White House Says Iraq Uranium Claim Forged
President Bush's claim in his State of the Union speech that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa was based on forged information, the White House National Security Council said on Tuesday."At the time, the national intelligence estimate on Iraqi weapons of mass destruction referred to attempts by Iraq to acquire uranium from several countries in Africa," said Michael Anton, a spokesman for the security council.
"We now know that documents alleging a transaction between Iraq and Niger had been forged," Anton said.
The White House statement fanned a smoldering controversy over whether the U.S. and British governments manipulated intelligence about weapons of mass destruction to make the case for war against Iraq. So far, no evidence of such weapons has been found by U.S. and coalition forces.
As I am not wont to do often, a large part of my reasoning is based on statements and reports from government sources. If the data we heard repeated and asserted was true, then my support was grudging but affirmative. I didn't like then (and I remain uneasy now) with using data from the government to rest so much of a position of mine on, but it felt like the rational thing to do. In addition to the undisputed evidence of Iraq's programs and weapons and the government's attempts to delay, deny, and cover up whatever remained after the first Gulf War, I figured the likely political risk of Bush & Co. being discovered as a bunch of lying or distorting bastards doing everything they could to steer the nation towards war with Iraq would be a substantial deterrent to them attempting it. History has shown that the truth will eventually come out in most matters of politics (even if the participants are long dead and gone), and the chances of someone leaking, screwing up, or the truth being revealed are very great in today's 24/7 news society. Furthermore, it's almost inevitable lies such as these would be refuted given their nature: once Iraq is defeated in battle and focus (and better ability) can be returned to the issue of WMD and everyone knew the pressure would be considerable to find the "smoking gun."
I have to be honest: in my opinion, no rational person or persons would do it unless the need to do so was truely immense. I hope my trust wasn't misplaced, but with greater anxiety I witness another day where I believe it to be the case.
I continue to believe the invasion was ultimately a Good Thing, certainly one of astounding military triumph. However, it's aftermath is distressing and has not met my expectations. The opposition, though relatively small and ineffective, is creating more distraction and destruction than I had hoped and the US-Iraqi accidents/shootings/conflicts are worsening the situtation. I never believed this would be easy, bloodless, cheap, or quick. There is a distorting effect the media applies when these bad events occur that may be desensitizing us to the good occuring at the same time...much in the same way we hear about school shootings but almost never about acts of firearm self-defense.
Nevertheless, when the government does something as fucking stupid as use forged evidence as central means to justify and uphold support for military action against another country, I am reminded once again why my trust in these matters is so rarely given. I'm angry on several levels, some of them conflicting. I'll need at least six more months of "no WMDs found" reports and investigations before I truely renounce my support, but at this point I consider everyone in the government behind the push for war and the people they used to find factual support for their positions to be in serious breech of faith. I've never liked Bush as a whole, but having something this idiodic slip through on your watch is not forgivable.
ATTENTION: Comments are closed. You are viewing my old blog, archived for search engine purposes.
To view the new blog, please go to the homepage. To find the current version of this entry, search here.