Any bunch sociopathic liars worth their salt would have PLANTED WMD to be found already.

Of course, any evidence of WMD that *IS* found I’m sure will be said to have been planted anyway.  So…kinda damned either way really on that one.

I figure they’re going to have maybe another 7 months or so to account for where the evidence of the WMD program went before they start having serious ass-end political exposure…what with the election cycle starting.  If the CIA can’t show an accounting for their intelligence, they’re going to look REALLY bad, political damage control will kick in and sacrificial heads will roll. 

I don’t buy into the conspiracy angle for several reason, not least of which being because it would the biggest stupidest political suicide move all parties involved (here and Britain) could take.  And I don’t think any of the parties involved are particularly stupid or politically suicidal.  Tony Blair is going to flush himself down the political toilet because his new pal George has a “scheme so crazy it just might work”?  Riiiiiiight.  Colin Powell is going blow his whole carefully built-up and polished image and credibility and look like the world’s biggest knob or liar because Bush said “It’ll be a hoot, nobody will find out.”  Suuuuuuure.  And George W. wants to end up another Post-War, One-Termer, villified-by-his-own-Party President like his dad so Cheney can get his old friends at Haliburton a job.  Ooooookay.

So in my opinion they either simply haven’t found the evidence (for a whole host of reasons) or a full explanation of what happened yet.  Or the intel. guys screwed the pooch in the worst way, even more so than before 9-11, and should hang. 

Ockham’s Razor: “Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily” frequently shortened to “Keep it simple.”

Hanlon’s Razor: “Never ascribe to malice what can be adequately explained by stupidity.”

Homer: Simply saying “the CIA” was actually sloppyness on my part. I’d say more correctly that those elements of the US intelligence system (those responsible for reviewing and analyzing data and saying “This here is a WMD site” and “These here are WMD support infrasturcture and materials”) would be the one who would have to be either incompetent or suicidal to make such a claim falsly. They know eventually they’re going to have to cough something up.

On to the rest. You say “The fact is that the neoconservatives now in power have wanted Iraq since before the Clinton administration, and another fact is that they now have it.” Ok..so what is your evidence that SPECIFIC neoconservatives IN the administration have ACTUALLY SAID they wanted to run Iraq since before Clinton? I’ve seen or seen reference in my readings to 3 documents that are frequently pointed at for this Conspiracy notion.

First is this “Draft” of a so called “Defense Planning Guidance” memo that supposedly Paul Wolfowitz was writing back in 1992. A draft that Wolfowitz said in his Vanity Fair interview session he HADN’T written or even seen before the NY Times did an article about it. Wolfowitz also indicates that there was a big difference between was reported to be in draft and what was actually in the draft when he finally saw it. Its really hard to tell since I have been trying and have yet to be able to find a copy ANYWHERE on the net of this “Draft” that the Times said it had and said was floating all over DC. I would really, in all seriousness, love to see it so if you can direct me to a complete copy somwhere I’d appreciate it. All I can find are tiny snips and quotes. I don’t want someone selectively telling me whats in it, I want to read for myself. I would, however, suggest you read the full transcript of the interview for Vanity Fair though to see what he said in his own words. It’s actually very interesting.

The link your cited source provides is not to the VF interview as he indicated but is actually to an interview with the Washington Post where Wolfowitz seems to be trying to clarify what he said to Vanity Fair. (I don’t know what his worse, his false cite or that none of the people on his blog bothered to verify his cite. Ugh! Does nobody have to do research papers in HS & college anymore?!? ) Anyway, as it happens, it’s being reportedthat Vanity Fair may have taken what Wolfwitz said out of context. Don’t know…can’t find whole article online so far without paying.

The second document is what Wolfowitz and Cheney ACTUALLY worked on and published (as opposed to the hard to find “Draft”), titled “Regional Defense Strategy of January, 1993″. So far, I know of copies HERE and HERE. Reading them, they don’t outline the grand schemes you’re talking about…they actually go against what some have claimed they were arguing. I suggest you read it too. Wolfowitz mentioned it in the VF interview session.

The third document is one produced in September 2000 called “Rebuilding our Defense” by the Project for the New American Century group. This is Bill Kristol’s group and he is a neoconservative writer and editor of the Weekly Standard. The document itself is written by Thomas Donnelly (another writer and author on military affairs and defense, national security and foreign policy and a member of the AEI) One place I know you can find this document is HERE. Considering the source, it contains the rhetoric you would expect from some neoconservative writers…none of whom work in the White House. Wolfowitz’s name is listed at the end when a host of others who either participated in at least one meeting with the group or contributed a paper for discussion. In other words, it’s the author’s / project’s list of sources. And a sad one because it doesn’t indicate what any of the sources may have said or provided. It also states that their report “does not necessarily represent the views of the project participants or their affiliated instutions.”

These are the only documents that I’ve seen anyone make mention of as supposed “evidence” of this conspiracy. But fact is, when you actually do the research and the reading, it doesn’t support the claim.

So, is there some other document that you’ve seen that proves the claim that “the neoconservatives now in power have wanted Iraq since before the Clinton administration, and another fact is that they now have it”? Because the documents above don’t do it.