WASHINGTON, January 13,  2004 -- Congressman Charles Rangel today called for Congressional hearings into allegations by former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill that question the timing and justification of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq.

O'Neill's revelations were made in an interview broadcast last weekend on the television show 60 Minutes.  The Bush Administration, he said, had focused on finding a way to remove Iraqi President Saddam Hussein immediately after taking office in January 2001, eight months before the 9/11 terrorist attack, and in the absence of any stated reason or evidence of  weapons of mass destruction. 

"When a former high ranking member of the Administration's inner-circle effectively accuses the President of lying about the war in Iraq, it is incumbent on Congress to investigate," Congressman Rangel said.  "The former Secretary of Treasury was not only a member of the National Security Council, where the deliberations took place, he is a friend of the Vice President and leader of industry with great credibility.  Whether or not you support the war,  Paul O'Neill's words must be taken seriously.

"O'Neill's remarks suggest that 9/11 provided the opening the Administration was looking for.  The President then led Congress to believe not only that Saddam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction that posed an imminent threat to the U.S. but that there was a connection between the dictator and Al Qaeda and the events of 9/11," Congressman Rangel said.  "If they had known that these alleged connections did not exist, many members of Congress would never have voted to give the President the authority to invade.

"It's not even a matter of believing O'Neill," Congressman Rangel said. "He has the official transcripts of  the meetings in which preparations for war, the subsequent occupation and control of Iraq's oil resources were discussed. Now the Administration is launching an investigation into whether O'Neill improperly released confidential material. 

"We will see whether this investigation reveals any more than the probe into the leak of Defense Secretary Rumsfeld's Pentagon memo in which he questioned the success of the war on terrorism, or the White House effort  to identify the person who exposed an undercover CIA agent whose husband challenged the Administration's claims of Iraq's nuclear capability.  The threat of an investigation should concern  O'Neill, however, in view of the Administration's typically vengeful response to any criticism of the President's handling of the war. 

"Responding to O'Neill's revelations, the President says he was motivated by the policy of regime change set in place during the Clinton administration.  But if the American people had known there was no evidence of an imminent threat to our country, how many would have willingly sacrificed the lives of 500 of their sons and daughters and another 2,000 maimed? How many would have willingly spent nearly $180 billion for the invasion, occupation and rebuilding of Iraq?  How many would have been willing to commit these lives and resources to create a democracy where none had ever existed?

"The Administration's aggressive campaign to win international support for the invasion  with the same warnings about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction has caused an historic loss of credibility for the U.S. around the world.   For the U.S. to maintain its position as leader of the free world and beacon of democracy, it must cut out this cancer of deceit," Congressman Rangel said. 

"By invading Iraq, the nation turned away from the war on terrorism and the pursuit of Osama bin Laden.  It also diverted attention from a long list of critical domestic priorities such as education, health care and the exploding budget deficit.  The magnitude of the price being paid by the American people for this war is too high for them not to know the whole truth," Congressman Rangel said.