I came across this item buried in the LA Times while trying to find some information on Turkey.

Biden was asked about the Armenian Genocide Bill. Here is some of his reply.

I support it. And the reason is simple: I have found in my experience that you cannot have a solid relationship with a country based on fiction. It occurred. It occurred. And to continue with this fiction that it never occurred — let’s shove it down their throats, that it never occurred — means that you never get to the place where you have a relationship based on a factual set of norms. And they’ve got to get over it.

Biden then continues:

I have very serious staff. My staff says, “You sure you want to do this, Senator? Because look at the circumstance right now, with Gul being denied the presidency […] and a real nervousness out there that the Army may very well take over. […]

My view is, it’s the same way I think we oughtta be dealing with Russia and every other country: If you want to be a member of the international community in good standing, it’s got to be based upon historical fact. You can’t pretend. And we’ve allowed Putin lately to pretend, and we’re gonna pay a hell of a price for it. We have not in the last six years made clear that we want you part of Europe, we want you part of us, but there are certain basic ground rules.

How does this view stack up against those of the current administration?

According to O’Neil, it was on day 10 of the first term of the Bush administration, that the topic of the first Security Council was the invasion of Iraq. “How can we go in.” “What excuse can we use to invade.”

Could someone in the inner, inner circle have said, let’s allow the terrorists to strike, sow fear upon the public, and blame Saddam? Of course not. We just sat on knowledge that “Bin Laden Determined to Attack Targets In US“. August 6th video: Crawford, Texas.

After 9/11 happens, Terrorist czar Richard Clarke gets hauled into the Oval Office. According to Mr. Clarke, he gets told by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, to find a connection to Iraq. Clarke explains that he has gone over it repeatedly. There is no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein. “Wrong answer” he is told. ” You are not looking hard enough. Find a connection between the two.” Ironically in the days immediately after 9/11, while the rest of us were reeling from the shock, our nation’s number one counter-terrorist was occupied searching for something that did not exist. After the invasion, we discovered………there was no connection between al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.

Anthrax is released simultaneously with the air attack. Iraq is first blamed. But then later, when the anthrax is analyzed, we find out that it derived from an American strain only harbored in a secret US military facility.

Karl Rove reports to the inner circle that his marketing has determined that Americans will only support an invasion into Iraq, if they believe Saddam has WMD’s and perceive him to be a threat.

The drums of war start pounding. WMD’s become the tool. CIA analysts who do not subscribe to Iraq having WMD’s are demoted or fired. Tenet becomes politicized, and clear judgement is lost. Cheney is given his own reading room in Langley Field to personally go over satellite intelligence to find evidence of WMD’s in Iraq. (When did he become America’s number one satellite expert?) Yellow cake and aluminum tubes are inserted in the State of the Union address. When an ex-ambassador writes an op-ed piece titled “What I didn’t find in Africa,” his wife is outed, to silence her (by law you are imprisoned if you speak within five years after leaving the agency, effectively silencing her.)

Powell is told intelligence is solid, ( he was apprehensive and skeptical) and he goes before the world, and with Tenet sitting behind him, shows photos of two trailers that were used to make hydrogen for weather balloons, and declares it is proof that WMD’s exist in Iraq.

Days later Congress votes to authorize Bush to use force in Iraq.

Now no longer a secret, the buildup of military surrounding Iraq, continues in the open.

What were the facts?

The best of our intelligence agencies could find NO evidence of WMD’s. The UN task force that was scurrying all over Iraq, could find no evidence of WMD’s. The best intelligence organizations in the world, told us that there was no way Saddam had any WMD’s. The British, French, Russian, Israeli, Chinese, as well as other Mid Eastern countries, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Djibouti, Kuwait all answered NO to Saddam having WMD’s.

Americans are told to expect mushroom clouds at any time, first by Cheney and then by Rice, and finally Bush..

After troops are in place, we decide after a brief meeting on the Canary Islands, to invade on Humanitarian reasons…..because, Saddam is a torturer…..No one should be allowed to remain in power for what they were doing to Iraqi citizens at Abu Ghraib.

We get a hot tip on where Saddam is; we bomb his ass anyway, despite our fake ultimatum’s clock still running, not yet having expired.

In other words, just as soon as the Supreme Court made it clear that there would be no recount in Florida,…… “We’re going to Iraq, Baby! This time, we are gonn’a get that guy………”

Oh did anyone consider what we do after we capture a country of 20 million people who hate each other? “Don’t worry about it Mr. President, its all under control. They got oil.”

Hat’s off to Cheney. He is the only one who had a plan after we invaded. 30 billion barrels of oil have disappeared without a trace.

This is all old news. But stringing it together and looking backwards over seven years to the beginning, one notices how the appearance of deception is prevalent. Even if one takes the laughable position that each of these mis-steps were misguided, and that those who were making them were just incompetent and wrong, the dark allusion remains, looking back over time, that impropriety occurred or had the potential to occur. As Scooter Libbey is now finding out, the direct hands-on influencing of events, gives one little place to hide when such activities are brought forth into the bright light of our justice system.

At the best, even if no high crimes or misdemeanors come to light, the United States of America was pushed along our current path of destruction, not by facts, but by fiction.

We were force fed a diet that (like most diets I’ve been on), was purely bogus. America listened to the sales pitch, America got suckered, America bit, and now we are paying the price.

We are paying the price all over. In our economy, in our deficit, in the quality of our education, in the quality of our environment, in the quality of our future political campaigns, in each of the categories, mis-truths, fake truths, and just plain lies are fed daily through our television sets by a media incapable of questioning what they are fed………..

As a nation, it is just a phase. It is not the end of the world, for we have weathered this same slop before. If memory serves correctly, we underwent the same collusion and silence on the part of the media, during the Hayes/Garfield/ McKinley, and the Harding/Coolidge/Hoover administrations. After each of these episodes, America attempted to correct itself with a Teddy Roosevelt, Franklin Roosevelt, and a Harry Truman.

These men were not bound by ideology, and yet today all are called up on as great leaders by both major political parties . Two of men had the presidency thrust upon them, having been sidelined as Vice Presidents until destiny transpired to bring them to the forefront. But they were bold, aggressive, and were willing to try anything if facts supported it. They also were advised to go forward with what could have been great misadventures: such as building a canal across Nicaragua, or nuking the Soviet Union in a preemptive strike, or declaring Taiwan to be a state of the US as Mao took over the mainland. But they, to our credit, wisely chose not to: the facts didn’t support it………………………

America needs to look a little harder at those candidates who are running this time. Having just been burned on a candidate who ran on an ‘agenda’, we as a nation need to be a little more circumspect. Those candidates who utter the “I” word, as in “I will”, or “I shall”, or “I am the best”, whose debates are a string or “I”, “I”, “I”, “I,” should probably be dealt with suspiciously. Those who deal with facts: “Iraq is like this now, this is how to fix it” are better served to deal with the myriad of problems they will inherit, the minute they finish taking the oath of office………

Just the facts, maam.”