Support BuzzFlash Get a copy of click image MORE BuzzFlash INTERVIEWS WORLD MEDIA WATCH P.M. CARPENTER MAUREEN FARRELL BARBARA'S DAILY BUZZ SOUTHERN STYLE CARTOONS THE ANGRY LIBERAL EDITORIALS CONTRIBUTORS MAILBAG PERSPECTIVES ANALYSIS NEWS ALERTS LINK ARCHIVES SEARCH ABOUT FAQ

Pentagon Propaganda Machine Continues to Spin Lies

A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY
From a Gulf War veteran

The US Department of Defense won't stop telling lies. In the press release disguised as a news article shown below, nearly all of the lies told by President George Bush to start the US-Iraq War are re-told by Douglas Feith, a top aide to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Veterans, Congress, the press, and the people need to stand up and tell the military to stop the lies, threats, and unilateral attacks and instead tell the truth and begin working in an atmosphere of mutual trust and verification.

Here is a DoD press release sent out on November 14, 2003. It repeats the phony reasons cited by President George Bush to attack Iraq. Here is an analysis of the DoD press release, with comments in brackets and blue. For a thorough review of all the lies the Bush told to start the war, please read, "The Five Biggest Lies Bush Told Us About Iraq." http://www.buzzflash.com/premiums/fivelies.html

-----Original Message-----
From: Press Service [mailto:afisnews_sender@DTIC.MIL]
Sent: Friday, November 14, 2003 2:30 PM
Subject: Feith Defends U.S. Decision to Take Down Saddam

Feith Defends U.S. Decision to Take Down Saddam

By Gerry J. Gilmore
American Forces Press Service

WASHINGTON, Nov. 14, 2003 - Former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's regime
presented a clear and present danger to the United States and to the world and
had to be removed, DoD's top policy official told members of a think tank here
Nov. 13.

[Here's the first lie: there is no evidence Iraq posed a "clear and present danger." After nearly eight months of occupation, there is no evidence of any banned weapons in Iraq, and there is no evidence of any links between Iraq and terror groups associated with attacks against the US.]

Speaking before the Council on Foreign Relations, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith [http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/feith_bio.html] defended the actions taken to remove Saddam, which occurred with the fall of Baghdad in early April.

Saddam's Iraq, Feith maintained, was a genuine world threat because of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, its refusal to allow U.N. weapons inspectors to do their jobs, Iraq's use of WMDs in the past and Saddam's ties with terrorist organizations.

[Again more lies: the United States ordered the UN weapons inspectors out of Iraq. Iraq may have used chemical weapons in 1988, when Donald Rumsfeld was providing hundreds of millions of dollars in US military aid to Saddam Hussein.]

"The nexus of terrorist groups, state sponsors of terrorism, and WMD is the security nightmare of the 21st century," he pointed out. "It remains our focus."

[Here's where the US Department of Defense begins the fearmongering propaganda by presenting a "worst case scenario." The military hypes fear when there is no evidence to justify the threat.]

The Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks, Feith noted, proved that America was vulnerable. Consequently, he continued, the United States went on the offensive against global terrorists, first in Afghanistan and then Iraq.

[This is the big lie: Feith links the 9-11 attacks with terrorists, Afghanistan, and Iraq without providing supporting evidence. At this point, the Bush Administration is refusing to release details of Saudi Arabia's potential involvement. Since most of the alleged hijackers are Saudi, why isn't Saudi Arabia mentioned? In this case, the neo-conservatives in power used 9-11 as the false pretext to attack Iraq, a plan they developed in the 1990s.]

The possibility that terrorists, or states that sponsor terrorists, such as Iraq under Hussein, could acquire WMDs, Feith asserted, "is a compelling danger in the near term."

Therefore, he said, the United States and its allies cannot wait for complete, flawless intelligence before such threats become imminent. "We cannot expect to receive unambiguous warnings of, for example, a terrorist group's acquisition of biological weapons agents," Feith pointed out.

[Again, this is a new twist on the "mushroom cloud" as the "smoking gun." This type of language is nothing more than warmongering and hype to promote fear. Once some people are scared enough, then some are more willing to accept a violent action and the loss of liberty.]

Feith said Saddam's defeat has reduced the list of terrorist-sponsoring states with WMD programs by one. That list still includes Iran, Syria, Libya, and North Korea. "Iraq used to be in that category; it no longer is," he noted.

[At this time, Feith's claim of US military victory is premature. The US may have won the battle to invade Iraq, but the US may be losing the war to occupy and subjugate the Iraqi people and exploit their natural resources.]

Saddam's regime, Feith pointed out, "was a sadistic tyranny" that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, warred against its neighbors, and assisted terrorists "by providing them with safe harbor, funds, training and other help." Under Saddam, Iraq refused to abide by several U.N. Security Council resolutions, Feith pointed out, and "undid the U.N. (WMD) inspection regime of the 1990s."

Saddam also bypassed economic sanctions imposed by the world community, Feith noted, and his military routinely shot at U.S. and coalition aircraft patrolling the northern and southern "no-fly" zones instituted at the end of the Gulf War.

"In sum, containment of Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a hollow hope," Feith pointed out, noting the best intelligence confirmed that Hussein "had chemical and biological weapons and was pursuing nuclear weapons."

[The Pentagon's lie is repeated. Although no banned weapons were found, the DoD press release claims "the best intelligence confirmed" Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.]

According to intelligence reports, Hussein could have had a nuclear weapon within a year, Feith maintained, if the dictator had pursued available technology that could be acquired outside of Iraq.

[The military uses another propaganda tactic of "what if, what if" to incite fear of nuclear war without providing a single piece of evidence. In America, we should not go to war based on information the government refuses to make public and hold up to objective review.]

Available intelligence illuminating Saddam's quest for WMDs was consistent, had been corroborated with other, foreign intelligence-gathering sources, and had been known for years, he pointed out.

It's true that stockpiles of chemical or biological weapons haven't yet turned up in Iraq, Feith acknowledged. However, David Kay's Iraq Survey Group, he noted, "has obtained corroborative evidence of Saddam's nuclear, chemical and biological programs; covert laboratories; advanced missile programs; and Iraq's program - active right up until the start of the war - to conceal WMD-related developments from the U.N. inspectors."

[This is a very twisted claim that turns logic into a pretzel: The military says Iraq was attempting to conceal a weapons program even though no weapons program was found.]

In light of all of this, "it would have been risky in the extreme," Feith said, to have allowed Hussein to remain in power "for the indefinite future."

[The DoD press release ends with one final emotional pitch to heighten fear. The overall message of the press release is to hype fear by repeating the words "risk, risk, risk, and "what if, what if, what if." In this case, the military, by relying on emotion instead of fact and reason, has no credibility on the subject of Iraq because Bush and the military lied too many times. Now the American people must demand thorough investigations and to hold those accountable for their intentional lies that started the US - Iraq War.]

A BUZZFLASH READER COMMENTARY