Date Posted:09:53:42 08/15/03 Fri Author: Hero of Time Author Host/IP: 66.189.225.43 Subject: Rant : Good Ole' Anti-War Protestors.
"WASHINGTON — Antiwar and peace circles are once again taking aim at the Bush White House, this time counting on Congress to investigate the recent intelligence flaps surrounding the Iraq war.
More than 400,000 people from across the country have contacted members of Congress, part of a petition campaign spearheaded by MoveOn.org that asks lawmakers to investigate the claims that led the United States to use military force to oust former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.
"There needs to be a full-scale, independent investigation into all of this controversy," said David Cortwright, co-founder of Win Without War (search) and president of the Fourth Freedom Forum. "We've been pushing this concept of accountability for weeks now."
But counter-groups are launching their own campaign in support of President Bush.
Citizens United (search), which held a 15,000-strong "Rally for the Troops, Rally for America" in Washington last April, is sending 100,000 letters written by Americans supporting the president to the White House. It is also preparing a television commercial that will address the criticisms pointed toward Bush.
"I do believe there needs to be a response" to the antiwar critics, said Citizens United President David Bossie. "The White House cannot, while conducting the business for America, while conducting the agenda for America ... fighting the war on terror, getting the economy back on track, getting things through Congress ... they don't have time to deal with these types of issues every day, nor should they."
Claims that Iraq tried to obtain uranium from Africa and doubts about the country's weapons of mass destruction program are providing the impetus for the latest wave in antiwar activism.
Opposition groups want the White House to fully disclose any other information being withheld from the American public.
"We entrust the federal government to make those kinds of decisions based on the best information. In this case ... the war was really oversold to us," said Erik Gustafson, a Gulf War veteran and founder of the Education for Peace in Iraq Center.
Citizens can sign the online petitions at MoveOn.org, which ask lawmakers to create an independent commission to investigate whether the Bush administration contorted evidence to take the country to war.
Some members of Congress have already heeded the call. Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Calif., has attracted 111 co-sponsors for a bill that would create an independent commission.
The panel would be modeled after the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, and would probe intelligence regarding threats posed by Iraq and claims made by executive-branch officials about the threats.
"My presumption is, when members come back into town, additional members will be signing on to the bill," said Karen Lightfoot, spokeswoman for the House Government Reform Committee, of which Waxman is the ranking Democrat.
Lawmakers return from the summer recess Sept. 3.
Rep. Ellen Tauscher, D-Calif., has also introduced a bill that would create a select committee in Congress to investigate the effectiveness of U.S. intelligence.
"I think something will happen — it's just a question of whether or not it's going to be thorough enough or open enough," Gustafson said.
Antiwar activists also argue that it is time to bring U.S. troops home.
"This is going sour for Bush. People are realizing that not only is there a great likelihood that the truth was messed around with," said Bill Dobbs, media coordinator for United for Peace and Justice, "but they're questioning something that is costing us upwards of $3.4 billion a month and a lot of American lives."
The White House, while admitting some lack of communication about the intelligence information, is standing its ground.
"Our coalition forces are taking the fight to the enemy in an unrelenting campaign that is bringing daily results," Bush said during a Rose Garden press conference last week.
Bush also said that he takes personal responsibility for the famous 16-word sentence in his State of the Union address — "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa" — that was later determined to be based on faulty intelligence.
The White House did get some good news last week when its lead weapons inspector told two Senate panels that inspectors could be close to finding weapons of mass destruction.
"We are gaining the cooperation, the active cooperation, of Iraqis who were involved in that program," said former U.N. chief weapons inspector David Kay. "We are, as we speak, involved in sensitive exploitation of sites that we are being led to by Iraqis. There is solid evidence being produced."
Bush supporters say they aren't just going to sit idly by as the administration faces a chorus of criticism.
"It's vital that we have a role that defends the president and educates the American people between the president and his detractors, mainly the Democratic presidential hopefuls," Bossie said."
-----------------------------------------------------------
For one, how can CONGRESS investigate this?
Second, if this all stems from that faulty bit of British intelligence, THEY need to be investigated, not the US.
And it seems Antiwar folks are all over the fact that no weapons have been found yet. BUT, if we've gained cooperation from people "in that program", then isn't that, you know, SYNONYMOUS with "having weapons of mass destruction"? If they were IN the WMD program, then there was, in fact, a program to create WMD. Duh.
The truth might not have been messed with so much as the wording was provoking. Consider the comparison:
"Yeah, we think Iraq might be cooking up some trouble out there, and they're looking more evil today...um...if it's ok with you guys, we might ask if they're evil. Are you evil Iraq? See, Britain told us you were buying uranium, but we just want to make sure."
vs.
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Same claim, stronger wording. You decide the legitimacy. I think that if it's enough to get the President of the world's superpower worried, we'd better give it more than a second thought.
With regards to these WMD claims, lemme compare it to a hypothetical, yet practically applied, school situation, per se: Suppose the principal hears rumors that Aj has brought a gun to school. He wants to investigate this by probing his locker. People oppose the idea, saying it violates the 4th amendment of search and siezures. But the principal says it's better than having a school filled with dead kids. He searches through, checking through the locker filled with AntiChrist and Marylin Manson pictures, and one of a fetus, but finds nothing. Because of the controversy, he wasn't allowed to search in the rather bulky backpack or gymbag within the locker, nor was he able to search Aj himself. Because he got no instantaneous results, the school board calls him a warmonger of sorts, and he is suspended. Next week, Aj opens fire and kills all 22 of his classmates for no discernable reason, and calls it "a good thing".
You see, in a situation where people, and MASS QUANTITIES thereof, can be slain by one lunatic, you can't take chances. I shudder to think of how many pieces of the US would be missing if we did not have this President so fervent on destroying terrorism. I can tell you more attacks would have happened, having read deeply into the workings of al Quaeda and terrorism and WMD. I'd rather not see the relatively few (about a handful) of people I care about staggering away from ground zero with their flesh hanging off their bones, nor would I like to be radiated. I don't give a damn HOW intruding it is, when there is a threat, you better damn sure investigate it. In my example, 22 teens were slain because people thought the claim to be rediculous. How many MILLION Americans will we lose if the same thing happens to the President?
