Iraq WMD: "Deliberately misleading"

With hawkish Senator John McCain about to become the Republican nominee for President, every now and then it's a good idea to review how most members of his party still view the Iraq war. Last night, Karl Rove provided a reminder when he spoke at the University of Pennsylvania:

On Iraq especially, the political strategist found it behooved him to underscore the unique circumstances under which the decision to go to war was made.

"History has a funny way of deciding things," he said. "Sometimes history sends you things, and 9/11 came our way."

Americans should not forget, he counseled, that every act of war sends a poignant political message and that any statement the U.S. could send by reluctance to fight Islamic extremists abroad will be taken as a sign of diminished will. He surmised that al-Qaida clearly indicated it understood the political implications of war by attacking the USS Cole in October 2000, a month before a presidential election.

His appraisal of the decision to invade Iraq was forthright: "Was it the right thing to do? Yes."

The standard line, of course, is that they acted based upon the best information they had at the time. I've previously blogged about that ad nauseum, but earlier tonight I saw more proof that this was false.

Here's then-Secretary of State Colin Powell, interviewed by Tim Russert on May 16, 2004, MTP. He was asked about his UN presentation about Iraq WMD:

I'm also comfortable that at the time that I made the presentation, it reflected the collective judgment, the sound judgment of the intelligence community. But it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it.

Hat tip: Today's "Countdown" with Keith Olbermann.


Visit this blog's homepage.