Skip to main content

On October 9th, the Seattle Times dedicated their Sunday edition to the Scientific consensus of the human impact on climate change (lead article The Truth about Global Warming).  This was a bold step, as they essentially brushed aside the contrarian arguments and said there is no more room for debate on this issue.

Well, today they ran the LA Times investigatory piece on "Curveball" which documents the Administration's manipulation of crucial intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war.

I felt it was time to challenge them to take a similar stance in the political war of words over whether or not the Administration lied us into war.  Since the facts so clearly show that the Administration played fast and loose with the truth in trying to convince us that war with Saddam was necessary, I feel it should be an easy step for them to take.

My letter follows:

Finding Agreement about the Road to Iraq

The October 9th issue of The Seattle Times focused on the issue of global warming and the effects that humans are having on this phenomenon.  Executive Editor Mike Fancher wrote an introductory editorial titled "Finding Agreement about Global Warming," in which he traces the development of an overwhelming consensus of the scientific community that the Earth is warming and humans are significantly affecting this climate change.

It was a courageous step to publish this issue in light of the political war still being fought over this conclusion.  And it is time to take another courageous step.

Currently the Bush Administration is fighting a war of words with their critics over whether or not they mislead Congress and America in their push for war with Saddam.  But this debate, like the debate over climate change, is purely a political one.  The facts of the matter are in and there is no objective conclusion that can be drawn other than that we were, in fact, lied to.

In Sunday, November 27th's issue, The Seattle Times printed the LA Times investigative piece "US Whiffs on 'Curveball'".  This article clearly traces how the Bush Administration continually pushed discredited claims of WMD presented by the Iraqi defector codenamed `Curveball'--long after they were shown to be false, and despite grave concerns about the reliability of the source.  This pattern is seen again and again in the Administration's run-up to war, as well documented in the November Rolling Stone investigative piece, "The Man Who Sold the War," which chronicles the similar story of Adnan Ihsan Saeed al-Haideri, another Iraqi defector who sold the CIA a bunch of fairy tales about WMD in order to gain a US visa.  Fairy tales that were then pushed by this administration after al-Haideri conclusively failed a polygraph and was discounted as a fabricator by his interviewer.

But really, one doesn't need to even see these flagrant falsehoods to know that the decision to invade Iraq was made in bad faith.  One only need to know about the pre-war marketing that was done via the White House Iraq Group (WHIG), a group that was organized purely to sell a war in Iraq to a skeptical America.  The WHIG was founded in 2002 by Andy Card and included among its members Karl Rove, Condoleeza Rice, Stephen Hadley and the now-indicted `Scooter' Libby.  The duplicity of claiming that war in Iraq was a `last resort' while at the same time marketing that war by cherry-picking suspect evidence (such as that described above) is obvious.  Even more disturbing is the evidence from the Rolling Stone investigation that indicates a private firm, The Rendon Group, was hired to plant false stories in foreign media knowing that these stories would quickly find their way back to US media outlets--a strategy designed to avoid laws against placing false stories directly in US media.

At this point, the strongest cry in defense of the Administration's actions comes in the form of the argument that `everyone had the same intelligence'.  But that argument is absurd on two grounds: First, Congress never had the raw intelligence, only `finished' briefings (and in fact Bush sent out a memo  on Oct. 5, 2001 to the FBI, CIA, and Secretaries of State, Defense and Treasury limiting raw intelligence to only 8 members of Congress), and, secondly, the real accusation is that this administration knowingly and willingly manipulated the intelligence to strengthen their case for war.

So it is time for The Seattle Times to take another courageous step and say plainly what was so obvious to the author of the Downing Street Minutes, that "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." The policy, of course, being the invasion of Iraq.

The debate is over, the jury is in. While there are many who still argue this assertion, they are like the `small group of dissenters' in the climate change argument whose views are amplified out of proportion to their validity.  As the latest Harris Poll indicates, over two-thirds of all Americans believe that the Bush Administration "generally misleads the American public on current issues to achieve its own ends."

 The only real room for debate now is where we go from here.

I have no idea whether or not this will be printed or if this will elicit any action on the part of the Times.  While they do serve a fairly progressive city, their ownership is considered conservative and many feel that this bias shows through.

However, it seems to me that so many people on both sides of the political fence are disgusted with the actions of this failed administration that this just might hit a chord.

Originally posted to Sylvester McMonkey Mcbean on Sun Nov 27, 2005 at 03:39 PM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Thank you for writing it (none)
    It needed to be brought to the attention of the Seattle Times.

    However - as a letter to the editor it is likely too long.

    If you could shorten it considerably - you would have a better chance.

    Proud to be a Bleeding Heart Liberal

    by sara seattle on Sun Nov 27, 2005 at 03:40:21 PM PST

  •  A Good Segue for these Stories (none)
    I don't think it's a coincidence that the Bush Administration edited the EPA report on climate change and more or less pulled the same move of "fixing the facts around the policy" so to speak.

    Fixing the facts around the policy seems to be a standard operating procedure  for the Administration.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site