 |
SwiftVets.com
Service to Country
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
SBD
Admiral
Joined: 19 Aug 2004
Posts: 1022
|
 Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:04 pm Post subject: SENATOR CARL LEVIN (D)believes that Saddam Hussein had nukes |
 |
|
| Quote: | Saddam's Nukes?
Does Carl Levin know something the rest of us don't?
by Stephen F. Hayes
11/08/2005 7:25:00 PM
DOES SENATOR CARL LEVIN believe that Saddam Hussein had nukes?
Levin, the second ranking Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, is leading the charge against the White House for manipulating intelligence on Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and connections to al Qaeda. He has been dogged and ruthless, focusing his criticism on two areas of the Bush administration's case for war in Iraq: the connection between Iraq and al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons program. Levin claims that the Bush administration manipulated intelligence in both areas to frighten the American public into supporting a war of choice.
Which is why Levin's latest claim is so startling. On Monday, Levin appeared on Hardball with Chris Matthews on MSNBC and made the following declaration:
"There was plenty of evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons, by the way. That is not in dispute. There is plenty of evidence of that."
Really? I'd like to see it. (The transcript is here and the video can be viewed on the Hardball main page, here.
Levin also criticized the Bush administration for deciding to remove Saddam Hussein shortly after 9/11. It is a curious charge. On December 16, 2001, in an appearance on CNN, Levin himself called for regime change in Iraq. Levin would not say whether he supported making Hussein's Iraq the "next target" after Afghanistan, but he did say this:
"The war against terrorism will not be finished as long as he [Saddam Hussein] is in power."
Here then, is the relevant portion of Monday night's exchange:
MATTHEWS: Senator Levin, from what I can figure, our audience on HARDBALL is a pretty mixed bag of conservatives, liberals and middle-of- the-roaders. That shifts of course. But, there are a lot of people out there who have different views than you, or me, or anybody else on this war.
I just wondered, analytically, how would you best describe the manner in which the vice president and his people and others in the administration looked at this intel? That you've just described. What was it, selective use? Was it a skewed use of it? Was it a worst-case scenario? Was it deliberate lying?
LEVIN: I think they ignored the intelligence that did not support their decision to go to war, basically. They were looking for those snippets of intelligence that would support their decision to go to war. That is basically what their signal was.
I believe the intelligence community. The intelligence community then provided some distorted intelligence on a lot of things. But, that's not what the issue is that I raise this weekend.
This is where the intelligence community was right and they ignored the intelligence community. Not where the intelligence community was wrong, which was plenty of times.
There are instance after instance after instance where the intelligence community was right or divided, where the administration, for reasons to, obvious to create an impression that they wanted the American people to believe, where they did not use what the intelligence community had found or decided.
MATTHEWS: What came first do you believe, Senator? Their desire to go to war or the way they looked at the evidence?
LEVIN: I think basically they decided immediately after 9/11 to go after Saddam. They began to--look there was plenty of evidence that Saddam had nuclear weapons, by the way. That is not in dispute. There is plenty of evidence of that.
Stephen F. Hayes is a senior writer at The Weekly Standard.
|
SBD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
LewWaters
Admin
Joined: 18 May 2004
Posts: 4042
Location: Washington State
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 09, 2005 8:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Standard Liberal reply: They were only repeating the lies told them by Bush when he misled everyone. Never mind many were also saying Saddam had WMDs including nukes 3 years before Bush got into office.
It would sure be nice to see someone in the media start holding these Liberals feet to the fire, though. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dusty
Admiral
Joined: 27 Aug 2004
Posts: 1264
Location: East Texas
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:59 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It would sure be nice to see someone in the media start holding these Liberals feet to the fire, though. |
Well, don't hold your breath waiting for Chris Matthews to do it. He's about as biased and deceitful as they come. When they go back and look at just who had the most influence in deceiving the public about all this, he has to have a place very near the top of the list.
Dusty
_________________
Left and Wrong are the opposite of Right! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PhantomSgt
Vice Admiral
Joined: 10 Sep 2004
Posts: 972
Location: GUAM, USA
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 10, 2005 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| LewWaters wrote: | | It would sure be nice to see someone in the media start holding these Liberals feet to the fire, though. |
I can't imagine a card carrying member of the MSM ever outing one of their Comrades and Collaborators who only live to undermine the security of our Nation.
_________________
Retired AF E-8
Independent that leans right of center. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
