I need to know if this is true (WMD report)

[southernleftylady]

Ive been sick (been in the hospital) and so im not up on this new thing but im trying to have a discussion with this repug and this is what she posted about it... is it correct?


The investigation states that there was no political pressure placed on the intelligence community to skew the information one way or the other.

It states the Bush administration did not distort evidence of Iraq's WMD.

It states that the intelligence community repeatedly gave the administration wrong information.

It also goes so far as to say that agents inside the CIA knew the information wasn't that good but Tenet dismissed that. Tenet denies this and said if he had known the intel wasn't reliable he wouldn't have passed it on to the administration.

Irregardless, the administration was given bad information, they were assured the information was true and reliable when it wasn't. They made grave decisions on this information. Knowing this doesn't release them from responsibility of their decisions but it does highlight how and why those decisions were made.

For our leaders to make wise decisions they must have the proper information. I hope they get this figured out and fast.

[Ironpost]

1. No truths here. I know that, you know that

[airfoil]

15. Clinton/Gore believed the same...

You must at least acknowledge that much of the responsibility indeed lies with Sadaam for all this. If you approach a police officer aggressively with your hand in your pocket, you aren't doing anything wrong on the surface, but you aren't giving him much of a choice if you get shot.

Root problem: Sadaam did nothing to convince the world he had disarmed. His records were very poor, there was no evidence of stockpiles being destroyed in a manner consistent with UN requirements.

And that's where the problem with all of this is. Sadaam benefited tremendously from the surrounding countries believing he had WMD. He new that. That's what kept aggressive neighbors out of his country.

Sadaam's top men all believed they had WMDs too. But it was the "other generals" that had them each general believed.

And at the end of the day, the inspectors entering Iraq were fully protected in case of accidental exposure to a range of chemical agents. If they didn't think there was a chance of contamination, why go through all the shots and carry all the decontamination gear?

The challenge here is to find someone in 1998, 2000 or 2002 that did NOT believe Iraq had WMD *and* was willing to put their money where their mouth was.

Everybody who mattered believed Sadaam very likely had WMD.

[Bridget Burke]

20. But Clinton & Gore managed not to start an illegal war.

Gosh, there sure were a lot of people who "didn't matter." Check out some of the other messages on this thread to get a more reality-based view of the "intelligence" that led to the war.

Of course, Bush & Co. ignored all the terror threats before 9/11. So--maybe they were just being extra-careful about Iraq? Ya think?

[Ilsa]

2. Off topic...

Are you okay? I hate hearing about pregnant ladies being in the hospital for anything other than a full term delivery.

Sorry I can't help with the topic. I haven't sorted through that one yet. I think there was an extensive thread in GD yesterday.

[southernleftylady]

6. yeah I'm OK now.. there was a virus going around ....

it was a stomach virus (throwing up diarrhea) and i got the WORST case of it out of my whole family so they put me in the hospital for a 23 hour observation but it lasted 3 days :(
there were 3 other women in the L & D unit that had it too....
just something that is going arround...
but now I'm fine and i gained all the weight back and baby is doing GREAT he is even showing 2 weeks bigger than he was before ;)
thanks for asking :)

[GR]

3. Well Yes And No...

I think it states some of those things but also mentions it COULD NOT investigate White House use of the intelligence and couldn't investigate the Office of Special Plans which was created by the Pentagon because the CIA wouldn't bend to their will enough.

I think you have to use common sense on this...place it in context...First look at PNAC, published long before Bush even took office which outlines the strategy...then look at Clarke's book where he describes how Rumsfeld and others were trying to figure out a way to use 9/11 to invade Iraq and the President himself even put pressure on Clarke in that respect and then factor in the first meeting of The National Security Council where O'Neill was present and the first order of business was invading Iraq. Then figure the aluminum tubes lies, the yellow cake lies, the Colin Powell lies, which he now admits were lies and feels used and then the lies since about "we've found WMDs" by Bush and NO SANE PERSON WOULD BELIEVE ANY REPORT WHICH SAYS THERE WAS NO PRESSURE...

[BlueEyedSon]

4. Revised version is one page, all caps:

"WE LIED, SHEEPLE!"

