Who Lied about Iraq?

Randall Hoven writes at American Thinker:

Do not believe that post-invasion intelligence invalidates our justification for using military force against Saddam's Iraq. The truth is the exact opposite. The US was fully justified to use military force against Iraq, even knowing what we know now -- especially knowing what we know now. We should not allow the false story -- almost accepted as fact -- as we head into a Presidential election, to go unchallenged.

Our invasion of Iraq was not based on a public relations drive; it was based on Public Law 107-243, otherwise known as the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq, passed by the 107^th Congress in October of 2002 .

....

Feel free to read all 23 clauses. The Authorization never claims that Iraq had large stockpiles of modern WMD in 2002, which later became, for no good reason, the threshold used for validation by the media and administration critics. (The logical fallacy employed by Bush's critics here is the "straw man.")

....

So what was found post-invasion? The Duelfer Report noted that 53 chemical weapons were found.

"Beginning in May 2004, ISG recovered a series of chemical weapons from Coalition military units and other sources. A total of 53 munitions have been recovered." (Found on page 97 of Annex F of Volume 3.)

That number later grew to over 500 chemical weapons. You can now check the "large stockpiles of chemical weapons" off your checklist (even though the Authorization did not claim they existed in 2002 or later).

....

As to concealment, note the following Duelferisms.

• The word "conceal" is found 57 times in Volume 1 alone.
• "Many locations associated with previous WMD programs and sites under monitoring by the United Nations have been completely looted... Often there is nothing but a concrete slab at locations where once stood plants or laboratories."
• "We cannot express a firm view on the possibility that WMD elements were relocated out of Iraq prior to the war."
• "ISG technical experts fully evaluated less than one quarter of one percent of the over 10,000 weapons caches throughout Iraq."

....

The Duelfer Report is three volumes of "I don't know." Post-invasion intelligence is no more trustworthy than pre-invasion intelligence.

....

Did the Authorization try to "prove that Iraq had connections to the 911 terrorists"? Was that proved false?

Again, no and no.
....

Were any al Qaida members in Iraq at the time of the Authorization? Yes, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his cell. The most recent Senate Intelligence Committee's report on the matter concluded the following .

"[Pre-war administration] statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other al-Qa'ida-related terrorist members were substantiated by the intelligence assessments. Intelligence assessments noted Zarqawi's presence in Iraq and his ability to travel and operate within the country.

"Postwar information supports prewar assessments and statements that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi was in Baghdad and that al-Qa'ida was present in northern Iraq."

This report is the product of a Democrat-controlled Senate committee, chaired by John D. Rockefeller (D-WV), in a Democrat-controlled Senate.

....

Judge Harold Baer ruled in Federal court that Iraq was indeed partially responsible for the September 11 attacks, enough so that the plaintiffs could be awarded damages against Saddam's Iraq . The judge ruled there was "a sufficient basis for a reasonable jury to draw inferences"

"that Iraq provided material support to bin Laden and al Qaeda.... Iraq collaborated in or supported bin Laden/al Qaeda's terrorist acts of September 11... Iraq provided materiel support to al Qaeda and that it did so with knowledge and intent to further al Qaeda's criminal acts."

Judge Harold Baer is not some 10-Commandment-Displaying Reaganite; he was appointed by President Clinton. Significant testimony in the case came from James Woolsey, President Clinton's CIA chief from 1993 to 1995.

And there's more. Read the whole thing.