"Know now about Iraq" or "Would you COOK THE INTEL BOOKS and lie to congress, [View all]

[blm]

to other world leaders, to the media, to the American people, in order to invade Iraq the way your brother and Dick Cheney did in 2002?"

It's utter BULLSH!T for anyone to claim that intel was at fault. The intel was COOKED deliberately.
===

Oct. 8, 2002, 10:47AM

Some administration officials expressing misgivings on Iraq
By WARREN P. STROBEL and JONATHAN S. LANDAY
Knight-Ridder Tribune News

WASHINGTON -- While President Bush marshals congressional and international
support for invading Iraq, a growing number of military officers, intelligence
professionals and diplomats in his own government privately have deep misgivings
about the administration's double-time march toward war.

These officials charge that administration hawks have exaggerated evidence of
the threat that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein poses -- including distorting his
links to the al-Qaida terrorist network -- have overstated the amount of
international support for attacking Iraq and have downplayed the potential
repercussions of a new war in the Middle East.

They charge that the administration squelches dissenting views and that
intelligence analysts are under intense pressure to produce reports supporting
the White House's argument that Saddam poses such an immediate threat to the
United States that pre-emptive military action is necessary.

"Analysts at the working level in the intelligence community are feeling very
strong pressure from the Pentagon to cook the intelligence books," said one
official, speaking on condition of anonymity.

A dozen other officials echoed his views in interviews.

No one who was interviewed disagreed.
>>>>>>


Remember Downing Street Memos?

http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2011/12/leadup-iraq-war-timeline