There have been some very important hard facts left out of the critical thinking here.
Hard facts:
The evidence for a conspiracy to use 9/11 to invade Iraq is significant. While there is not one shred of evidence the government blew up the World Trade Center, there is evidence that they used the tragedy to remove Saddam Hussein using poor WMD evidence.
Below is a short list of people who blew the whistle on the misuse of pre-war intelligence.
Thomas Packard, acting FBI director: Summer before 9/11, Ashcroft told him he didn’t want to hear anything more about terrorist threats. During the 9/11 hearings other FBI people corroberated this. Someone lied to congress and yet this goes uninvestigated.
Larry Johnson, former counter terrorism agent with the CIA: Rumsfeld set up a special office to link Iraq and Al Qaeda cherry picking Intel; evidence is sent back saying, “That’s garbage, that’s misleading, that misrepresents,” then they would take the same brief to the vice president or one even worse.
Rand Baers, National Security Council: Resigns White House post and works against Bush. He said Cheney pushed CIA "Cheney said, “Everybody knows Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, tell us what you know, what’s your best stuff?..”
Downing Street Memo says Bush wanted to remove Saddam though military action. “Evidence fixed around the policy” How many other counties did the Bush Administration ask to fix evidence evidence around policy? Is the yellowcake part of this fix? If they did it to one country why wouldn't they do it to others?
Rice, Rove, Karen Hughes, Cheney have weekly closed door meetings on how to convince the American people.
John McLaughlin, CIA deputy director: “We did not clear that particular [Niger] speech”… Tenet’s “slam dunk” does not mean what the media thinks it means. Tenet also says the slam dunk was not about the evidence but the presentation of the evidence.
Michael Scheuer: Intel did not matter. We were going to war / Tenet researched 10 years worth of documents and found no connection to Al Qaeda. Tenet tells Bush / Administration yet administration continues to suggest connection.
Who is ‘Joe T’ and why was he the point man for analyzing nuclear weapon intel?
Gregory Thielmann, State Dept intelligence: More and more people said intel on tubes was that they were no good for a nuclear weapon. Official leak saying “Mushroom Cloud” misrepresents the intelligence community disagreement. Administration continues “No doubt” he has WMD. Tenet defends erroneous evidence while others in the CIA voice doubts. State department issues strong and lengthy dissent. Niger uranium purchase “Highly Dubious.” "Intelligence agencies, get your talking points”
CIA intel notes critical gaps in the evidence because of questionable reliability of many sources,
For the first time before a modern war, Bush did not ask for National Intelligence Estimate. Congress demands it. N.I.E. said Saddam not a threat.
White House Iraq group gives only evidence which supports policy while down playing dissent.
Last minute dispute over Niger speech.
Tenet and Powell argue about intel.
Carl Ford, Asst Sec of State, Intelligence: “This is all we got? And we’re making these firm judgments?
Powell not told about Curveball. Curveball was never debriefed by the CIA.
Col. Laurence Wilkerson: Evidence brought to the UN “It was anything but an intelligence document. It was a Chinese menu where you can pick and choose what you want”
A day before Powell’s UN speech, a CIA skeptic had warned Curve Ball is a lair. A superior sends an E-mail reply saying “This war’s going to happen regardless, the powers that be probably aren’t interested whether Curve ball knows what he’s talking about.”
Powell’s speech riddled with misleading allegations. Not outright lies but worded in such a way as to mislead.
Scott Ritter, ex UNSCUM weapon inspector: The evidence for war is not there. He goes on just about every TV station trying to stop the war.
Richard Clarke: Bush wanted to connect Iraq and 9/11. Invading Iraq for 9/11 is like China attacking us and we invade Mexico.
Gen. Clark: People in the Pentagon told him Bush was going to war no matter what.
New Memo DSM said Bush was going to war no matter what.
We know the PNAC wanted to invade Iraq before 911. Was 911 the perfect excuse?
Are you telling me all these high level people are lying?
Here is what I think happened...
PNAC has been looking for an excuse to invade IRAQ since the clinton years. They had a few reasons in mind.
1) Saddam was a nutcase (Trying to draw conclusions from his actions based on what the normal person would do is silly. He wasn't normal) - Problem: he was never shown to be more than a local threat
2) protect the oil supply - Problem: A good reason but not enough to invade. It's their oil and the american people will not go to war just to secure something which isn't theirs.
3) Stablize the middle east: Problem: The american people don't want to go to war to turn Iraq into a middle estern america.
I think what put them over the edge was money. Many of their supporters were going to make a lot of money if they went to war. I'm not saying they made the decision because they knew they were going to make a killing (No pun intended) but because it colored their judgement.
The proof that they didn't think there was WMD was the fact that he pulled the weapon inspectors out only 3 months after they began. Yet we spent more than a year with more than one group of inspectors only to realize they didn't have WMD.
So if you want to go to war what would you have to do? Paint Saddam as a threat by suggesting he was creating WMD and could give it to terrorists. You would do it with a small number of players. Just present the evidence the way conspiracy theorists present their evidence - tell half the truth.
You can want to believe we are killing people in Iraq for valid reasons and if that helps you sleep at night so be it.
Impressive list. Now tell me where were those folks when the Democrats were saying the following in the years leading up to the invasion?
One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998.
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.
My fault.