This is only a Preview!

You must Publish this diary to make this visible to the public,
or click 'Edit Diary' to make further changes first.

Posting a Diary Entry

Daily Kos welcomes blog articles from readers, known as diaries. The Intro section to a diary should be about three paragraphs long, and is required. The body section is optional, as is the poll, which can have 1 to 15 choices. Descriptive tags are also required to help others find your diary by subject; please don't use "cute" tags.

When you're ready, scroll down below the tags and click Save & Preview. You can edit your diary after it's published by clicking Edit Diary. Polls cannot be edited once they are published.

If this is your first time creating a Diary since the Ajax upgrade, before you enter any text below, please press Ctrl-F5 and then hold down the Shift Key and press your browser's Reload button to refresh its cache with the new script files.


  1. One diary daily maximum.
  2. Substantive diaries only. If you don't have at least three solid, original paragraphs, you should probably post a comment in an Open Thread.
  3. No repetitive diaries. Take a moment to ensure your topic hasn't been blogged (you can search for Stories and Diaries that already cover this topic), though fresh original analysis is always welcome.
  4. Use the "Body" textbox if your diary entry is longer than three paragraphs.
  5. Any images in your posts must be hosted by an approved image hosting service (one of: imageshack.us, photobucket.com, flickr.com, smugmug.com, allyoucanupload.com, picturetrail.com, mac.com, webshots.com, editgrid.com).
  6. Copying and pasting entire copyrighted works is prohibited. If you do quote something, keep it brief, always provide a link to the original source, and use the <blockquote> tags to clearly identify the quoted material. Violating this rule is grounds for immediate banning.
  7. Be civil. Do not "call out" other users by name in diary titles. Do not use profanity in diary titles. Don't write diaries whose main purpose is to deliberately inflame.
For the complete list of DailyKos diary guidelines, please click here.

Please begin with an informative title:

After a long-winded session of Back Peddling by Ridge over his thoughts and feelings that Homeland Security "might" have been politicized - the best part is during the second section of the Interview here where Rachel hones in the invalid basis for starting the Iraq War and does something no other Journalist has bother to do in 6 Years - Point out the Truth!


You must enter an Intro for your Diary Entry between 300 and 1150 characters long (that's approximately 50-175 words without any html or formatting markup).

MSNBC The Rachel Maddow Show - 1 Sep. 2009: Rachel interviews former Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge on politicizing terror threat level during the Bush Administration. Maddow clearly has no patience with Ridge pulling out the "faulty intelligence was responsible for Iraq fiasco" crap and his backpedaling.

PART ONE OF INTERVIEW: http://www.democraticunderground.com/....

MADDOW: I think you making that argument right now is why Republicans after the Bush and Cheney administration are not going to get back the country's trust on national security. To look back at that decision and say 'we got it wrong but it was in good faith' and not acknowledge the foregone conclusion that we are going to invade Iraq that pervaded every decision that was made about intelligence. Looking back at that decision-making process, it sounds like you're making the argument that you would have made the same decision again.

Americans need to believe that our government would not make that wrong a decision, that would not take such a foregone conclusion to such an important issue, that the intelligence that proved the opposite point was all discounted, that the intelligence was combed through for any bit that would fit the foregone conclusion of the policymakers. The system was broken and if you don't see that the system was broken and you think that it was just that the intel was wrong - I think that you're one of the most trusted voices on national security for the Republican party, and I think that is the elephant in the room. I don't think you guys get back your credibility on national security until you realize that was a wrong decision made by policy makers; that wasn't the spies fault.

RIDGE: Well, I think you are suggesting that it was only driven by, quite obviously the people who made the decision knew more about the threat than you and I do. And again I think it is a pretty radical conclusion to suggest that men and women entrusted with the safety of this country would predicate a decision upon any other basis other than to keep America safe. Later on it may have proven that some of the information was inaccurate, but there were plenty of reasons to go into Iraq at the time - the foremost were the weapons of mass destruction, that obviously proven to be faulty. But the fact of the matter is, at that time, given what they knew, and they knew more than what you and I did, it seemed to be the right thing to do and the decision was made in what they considered to be in the best interest of our country.

- snip -

MADDOW: If you can go back in time and sell the American people on the idea that 4,000 Americans ought to lose their lives and we ought to lose those trillions of dollars for democracy in Iraq, you have a wilder imagination than I do. We were sold that war because of 9/11. We were sold that war because of the threat of weapons of mass destruction from this guy who didn't have them, and our government should have known it. And frankly a lot of people believe our government did know it and it was a cynical decision. And maybe everybody wasn't in on it and maybe that is a radical thing to conclude...

Repeated Ridge claims the people who ultimately made the decisions had better information than either "You or I"?

You mean people like Dick "String 'em up and Crush their Testicles" Cheney?

Here's something they knew:

The head of Iraqi Intelligence, Tahir Jalil Habbush, had Defected before the War and TOLD US that Saddam had already destroyed all his previous WMD stockpiles. Bush choose not to believe him and said "Give me something I can use..." They then paid him off with $5 Million to keep quiet, after having him forge a letter that framed Saddam for 9-11!

Suskind says he spoke on the record with U.S. intelligence officials who stated that Bush was informed unequivocally in January 2003 that Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction. Nonetheless, his book relates, Bush decided to invade Iraq three months later — with the forged letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam bolstering the U.S. rationale to go into war.
George Tenet phoned and sent faxes to the White House saying the "Yellowcake Story is Bogus"... so Bush didn't quote the CIA or Tenet, he quoted the British who hadn't figured out that the Niger Document was forgery yet.

When Joe Wilson called them on it, they blew his wife's cover as a covert CIA Agent - which under normal and sane circumstances would be called "Treason" - and tried to claim his objections were just "Nepotism". Yeah, ok - where's the Yellow Cake then?

In order to help prove the Saddam/9-11 link Cheney requested that the head of Iraqi Security be Waterboarded (A Prisoner of War In Iraq - to whom the OLC Memos Didn't Apply), even though he was already cooperating - he just wasn't telling them what CHENEY wanted to hear.

Cynical? Maybe so and Maybe not, but Fracking BULLHEADED and CRIMINAL!  You Betcha!

Here's a parting shot from my new Video - just because it's Right on Point - Show them the Truth and some people will simply Never Believe it.


Extended (Optional)

Originally posted to Vyan on Wed Sep 02, 2009 at 09:49 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.