WMD

NYT on Bush vs. Blair

In this New York Times op ed piece, You Say Tomato, Paul Krugman discusses why Blair's in so much more hot water than Bush. He argues that Bush is much less adept at 'spin-control,' and it's hard to fault this argument. (He also discusses the effect of Kelly's death and the 'kid-gloves' treatment the US media have given Bush).

Who blocked the inspectors?

Bush, in a photo oppoortunity with Kofi Annen, said of Saddam Hussein: And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in.. The Washington Post picked up the story, noting that:

The president's assertion that the war began because Iraq did not admit inspectors appeared to contradict the events leading up to war this spring: Hussein had, in fact, admitted the inspectors and Bush had opposed extending their work because he did not believe them effective.

Commented on by Joe Conason, Tom Tomorrow, and Meg Hourihan.

The whole context of the quote can be found on the Whitehouse site in the transcript President Reaffirms Strong Position on Liberia:

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Dana, one last question.

Q Mr. President, back on the question of Iraq, and that specific line that has been in question --

THE PRESIDENT: Can you cite the line? (Laughter.)

Q I could, if you gave me some time.

THE PRESIDENT: When I gave the speech, the line was relevant.

Q So even though there has been some question about the intelligence -- the intelligence community knowing beforehand that perhaps it wasn't, you still believe that when you gave it --

THE PRESIDENT: Well, the speech that I gave was cleared by the CIA. And, look, the thing that's important to realize is that we're constantly gathering data. Subsequent to the speech, the CIA had some doubts. But when I gave the -- when they talked about the speech and when they looked at the speech, it was cleared. Otherwise, I wouldn't have put it in the speech. I'm not interested in talking about intelligence unless it's cleared by the CIA. And as Director Tenet said, it was cleared by the CIA.

The larger point is, and the fundamental question is, did Saddam Hussein have a weapons program? And the answer is, absolutely. And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him from power, along with other nations, so as to make sure he was not a threat to the United States and our friends and allies in the region. I firmly believe the decisions we made will make America more secure and the world more peaceful.

Pretzel logic and revised history

Joe Conason in Salon, Pretzel logic and revised history:

Does Rumsfeld think that nobody can remember what he and his associates were saying about Iraqi weapons during those eight months before the war began? Hasn't the secretary of defense ever heard of videotape?

Me, too!

Everybody else is linking to it, why not me?

Three questions from The Economist

The Economist asks three questions:

1. Did the government “sex up” intelligence information? (Their answer: not really)
2. Did the BBC act properly in the way it broadcast this story? (Their answer: no)
3. Did the prime minister mislead Parliament? (Their answer: he was ignorant, so there was no intent to mislead).

But they say the real question is why Britain went to war on the basis of a threat that, it seems, wasn't there.