Study:
Bushies Lied 935 Times to Sell Iraq Invasion By
Charles Lewis and Mark Reading-Smith, The Center for Public Integrity
President
George W. Bush and seven of his administration's top officials, including Vice
President Dick Cheney, National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice, and Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, made at least 935 false statements in the two years
following September 11, 2001, about the national security threat posed by Saddam
Hussein's Iraq. Nearly five years after the U.S. invasion of Iraq, an exhaustive
examination of the record shows that the statements were part of an orchestrated
campaign that effectively galvanized public opinion and, in the process, led the
nation to war under decidedly false pretenses. On
at least 532 separate occasions (in speeches, briefings, interviews, testimony,
and the like), Bush and these three key officials, along with Secretary of State
Colin Powell, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, and White House press secretaries
Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan, stated unequivocally that Iraq had weapons
of mass destruction (or was trying to produce or obtain them), links to Al Qaeda,
or both. This concerted effort was the underpinning of the Bush administration's
case for war. It
is now beyond dispute that Iraq did not possess any weapons of mass destruction
or have meaningful ties to Al Qaeda. This was the conclusion of numerous bipartisan
government investigations, including those by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
(2004 and 2006), the 9/11 Commission, and the multinational Iraq Survey Group,
whose "Duelfer Report" established that Saddam Hussein had terminated
Iraq's nuclear program in 1991 and made little effort to restart it. In
short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous
information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action
against Iraq on March 19, 2003. Not surprisingly, the officials with the most
opportunities to make speeches, grant media interviews, and otherwise frame the
public debate also made the most false statements, according to this first-ever
analysis of the entire body of prewar rhetoric. President
Bush, for example, made 232 false statements about weapons of mass destruction
in Iraq and another 28 false statements about Iraq's links to Al Qaeda. Secretary
of State Powell had the second-highest total in the two-year period, with 244
false statements about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and 10 about Iraq's
links to Al Qaeda. Rumsfeld and Fleischer each made 109 false statements, followed
by Wolfowitz (with 85), Rice (with 56), Cheney (with 48), and McClellan (with
14). The
massive database at the heart of this project juxtaposes what President Bush and
these seven top officials were saying for public consumption against what was
known, or should have been known, on a day-to-day basis. This fully searchable
database includes the public statements, drawn from both primary sources (such
as official transcripts) and secondary sources (chiefly major news organizations)
over the two years beginning on September 11, 2001. It also interlaces relevant
information from more than 25 government reports, books, articles, speeches, and
interviews. Consider,
for example, these false public statements made in the run-up to war:
On
August 26, 2002, in an address to the national convention of the Veteran of Foreign
Wars, Cheney flatly declared: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam
Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing
them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us." In
fact, former CIA Director George Tenet later recalled, Cheney's assertions went
well beyond his agency's assessments at the time. Another CIA official, referring
to the same speech, told journalist Ron Suskind, "Our reaction was, 'Where
is he getting this stuff from?' " In
the closing days of September 2002, with a congressional vote fast approaching
on authorizing the use of military force in Iraq, Bush told the nation in his
weekly radio address: "The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical
weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British
government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes
after the order is given. . . . This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with
fissile material could build one within a year." A few days later, similar
findings were also included in a much-hurried National Intelligence Estimate on
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction -- an analysis that hadn't been done in years,
as the intelligence community had deemed it unnecessary and the White House hadn't
requested it. In
July 2002, Rumsfeld had a one-word answer for reporters who asked whether Iraq
had relationships with Al Qaeda terrorists: "Sure." In fact, an assessment
issued that same month by the Defense Intelligence Agency (and confirmed weeks
later by CIA Director Tenet) found an absence of "compelling evidence demonstrating
direct cooperation between the government of Iraq and Al Qaeda." What's more,
an earlier DIA assessment said that "the nature of the regime's relationship
with Al Qaeda is unclear." On May 29, 2003, in an interview with Polish
TV, President Bush declared: "We found the weapons of mass destruction. We
found biological laboratories." But as journalist Bob Woodward reported in
State of Denial, days earlier a team of civilian experts dispatched to examine
the two mobile labs found in Iraq had concluded in a field report that the labs
were not for biological weapons. The team's final report, completed the following
month, concluded that the labs had probably been used to manufacture hydrogen
for weather balloons. On
January 28, 2003, in his annual State of the Union address, Bush asserted: "The
British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant
quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has
attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons
production." Two weeks earlier, an analyst with the State Department's Bureau
of Intelligence and Research sent an email to colleagues in the intelligence community
laying out why he believed the uranium-purchase agreement "probably is a
hoax." On
February 5, 2003, in an address to the United Nations Security Council, Powell
said: "What we're giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence.
