and Congress. We don't have a "way back machine", but there is such a thing called justice in this country, at least I hope.
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
74,584
6,713
126
Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is a tragedy.

Let's go back to 2002 and fix it.

My wayback machine is broken.. can we use yours? not right now.. it can wait until after the Superbowl, right? and the new American Idol just started up again... DARNITALL!
I rent out my wayback machine and it's already booked years into the future by right-wingers going back before 2000 and listening to Democrats crow about how Saddam and his WMDs are such a dire threat. The Clintons, Pelosi, Kennedy...they revisit them all.

Who knows why they find that so interesting? But it pays the bills.

Did you cry about the "way back machine" when Saddam was being executed? Didn't think so. So therefore Bush should face the lies he made to the American people and Congress. We don't have a "way back machine", but there is such a thing called justice in this country, at least I hope.

I think your dreaming. The way I see it, all the American hate of themselves was looking for a place to take a crap and when AlQuiraq came along it we were ready go do our business. Who is going to fuck somebody over to release pent up pressure and turn around the next minute and admit they made a mistake. Horses asses don't like to know it. There will be no justice, just a very big bill.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,268
126
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Originally posted by: palehorse74
Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
This is a tragedy.

Let's go back to 2002 and fix it.

My wayback machine is broken.. can we use yours? not right now.. it can wait until after the Superbowl, right? and the new American Idol just started up again... DARNITALL!
I rent out my wayback machine and it's already booked years into the future by right-wingers going back before 2000 and listening to Democrats crow about how Saddam and his WMDs are such a dire threat. The Clintons, Pelosi, Kennedy...they revisit them all.

Who knows why they find that so interesting? But it pays the bills.

I don't give a crap about republicans or democrats. They talk trash and always have. The difference is that Bush went in shooting and didn't even bother to do much more than listen to his and the dems lips flapping as an excuse to go to war. Bush wanted this, he made sure he got it, and we're stuck with it. The best excuse you seem to be able to come up with is that well yeah, maybe Bush started the war, but the Dems talked about it.

Bush ran with it, because the war was his hearts desire, and most importantly, he ACTED on it.

The responsibility for this rests on Bush alone regardless of any Rushite tactics to point the finger elsewhere.
 

Jeff7

Lifer
Jan 4, 2001
41,596
20
81
Bush: Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. Anyone saying Saddam blew up the Trade Centers is crazy. Saddam and 9/11? Didn't happen. Saddam is a threat? No. Is anyone trying to even associate Saddam with 9/11? Of course not. Some people accuse me of associating Saddam with 9/11. I would never do that, "that" referring to associating Saddam with 9/11. I wouldn't even considering using Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence together. Saddam and 9/11.


"You can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror."


See? He did everything in his power to avoid associating Saddam with 9/11 and blowing up the Trade Centers.
Good old power of association.

Saddam and 9/11.


Originally posted by: PC Surgeon
Going to war on false pretenses = treason?
No, it's called "patriotism." ;):( Don't question it, or the terrorists win.


Originally posted by: ProfJohn
The only thing that really matters is were these ?false? statements knowingly ?false? when they were made?

There people all over the political spectrum make the same types of statements going way back into Clinton?s term and his own justification for bombing Iraq.

Someone find me a statement by Bush that we know was 100% false and he knew it to be false when he made it. (good luck)
"I do not recall."
 

1EZduzit

Lifer
Feb 4, 2002
11,833
1
0
Originally posted by: alchemize
Hmm, I believe they missed a few statements by some other politicians....surely a mistake by this completely non-biased study :)

/cue Pabster's list.

The great dems, they can't admit they were complicit in this trainwreck, so they have to say they were stupid.

But we all know who the engineer was.... and he wasn't a Dem. Now instead of trying to deflect responsibility, try taking it and demand justice. Or are you just one more partisian hack?
 

kage69

Lifer
Jul 17, 2003
30,969
46,483
136
Yep, I was expecting someone to release a study like this someday, just didn't realize there were that many falsehoods delivered. Not surprising, as many of us have known for sometime that the bullsh!t is strong with this admin. What is surprising is all the cheerleaders sounding off like this is no big deal, despite claims of nonpartisanship and respect for accountability. Can't be bothered to snap out of their partisan haze, they just continue right along and try to rub off as much slime on the dems as possible. Fuggin pathetic.


And, true to form, Fox Entertainment - probably the biggest cheerleader of them all, doesn't even have a buried link to this story. Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger, Brittany, Heath Ledger, Vatican sending out exorcists to combat evil, Heath Ledger....


 

NoStateofMind

Diamond Member
Oct 14, 2005
9,711
6
76
Originally posted by: kage69

And, true to form, Fox Entertainment - probably the biggest cheerleader of them all, doesn't even have a buried link to this story. Heath Ledger, Heath Ledger, Brittany, Heath Ledger, Vatican sending out exorcists to combat evil, Heath Ledger....

Ahhh the stench of Rupert Murdoch!
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
Mr Bush et al told everybody that Iraq was a serious threat and presented intel to back up their assertions.

One could blame the Democrats for believing him. Why would the Democrats think that Mr Bush would use false statements about a serious national security issue?