Iraq News Now

Presidential candidate Joe Biden is adding lies on top of lies to cover up

his backing of the Iraq invasion.

At last night’s ABC/DNC debate Biden lied about his Iraq record, just like

he did at the first two debates.

In the July debate, Biden claimed:

“From the moment ‘shock and awe’ started, from that

moment, I was opposed to the effort, and I was outspoken

as much as anyone at all in the Congress.”

When he first said that, it received virtually no scrutiny except for Mideast

scholar Stephen Zunes, who wrote the piece “Biden

Is Doubling Down on Iraq War Lies.” Zunes outlined much of Biden’s record,

including his insistence in May 2003 – months after the Iraq invasion –

that “There was sufficient evidence to go into Iraq.”

At last night’s debate on ABC, Biden claimed that

he voted for the Iraq invasion authorization to “to

allow inspectors to go in to determine whether or

not anything was being done with chemical weapons

or nuclear weapons.”

But the congressional vote happened on

October 11 (see Biden’s speech

then). And by that time Iraq had agreed to allow weapons

inspectors back in. On Sept. 16, 2002, the New

York Times reported: “U.N.

Inspectors Can Return Unconditionally, Iraq Says.”

(This was immediately after a delegation organized

by the Institute

for Public Accuracy – where I work – had gone to

Iraq.)

Now, independent journalist Michael Tracey, who interviewed

Biden in New Hampshire recently, reports that Biden

made the ridiculous claim that he opposed the invasion

of Iraq even before it started. Said Biden:

“Yes, I did oppose the war before it began.” See Tracey’s

piece: “Joe

Biden’s Jumbled Iraq War Revisionism” and video.

Biden did initially back a bill along with Republican

Sen. Richard Lugar which would have somewhat constrained

Bush’s capacity to launch an invasion of Iraq completely

at his whim. But the Bush administration opposed

the measure. One might have thought that such opposition

would lead Biden to conclude that Bush insisting

on not having any constrain would be a reason not

to write him a blank check. But not Biden. He of

course voted for the legislation giving Bush the

complete license he wanted.

Bush ended up launching the war by telling

the UN to get the weapons inspectors out – thus

forcing an end to their work – before starting to

bomb the country. Immediately, Biden co-sponsored

a resolution

backing Bush.

Tracey writes “It’s unclear whether the Delaware senator genuinely believes

the tale he is currently telling, or if it’s the product of his apparent cognitive

decline.” But, Biden has been lying about Iraq for years

and years

and years

and years.

He was chair of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in 2002 and presided

over hearings that were called rigged at the time by actual critics of the Iraq

invasion.

Still, Biden’s voluminous deceits

on Iraq – which he’s adding to by the day – have

yet to be adequately examined. Biden told Tim Russert

on “Meet the Press” in 2007 of Saddam Hussein’s

alleged WMDs: “The real mystery is, if he, if he

didn’t have any of them left, why

didn’t he say so?“

Of course the Iraqi government, in 2002 and before,

had been pleading that it had disarmed. And it was

widely mocked by the U.S. government and media for

such claims.

Saddam Hussein told Dan Rather on 60

Minutes in February 2003: “I believe that that [the US military preparations

in the Gulf] were, in fact, done partly to cover the huge lie that was being

waged against Iraq about chemical, biological and nuclear weapons. And it was

on that basis that Iraq actually accepted [the U.N.] Resolution – accepted

it, even though Iraq was absolutely certain that what it had said-what the Iraqi

officials…had kept saying, that … Iraq was empty, was void of any such weapons

– was the case. But Iraq accepted that resolution… in order not to allow

any misinterpretation of its position…in order to make the case absolutely clear

that Iraq was no longer in possession of any such…weapons.” (See from FAIR:

“Saddam’s ‘Secret.’“)

But such remarks from Iraq were derided. On Nov. 13, 2002, the New York

Times reported: “US

Scoffs at Iraq Claim of No Weapons of Mass Destruction.” “The White House

dismissed Saddam Hussein’s contention today that he possesses no weapons of

mass destruction as a fabrication. But President Bush’s advisers said they would

not be taunted into revealing the intelligence they had gathered to contradict

him until after Iraq delivered a full accounting of weapons stores in early

December.”

Similarly, the International Herald Tribune reported on December 9,

2002: “Senators dismiss Iraqi arms declaration to UN” – “Copies of a 12,000-page

Iraqi declaration on banned weapons reached UN offices in Vienna on Sunday and

were en route to the United Nations in New York for analysis, but senior US

senators of both parties dismissed its contents as lies. And they spoke of a

likely war that they said would have surprisingly broad backing.” These senators

did this without even having access to the documents.

The piece continued: “Senator Richard Lugar, Republican

of Indiana, incoming chairman of the Foreign Relations

Committee, said that he assumed the Iraqi report

would ‘totally be an obfuscation.’ The Democratic

vice-presidential candidate in 2000, Senator Joseph

Lieberman of Connecticut, called the declaration

‘probably a 12,000-page, 100-pound lie.'” The piece

also quoted Biden saying that Bush was likely to

“have all that he needs, all the help, all the bases

in the Middle East” and a coalition “larger than

anyone anticipated.”

What Biden did was to help ensure war

happened while trying to wash his hands of responsibility

for it. He helped build the car for Bush, filled

it up with gas, saw that Bush was drunk, gave him

license to do what he wanted – and then told him

to be responsible while he handed him the keys.

Eventually, Biden pretends he’s shocked that the

streets are littered with mangled bodies.

Biden is the exact opposite of