War Lies and the 2004 Election
by
James Bovard
by James Bovard
DIGG THIS
Shortly after
he was reelected, President Bush declared that American voters had
had their moment of accountability regarding the Iraq
war. Since he had gotten slightly more than 50 percent of the votes
in the November 2004 election, that meant that they had ratified
his policies and that Bush was free to do as he chose in the coming
years.
Almost all
of the Founding Fathers would have recognized Bushs interpretation
as dictatorial tripe. But it is also worthwhile to examine the war
frauds by which Bush and Dick Cheney won a second term. This is
especially relevant, since Bush and Cheney may use similar frauds
to attack Iran.
Bush and Cheney
were reelected in large part because they inoculated scores of millions
of Americans against the evidence of the deceits and failures of
the U.S. war in Iraq. They swayed tens of millions of Americans
to take their beliefs from their rulers, not from the facts.
Americans may
be more gullible on foreign policy in part because of their greater
global ignorance. A 2002 survey for National Geographic found
that roughly 85 percent of young Americans (ages 18 to 24)
could not find Afghanistan, Iraq, or Israel on a map. Almost
30 percent of the young adults surveyed could not locate the Pacific
Ocean and 56 percent were unable to locate India. As the old saying
goes, War is Gods way of teaching people geography.
In the days
after 9/11, when pollsters asked Americans who they thought had
carried out the 9/11 attacks, only 3 percent of respondents suggested
Iraq or Saddam Hussein as culprits. But Bush and Cheney strove to
make Americans believe that Saddam was linked to 9/11 or closely
associated with the terrorist group that carried out the attack.
The Saddamal-Qaeda link was the linchpin for exploiting 9/11
to justify preemptive attacks around the globe.
In his official
notification of invasion sent to Congress on March 18, 2003, Bush
declared that he was attacking Iraq to take the necessary
actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations,
including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned,
authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred
on September 11, 2001. Bush tied Saddam to 9/11 even though
confidential briefings he received informed him that no evidence
of any link had been found. In a speech to troops shortly after
Baghdad fell, Bush characterized his attack on Iraq as one
victory in the war on terror that began September 11.
Months of accusations
and insinuations by the Bush administration profoundly affected
Americans perceptions of Iraq and the war. A February 2003
poll found that 72 percent of Americans believed that Saddam was
personally involved in the September 11 attacks. Shortly
before the March 2003 invasion, almost half of all Americans believed
that most or some of the 9/11 hijackers
were Iraqi citizens. Only 17 percent of respondents knew that none
of the hijackers was Iraqi.
Throughout
2004, the Saddamal-Qaeda link was repeatedly officially debunked.
A 9/11 Commission staff report on June 16 concluded that there was
no evidence of a collaborative relationship between
Saddam and al-Qaeda. The findings were trumpeted in headlines across
the nation. Despite this broad coverage of the report, 55 percent
of Bush supporters wrongly believed that the 9/11 Commission reported
that Iraq was providing substantial support to al-Qaeda,
according to a University of Maryland Program on International Policy
Attitudes poll a few weeks later. A Wall Street Journal/NBC
News poll asked Americans whether you agree or disagree with
[the 9/11 Commission] finding [that] Saddam Hussein and the Iraqi
government did not collaborate with al-Qaeda in attacking the United
States on 9/11. Almost half of the respondents disagreed.
Any lingering
doubts on this topic should have been quashed on July 9, 2004, when
the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a 511-page report on the
CIA and Iraq. The report concluded that the CIA reasonably
assessed ... that these contacts [between Saddam and al-Qaeda] did
not add up to an established formal relationship. The report
also recognized that the CIA accurately concluded that to
date there was no evidence proving Iraqi complicity or assistance
in the 9/11 attacks. The report noted that the CIAs accurate
judgments on Saddam, al-Qaeda, and the non-link to 9/11 were
widely disseminated [prior to the U.S. invasion of Iraq], though
an early version of a key CIA assessment was disseminated only to
a limited list of Cabinet members and some sub-Cabinet officials
in the administration. Neither Bush nor Cheney permitted the
facts to impede their rhetoric on Iraq.
Encouraging
Americans to believe that Saddam was behind 9/11, and to see the
Iraq war as vengeance for 9/11, made it far easier to justify an
unprovoked attack on a nation that posed no threat to America. A
September 2004 Newsweek poll found that 42 percent of Americans
believed that Saddam was directly involved in planning, financing,
or carrying out the terrorist attacks. As of mid October,
75 percent of Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq
was providing substantial support to al-Qaeda, and 63 percent believe
that clear evidence of this support has been found, according
to a University of Maryland poll.
The Bush campaigns
portrayal of the invasion of Iraq as a necessary part of the war
on terrorism saved the president. The 55 percent of voters who said
that the war in Iraq is part of the war on terrorism
went for Bush by a 4 to 1 margin. The 43 percent who said Iraq was
not part of the war on terrorism voted for Kerry by an 8 to 1 margin.
