So my elected representative to the Senate, the partisan hack Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) wrote a misleading Op-Ed in the LA Times this past week, full of disinfomation, misinformation and some flat out lies. The Military Blogs have been busy dubunking Senator Levin’s partisan nonsense. Two great posts were by Scott Malensek at Flopping Aces and Dadmanly at his blog Dadmanly, and cross-posted at Mudville Gazette’s Milblogs. In addition, John Hinderaker has a great post at Power Line Blog:
Go read those first for some background. They completely dismantle the misleading and flat out lying tripe that Senator Levin propagates to the masses. Granted, it is not surprising, as Senator Levin has been doing this for years. However, the unfortunate reality is that most Americans are ignorant dolts and will believe Senator Levin’s statements in the Op-Ed based on their utter lack of knowledge of facts and history. In addition to the fact that Senator Levin sits on the Senate Foreign Intelligence Committee, so most naive Americans would assume that Senator Levin knows what he is talking about and is putting out a completely factual and non-biased account in his Op-Ed.
Well, you know what they say about people who ass-u-me things.
Today, Scott Malensek has another great post at Flopping Aces: Saddam’s Ties to Al Qaeda Debunked? in which he wades through all the political BS to get to the facts:
“Collaborative Operational Relationship” seems to be the words that started the idea that Saddam and Al Queda would never work together to attack the US, but those three words are cherry-picked from the comment as a whole-a comment that hinges on the precursory words, “we have seen no evidence.” These are repeated again in the very next sentence, “Nor have we seen evidence….”
At first glance it sounds like the commission members are saying that no evidence exists, but that’s not it at all as some of the 911 Commission members later elaborated.
“John Lehman, a 9/11 commissioner, spoke to The Weekly Standard at the time the report was released.”There may well be–and probably will be–additional intelligence coming in from interrogations and from analysis of captured records and so forth which will fill out the intelligence picture. This is not phrased as–nor meant to be — the definitive word on Iraqi Intelligence activities.””
Upon seeing just a glimpse of the 18% of the millions of documents and thousands of hours of tapes captured from Saddam’s regime, 911 Commission member, Sen. Bob Kerrey (D) said,
“This is a very significant set of facts,” former 9/11 commissioner, Mr. Kerry said yesterday. “I personally and strongly believe you don’t have to prove that Iraq was collaborating against Osama bin Laden on the September 11 attacks to prove he was an enemy and that he would collaborate with people who would do our country harm. This presents facts should not be used to tie Saddam to attacks on September 11. It does tie him into a circle that meant to damage the United States.”
Other 911 Commission members have spoken out as well and made clear that the lack of evidence cited in their report was a reference to a lack of evidence gathered. That word, “gathered” come directly from the CIA reports and other intelligence agency reports regarding Saddam’s Ties upon which the 911 Commission was using to make its assessments.
Mr. Malensek then goes on to highlight the 11 Intelligence reports which reveal consistencies on only a few things:
They all refuse to form a conclusion
They all say there was a relationship, but the depth of it is debated inside the intelligence community
They all say the matter should be looked into rather than dismissed, closed, or perpetuated as a resolved point of discussion.
Mr. Malensek then asks a great question: with all the petty political investigations the Congress conducts (*cough* 8 fired US attorneys *cough*), why hasn’t Congress demanded an investigation into the most crucial information of our time: the extent of the relationship between Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein?
Mr. Malensek concludes:
We the American people must demand that an investigation into the depth of the relationship between Saddam’s regime and Bin Laden’s terrorist network be conducted and conclusions that should have been made before the war finally be made. At a time of war with the remnants of both enemies, how can responsible legislators and a dedicated intelligence community continue to refuse to investigate this? The answer is simple, the legislators who deny the 3 commonalities listed earlier and who dismiss the relationship are simply not responsible legislators.
The absolute denial of politicians who continue to falsely claim that there was no relationship at all between Al Queda and Saddam’s regime are either inept beyond acceptability if they have not read the reports listed above, or they are flat out liars if they have read those reports and are dismissing the nature of those who seek to kill Americans; our enemies in Iraq and Afghanistan. Politicians who claim the war in Iraq is “separate from the war on terror” (where every single soldier and Marine killed or wounded since 5/1/03 has been killed in an attack using terrorist tactics) are either completely uninformed by the US military (ignoring or turning down military briefings and intelligence reports), or they are acting in direct and deliberate misrepresentation of the conduct of this war for little more than penciled in circles on ballots every other year.
Additionally, an intelligence community that continues to take a lackadaisical approach to the matter is not properly dedicated at all levels, but rather as politicized and ideologically divided as Congress. The events of 911, the intelligence failures of the Iraq War, the surprise collapse of the Soviet Union, high level spies infiltrating the CIA and FBI, and so much more all serve as examples to the American people of an intelligence community packed with people who are more concerned about saying the politically correct thing in the political capital of the world than they are about forming a conclusion on who the enemy of the United States is and has been.
Saddam is dead. He was a criminal. He was a mass murderer. He was a tyrant, and he was a liar. Why take his word? Americans spend $40 billion to $100 billion a year for 16 different intelligence agencies, and yet rather than get a conclusion based on the intelligence collection and analysis from those any of those 15 agencies, the American people are told to believe Saddam because they are afraid of presenting unpleasant conclusions on a matter that is at least 4 yrs old, and more accurately 15 years old.
That’s not acceptable. America didn’t pay $160 billion dollars to get told just take Saddam’s word for it. It’s time to conduct a real investigation, and a form a real conclusion – a conclusion from intelligence agencies not political committees acting as intelligence agencies.
Amen to that, Mr. Malensek. Well said. Unfortunately, I am afraid that our government (not to mention our watchdog media) is completely corrupted with power and completely emasculated by Political Correctness, Multiculturalism and Moral Relativism that we have no one with the courage to do what most Americans demand. I hope I am wrong though.