[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 9]
[House]
[Pages 11315-11316]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      HOW COULD BUSH ADMINISTRATION HAVE BEEN SO WRONG ABOUT IRAQ?

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Oregon (Mr. DeFazio) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, a question that should be asked here in 
Congress but there is resounding silence from the majority because they 
do not want to embarrass the Bush administration is how could the Bush 
administration have been so wrong about Iraq? How could they have been 
so wrong about the nonexistent weapons of mass destruction, about the 
nonexistent mobile biological warfare laboratories, about the fantasy 
that American troops would be greeted with flowers and there would be 
an immediate transition to a robust democracy in Iraq, so, therefore, 
there would be no need for a robust force post-war to keep the peace, 
no need for body armor for the troops or armored Humvees.
  And, in fact, the administration fired the head of the Joint Chiefs 
of Staff because he did not believe that stuff and said we would need 
300,000 troops or more to maintain the order. Of course, he was right; 
they were wrong. But how could they be so wrong?
  I guess you could be wrong if you took your intelligence from a 
convicted fugitive, bunko artist, bank embezzler, and that was the 
chief source of intelligence and information for this administration. 
Despite the fact that the CIA severed all ties with Mr. Chalabi 7 years 
ago, despite the fact that the State Department rejected Mr. Chalabi 
quite some time ago, the Bush principals involved in planning and 
executing this war, particularly Mr. Wolfowitz who was one of Mr. 
Chalabi's dearest friends and compatriots, believed Chalabi over their 
own CIA, over the people at the State Department and in other 
intelligence agencies.
  They said, oh, no, Ahmad, he is telling us what is really going on in 
Iraq. He is giving us good information.
  In fact, Chalabi was invited to a meeting of the Defense Policy Board 
9 days after September 11, and he said, hey, skip Afghanistan and go 
into Iraq. Luckily, that initial advice from Mr. Chalabi was ignored. 
But at the same time he began building the case that there would be no 
guerrilla warfare and there would be quickly a new democratic 
government with him as its chosen head and that showers of flowers 
would come upon the troops and Mr. Chalabi and others.
  He was close and met with Condoleezza Rice, Vice President Cheney and 
Secretary Wolfowitz. Mr. Chalabi, despite the protestations of this 
administration and all attempts to hide their ties to him, was provided 
$39 million for his phoney intelligence by this administration, 
$340,000 a month in a stipend that continued even after his lies 
regarding weapons of mass destruction and the post-war environment in 
Iraq. Even then the administration continued to give him $340,000 a 
month.
  He was flown into Iraq before the war was over by the Pentagon with 
the idea that he was going to become the new anointed president and 
leader. They had to quickly evacuate him when they found out that the 
Iraqi people did not think as much about this convicted bunko artist, 
fugitive, bank embezzler as did the CIA and others. They basically ran 
him out of the country until the U.S. established control.
  He is, of course, not repentant about the bad information he gave us. 
He said, ``As far as we are concerned, we,'' meaning he and the other 
fraud members of the INC, ``have been entirely successful. Saddam is 
gone, Americans are in Baghdad, and what we said before is not 
important,'' and that is all of the lies he told us.
  He went on to say the U.S. intelligence agencies are at fault because 
intelligence people are supposed to do a better job for their country 
and did not do such a good job. That is Mr. Wolfowitz and others who 
believed his lies were at fault, according to Mr. Chalabi, not he or 
the others who lied to us, misled us, and caused death of American 
troops and a lot of chaos in Iraq.
  Now the director of DIA testified in March that all of the 
intelligence he gave us was either fabricated or embellished. The 
National Intelligence Council now says the intelligence was useless. Of 
course, his money was cut off last month. But, unfortunately, he did 
more damage than even that.
  He has compromised the U.S. dramatically in the Middle East. As we 
see today, a headline story in the New York Times, ``Chalabi reportedly 
told Iran that the U.S. had broken their code'' which will mean 
incredible problems for the United States in gathering intelligence in 
that region where we already had scant resources.

                              {time}  1930

  Now the Bush administration, Mr. Wolfowitz and others, are trying to 
pretend like they never met this guy before. They did not give him $36 
million, they did not base their war strategy on his phony 
intelligence, and they are not ``best buds.''
  Well, you are judged by the friends you keep, and they cannot 
separate themselves from this. It has caused tremendous harm to our 
country, and those in the Bush administration who pushed Mr. Chalabi's 
information should be held to account. It has caused deaths of American 
troops.

[[Page 11316]]



                          ____________________