73rd in continuing blog series on the administration push to war. Within a very few days of the initial invasion, key developments lay down a pattern that will stay in place for the rest of the Bush administration: major contractors commence profiteering in Iraq; the White House begins backpedaling on the claim of Iraq WMD while frantically looking for support for its claims; and the large media outlets try to ignore both.
March 21-25, 2003:

 

March 21, 2003 -- MZM, Inc., the company owned by indicted and discredited administration crony Wade Mitchell, receives a $2,427,264 contract awarded by Washington Headquarters Service in support of rebuilding Iraq, for humanitarian assistance in Iraq. The contract is for providing linguists or translators. http://www.dodig.mil/audit/reports/fy04/04-057.pdf

 

March 22, 2003 -- Gen. Franks publicly lays out the aims of the Iraq war, including regime change, eliminating WMD, driving out terrorists, collecting intelligence, humanitarian aid and securing the oil fields.

 

Same day -- Bush discusses the Iraq war in his weekly radio address:

“THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. American and coalition forces have begun a concerted campaign against the regime of Saddam Hussein. In this war, our coalition is broad, more than 40 countries from across the globe. Our cause is just, the security of the nations we serve and the peace of the world. And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.        

          The future of peace and the hopes of the Iraqi people now depend on our fighting forces in the Middle East. They are conducting themselves in the highest traditions of the American military. They are doing their job with skill and bravery, and with the finest of allies beside them. At every stage of this conflict the world will see both the power of our military, and the honorable and decent spirit of the men and women who serve.”

 

In this initial radio address, Bush is already hinting that the public should be prepared for an extended stint in Iraq.

 

March 23, 2003 – In a press availability, Bush discusses the Iraq war:

“Q Mr. President, do you know -- at this point, can you tell Americans, I mean, is the war progressing the way you expected it to?

THE PRESIDENT: Yes, Larry, it is. It is -- and I -- the air campaign is achieving its objective, and the ground campaign is also achieving objective. We're slowly, but surely, taking control of that country so that we can free the people of Iraq and eventually clear that country of weapons of mass destruction. We've made good progress.

One of the big concerns early on was the Southern oil fields. As you all remember, we had discussions about that. There was a lot of speculation about whether or not coalition forces would be able to get to the Southern oil fields in time, before -- so that Saddam Hussein wouldn't destroy them. As a matter of fact, I had frequently talked about the Southern oil fields -- or oil fields in general -- in my declaratory policy.

Tommy Franks put a plan in place that moved on those oil fields quickly, and at least in the south, they are secure. And that is positive news for all of us. Most of the south is now in coalition hands. Obviously, there's pockets of resistance in a place like Basra. We're making great progress -- in the west, we're making great progress. The area, the launch sites for the scuds, while certainly not a hundred percent secure, but we've made good progress.”

 

March 24, 2003 – The New York Times runs another bated-breath article on WMD from Judith Miller:

“Nothing distinguishes the complex of trailers parked at the edge of the desert encampment here south of the Iraqi border. Only the sign on the door barring "unauthorized" visitors belies the spirit of the welcome mat below. But the vehicles and their occupants, which are off-limits even to most soldiers here, are at the core of the Bush administration's effort to disarm Saddam Hussein of biological, chemical and other weapons of mass destruction.”

(“A NATION AT WAR: WITH THE TROOPS CHEMICAL BIOLOGICAL INTELLIGENCE SUPPORT TEAM; Lab Technicians Eagerly Await Work,” B5)

 

March 24, 2003, about – Justly famous American journalist Seymour Hersh publishes a devastating article in the New Yorker, later reprinted in the British magazine Prospect: “WHO LIED TO WHOM? Why did the Administration endorse a forgery about Iraq's nuclear program?” (New Yorker, March 31, 2003)

 

March 25, 2003 – Bush issues an Executive Order extending government ability to classify documents and records beyond any other administration in U.S. history.

 

Same day – The Bush administration requests supplemental funding from Congress “to cover military operations, relief and reconstruction activities in Iraq, and ongoing operations in the global war on terrorism.”

 

March 25, 2003 – I am not Seymour Hersh, but this writer publishes a column titled “It’s only a pretext for taking over another country,” in the suburban D.C. Prince George’s Journal.

 

The article includes the fundamental definition of pretext from Black’s Law Dictionary:

“Pretext: In international law: A reason alleged as justificatory, but which is so only in appearance, or which is even absolutely destitute of all foundation.

          The name of ‘pretexts’ may likewise be applied to reasons which are in themselves true and well-founded, but, not being of sufficient importance for undertaking a war, are made use of only to cover ambitious views.”

 

The column lists several of the inconsistencies, falsehoods and unbased claims issued by the White House in its quest for war–Iraq WMD, links between Saddam Hussein and Islamic fundamentalists, bogus comparisons to Hitler’s Germany. No major writers at the Washington Post did the same, nor did anyone privileged to speak on national television, aside from Seymour Hersh. Thus is born the false convention wisdom that ‘nobody got it right’ on Iraq. Actually, millions of people got it right, and hundreds of thousands of them tried to communicate their views and questions to Congress and the White House.