Weapons
of mass deception
The Bush teams
invocations of Saddams supposed vast arsenal of weapons of
mass destruction convinced Americans that the United States could
not afford to wait for the UN weapons inspection process to continue.
In a March 17, 2003, speech giving Saddam 48 hours to abdicate power,
Bush declared, Intelligence gathered by this and other governments
leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal
some of the most lethal weapons ever devised. Bush also justified
the invasion of Iraq by appealing to UN resolutions that, he said,
authorized the United States and other governments to
use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction.
The constant
references to WMDs by Bush administration officials burned the issue
into Americans minds. Several months later, almost a quarter
of Americans wrongly believed that Iraq had actually used its weapons
of mass destruction against American forces during the fighting
in March and April 2003.
In the weeks
and months after the fall of Baghdad, Bush repeatedly asserted that
U.S. forces had discovered WMDs or that Saddam had weapons programs.
We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological
laboratories, Bush declared to journalists on May 29, 2003.
Five weeks later, he again claimed vindication because we
found a biological lab in a truck trailer. However, CIA investigators
concluded that the trailer had nothing to do with an Iraqi WMD program.
On January
28, 2004, David Kay of the CIA testified to two Senate committees
on the result of the almost-finished great WMD hunt. As CBS News
noted, Kay was chosen last year as the Iraq Survey Group leader
in part because he was convinced weapons would be found. Kays
group included a thousand people and cost about a billion dollars
(on top of the costs of the invasion supposedly motivated by WMDs).
But Kay announced to the Senate Armed Services Committee that we
were almost all wrong about Iraqs possessing WMDs. Kays
tell-tale almost all wrong phrase was hyped in front-page
headlines across the nation and got massive airtime on television
news and talk shows.
Despite the
publicity that Kays comments received, a March 2004 poll by
the University of Maryland found that 63 percent of Bush supporters
thought, incorrectly, that [Kay] had concluded that Iraq had at
least a major WMD program.
On October
7, 2004, Americans heard from Charles Duelfer, also of the CIA and
the chief U.S. weapons inspector chosen by Bush to go to Iraq and
complete the work of the Iraq Survey Group. Duelfers team
issued a thousand-page final report that offered literary analysis
(speculating on how Hemingways short story The Old Man
and the Sea appealed to Saddam Hussein) in lieu of any WMD
discoveries. Duelfers report was widely seen as the final
demolition of the Bush administrations original casus belli.
The report, coming out the day before the second presidential candidates
debate, generated front-page headlines. Yet a University of Maryland
poll taken after the reports release found that 57 percent
of Bush supporters incorrectly believed that Duelfer concluded
that Iraq did have either WMD (19 percent) or a major program for
developing them (38 percent).
WMD delusions
persisted through Election Day. Another University of Maryland poll,
shortly before the 2004 election, found that 72 percent of
Bush supporters continue to believe that Iraq had actual WMD (47
percent) or a major program for developing them (25 percent).
Fifty-six percent assumed that most experts believed Iraq possessed
WMDs at the time of the U.S. invasion. Bush supporters also wrongly
believed that the invasion of Iraq was welcomed around the world.
Bush supporters
approval of the war depended largely on their delusions. They were
asked, If, before the war, U.S. intelligence services had
concluded that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction and
was not providing substantial support to al-Qaeda, what should
have been done? Fifty-eight percent of Bush supporters said
in that case the U.S. should not have gone to war. Furthermore,
61 percent express confidence that in that case the President would
not have gone to war.
The
October 2004 University of Maryland report explained that Bush supporters
continue to hear the Bush administration confirming these
beliefs. Among Bush supporters, an overwhelming 82 percent perceive
the Bush administration as saying that Iraq had WMD (63 percent)
or a major WMD program (19 percent).... Seventy-five percent of
Bush supporters think the Bush administration is currently saying
Iraq was providing substantial support to al-Qaeda (56 percent)
or even that it was directly involved in 9/11 (19 percent).
Stephen
Kull, director of the University of Marylands Program on International
Policy Attitudes, commented, To support the president and
to accept that he took the United States to war based on mistaken
assumptions likely creates substantial cognitive dissonance, and
leads Bush supporters to suppress awareness of unsettling information
about prewar Iraq. The more information about the war that
people suppressed, the easier it became for them to support Bush
and to view opponents of the war as unpatriotic, un-American, or
otherwise possessed by demons.
George
W. Bush has not yet had his moment of accountability
for his war in Iraq. If there is justice, then there will be a full
investigation of the lies by which the president and his team paved
the way to attack.
In
the meantime, Americans should remember the Iraq war frauds and
radically discount any White House racketeering for the next war.
July
24, 2007
James Bovard
[send him mail] is the author
of the just-released Attention
Deficit Democracy, The
Bush Betrayal, and Terrorism
& Tyranny: Trampling Freedom, Justice, and Peace to Rid the
World of Evil. He serves as a policy advisor for The
Future of Freedom Foundation. Visit his
website.
Copyright
© 2007 The Future of Freedom Foundation
James
Bovard Archives
|