I will cite some examples, and these are from human sources." As it turned
out, however, two of the main human sources to which Powell referred had provided
false information. One was an Iraqi con artist, code-named "Curveball,"
whom American intelligence officials were dubious about and in fact had never
even spoken to. The other was an Al Qaeda detainee, Ibn al-Sheikh al-Libi, who
had reportedly been sent to Eqypt by the CIA and tortured and who later recanted
the information he had provided. Libi told the CIA in January 2004 that he had
"decided he would fabricate any information interrogators wanted in order
to gain better treatment and avoid being handed over to [a foreign government]."
The
false statements dramatically increased in August 2002, with congressional consideration
of a war resolution, then escalated through the mid-term elections and spiked
even higher from January 2003 to the eve of the invasion. It
was during those critical weeks in early 2003 that the president delivered his
State of the Union address and Powell delivered his memorable U.N. presentation.
For all 935 false statements, including when and where they occurred, go to the
search page for this project; the methodology used for this analysis is explained
here. In
addition to their patently false pronouncements, Bush and these seven top officials
also made hundreds of other statements in the two years after 9/11 in which they
implied that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction or links to Al Qaeda. Other
administration higher-ups, joined by Pentagon officials and Republican leaders
in Congress, also routinely sounded false war alarms in the Washington echo chamber. The
cumulative effect of these false statements -- amplified by thousands of news
stories and broadcasts -- was massive, with the media coverage creating an almost
impenetrable din for several critical months in the run-up to war. Some journalists
-- indeed, even some entire news organizations -- have since acknowledged that
their coverage during those prewar months was far too deferential and uncritical.
These mea culpas notwithstanding, much of the wall-to-wall media coverage provided
additional, "independent" validation of the Bush administration's false
statements about Iraq. The
"ground truth" of the Iraq war itself eventually forced the president
to backpedal, albeit grudgingly. In a 2004 appearance on NBC's Meet the Press,
for example, Bush acknowledged that no weapons of mass destruction had been found
in Iraq. And on December 18, 2005, with his approval ratings on the decline, Bush
told the nation in a Sunday-night address from the Oval Office: "It is true
that Saddam Hussein had a history of pursuing and using weapons of mass destruction.
It is true that he systematically concealed those programs, and blocked the work
of U.N. weapons inspectors. It is true that many nations believed that Saddam
had weapons of mass destruction. But much of the intelligence turned out to be
wrong. As your president, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq. Yet
it was right to remove Saddam Hussein from power." Bush
stopped short, however, of admitting error or poor judgment; instead, his administration
repeatedly attributed the stark disparity between its prewar public statements
and the actual "ground truth" regarding the threat posed by Iraq to
poor intelligence from a Who's Who of domestic agencies. On
the other hand, a growing number of critics, including a parade of former government
officials, have publicly -- and in some cases vociferously -- accused the president
and his inner circle of ignoring or distorting the available intelligence. In
the end, these critics say, it was the calculated drumbeat of false information
and public pronouncements that ultimately misled the American people and this
nation's allies on their way to war. Bush
and the top officials of his administration have so far largely avoided the harsh,
sustained glare of formal scrutiny about their personal responsibility for the
litany of repeated, false statements in the run-up to the war in Iraq. There has
been no congressional investigation, for example, into what exactly was going
on inside the Bush White House in that period. Congressional oversight has focused
almost entirely on the quality of the U.S. government's pre-war intelligence --
not the judgment, public statements, or public accountability of its highest officials.
And, of course, only four of the officials -- Powell, Rice, Rumsfeld, and Wolfowitz
-- have testified before Congress about Iraq. Short
of such review, this project provides a heretofore unavailable framework for examining
how the U.S. war in Iraq came to pass. Clearly, it calls into question the repeated
assertions of Bush administration officials that they were the unwitting victims
of bad intelligence. Above
all, the 935 false statements painstakingly presented here finally help to answer
two all-too-familiar questions as they apply to Bush and his top advisers: What
did they know, and when did they know it?
|