Dick Cheney recently appeared on Meet the Press and proceeded to defy all logic and documented evidence to explain how the terrorist attacks led to the Iraq war. For an in depth analysis of Dick's logic click here to read David Corns article. Here's an excerpt from our VP's Meet the Press Interview.
Tim Russert: "Based on what you know now, that Saddam did not have the weapons of mass destruction that were described, would you still have gone into Iraq?"
Cheney: Yes, indeed, Look at the Duelfer Report and what it said. No stockpiles, but they also said he has the capability. He'd done it before. He had produced chemical weapons before and used them. He had produced biological weapons. He had a robust nuclear program in '91. All of this is true, said by Duelfer, facts.
Is this true? Is the Vice President lying? Is he bending the findings of the report to suit his logic? Here's David Corn's response:
Well, let's look at the report of Charles Duelfer who headed up the Iraq Survey Group, which was responsible for searching for WMDs after the invasion. (Duelfer took the job following David Kay's resignation in late 2003.) [T]he report noted that Saddam's WMD capability was essentially destroyed in 1991. That is the opposite of what Cheney told Russert the report said.
Some capability, no capability, essentially no capability...twist the words any way you want, but ESSENTIALLY DESTROYED means no WMD's, No? Read the Duelfer report here.