Peanut Bitter

From Investors Business Daily:

Posted 11/7/2005

Politics: Jimmy Carter, whose naivete helped give the world two nuclear threats, Iran and North Korea, says the Bush administration "manipulated" prewar intelligence on Iraq. He's the one who's manipulating history.
Carter's record judging potential threats to U.S. security leaves a lot to be desired. In 1994, he jetted off to North Korea to broker a deal whereby the last Stalinist nation would give up its nuclear weapons program. We all know how well that turned out.

His record in judging the character of world leaders is also suspect. He returned praising the mass-murdering North Korean dictator as a "vigorous and intelligent man" and saying of a nation that has starved millions: "I don't see that they are an outlaw nation."

So there the former president was on NBC's "Today" show saying the Bush administration's prewar claims that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction were "manipulated, at least" and that plans to take out Saddam predated 9-11.

His sentiments are echoed by Democratic congressional leaders, defeated presidential candidate John Kerry and others who think "Bush lied" and began planning the march to Baghdad right after taking office. Actually, regime change became official U.S. policy when Congress passed, and President Clinton signed, the Iraq Liberation Act on Oct. 31, 1998. And who believed Iraq posed a WMD threat?

In 1998, Clinton said, "If he refuses or continues to evade his obligations through more tactics of delay and deception, he and he alone will be to blame for the consequences." If "we fail to act," Clinton warned, Saddam "will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal."

Robert Einhorn, Clinton's deputy assistant secretary of state, told a Senate committee in March 2002 that Saddam could have nukes capable of striking Europe in "four to five years" and would be able to deliver nukes in America via "nonconventional means."

Hillary Clinton on Oct. 10, 2002, said: "Intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program." The same day Jay Rockefeller, Democratic vice chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, cited "unmistakable evidence" Saddam was "working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons."

Unmistakable evidence. Not manipulated intelligence. In fact, in July 2004, the Intelligence Committee said it "did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments" related to Iraq WMD.

Everyone saw the same evidence and came to the same conclusion — including France, Britain, Germany, Israel, China, Russia and the U.N., which passed Resolution 1441, telling Saddam to account for his weapons stash or there would be "serious consequences."

He didn't and there were. It was never our job to prove Saddam Hussein had WMD. It was his job to prove he didn't. Which part of "serious consequences" do Jimmy Carter et al. not understand?