From the above-linked article:
James Inhofe, R-Okla., recently said, " ... This old argument of weapons of mass destruction, which has always been a phony argument from the beginning, now that we have information that's been testified ... in closed session, by this Gen. Sadas [sic] – all kinds of evidence as to the individuals who transported the weapons out of Iraq into Syria."
What in the world is this supposed to mean? In what sense was WMD a "phony argument"? Who used it to justify war in the first place? The evidence comes from an Iraqi general serving at the pleasure of the US occupation, filtered through a sub-literate GOP congressman? And what precisely is this "all kinds of evidence"?
Here's something to chew on. In 2001, prior to Sept. 11, Cheney convened an Energy Task Force with the express purpose of making energy policy for the US. It was composed (evidently) solely of big-time energy execs (including pre-disgrace "Kenny Boy" Lay). At that meeting the men looked at maps of Iraq--divided not according to political boundaries, but rather by oil-production centers. I'm fully prepared to believe other explanations than that Cheney was planning, pre-9/11, to invade Iraq. All the VP has to do is release minutes--something he has refused to do despite persistent pressure. Why? Why do citizens not have the right to review the policy proceedings of our elected leaders? What is he hiding, and under what principle is he hiding it? How do you guys justify his refusal to reveal the energy task-force proceedings. Is energy policy, like monetary policy in our system, somehow to take place away from the public gaze? As i've asked before, *these* are the guys who have elected themselves to go around imposing democracy at the barrel of a gun?
Let's start with a little openness at home.
Let's also discuss how instability in Iraq affects world oil prices. Let's talk about record profits for oil conglomerates. Let's talk about how the invasion of Afghanistan affected the natural gas pipeline deal that Clinton failed to close. The people in that meeting with Cheney have been the beneficiaries of the Bush administration's imperial excursions.
I repeat Tom's question: How do you guys justify his refusal to reveal the energy task-force proceedings? Especially when ordered to do so by the GAO?? This was the first sign that the Bush regime had no regard for legal procedure or for the other branches of government.
What say ye?