[wtmusic]

5. the panel WAS NOT AUTHORIZED to look at *'s interpretation of data

"the panel that Bush appointed under pressure in February 2004 said it was "not authorized" to explore the question of how the commander in chief used the faulty information to make perhaps the most critical decision of his presidency"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=103&topic_id=116865&mesg_id=116866&page=

This really, really sucks

[Discord]

7. Might want to mention that...

this so-called... "bi-partisan" commision was appointed solely by the President. Not by a real bi-partisan panel.

[Toots]

8. Well it makes all their intel suspect now

How can they possibly tell us Iran has WMDs if they use the same intelligence source?

[seabeyond]

9. remember back to the time. this is how we know this isnt true

it has been a long time. but prior to the war, when bush first started talking iraq, before even trying to sell it. both tenet and powell were opposed. neither favored it. we watched those two being manipulated. we knew that cheney had a hand in having the cia change info to come back stating there was wmd in iraq. we saw them step by step excalate the danger of iraq

what we saw at the time is contradictory to this report. just like taking the 9/11 report. it comes out saying nothing was a big deal. yet so many of us can take that report and point out the errors in it

both reports are bogus, made to let bush off the hook, that is all

[G_j]

10. some reading material

http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/3/31/122152/436

"Darned Good Intelligence"
By WilliamPitt,

Thu Mar 31st, 2005 at 12:21:52 PM EST :: Iraq ::

Bush's hand-picked crew of whitewashers has put out a report blaming the entire Iraq debacle on the intelligence community. The report is a farce, a fraud, evidence that the White House has managed to win its little war with CIA by sticking Goss in there and silencing whistleblowers by way of Plame-like intimidation. The corporate news media, of course, has helped.

My immediate thought: If the intelligence was so bad, so wrong, why are we still there?

Beyond that, let's remember a few things here.

<snip>
--------------
http://forum.truthout.org/blog/story/2005/4/1/83840/12693

"Darned Good Intelligence" Part II
By WilliamPitt,

Fri Apr 1st, 2005 at 08:38:40 AM EST :: Iraq ::

As reported yesterday, Bush's hand-picked WMD commission has basically exonerated the administration for Iraq while laying the blame squarely on the shoulders of the intelligence community.

It is time once again to reach down into the memory hole.

<snip>

---------------------------------
http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=5423

'Dead Wrong'
– or Outright Deception?
Iraqi WMD: someone threw us a curveball
by Justin Raimondo

So many investigations, so little time – that's a major problem these days for anyone intent on keeping up with the various scandals that plague this administration's foreign policy.

There's the recently-released 500-page-plus report <.pdf> on how we were bamboozled into believing that Saddam Hussein had "weapons of mass destruction," which concluded that the intelligence community was "dead wrong" – about everything.

We have the "Fitzgerald report" <.pdf> issued by the United Nations on the assassination of Rafik Hariri, which was trumpeted as conclusive proof that Syria was behind the Lebanese leader's death – at least, if you don't read beyond the headlines, and cherry-pick only what fits this theory from the actual text.

However, the Fitzgerald report was overshadowed by another UN report, one detailing the shenanigans that went on in the UN's "oil for food" program, in which Kofi Annan's son loomed large. Again, the headlines were misleading: Annan was not "cleared," but merely excused. Oddly, his "Hell no!" response to calls for him to step down as secretary general was fully supported by the supposedly anti-UN Bush administration. More about that later.

Finally, we have the news that the investigation into the role of the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), one of the most powerful lobbies in Washington, is reaching a crossroads, with charges about to be filed. The investigation, which has been going on for at least two years, has all kinds of implications, political as well as criminal. It may well provide us with important clues about the mystery of how American foreign policy is created and conducted.

..much more..
===
http://www.cmonitor.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050321/REPOSITORY/503210312/1029/OPINION03


Convenient end to 9/11 investigation, ALAN R. KRAG, Warner - Letter

March 21. 2005 8:00AM


In 2004 the Senate Intelligence Committee investigated the credibility of the intelligence leading to the administration's decision to invade Iraq. The finding was that all the intelligence was wrong. The committee was to continue working to determine if the administration influenced the intelligence reports or misused or misconstrued the information it had.

National Public Radio reported on March 10 that the House committee that was investigating the same issue was quietly stopped. The Senate Intelligence Committee chairman, Sen. Roberts, a Republican, announced the same day that he was stopping the Senate investigation because "we already know that the information was wrong and that the administration says that they believed it to be true. . . . We shouldn't worry about the past. We should concentrate on the future."

Really?

Use this argument with the people who died in the Twin Towers. Tell it to the families of the 1,500-plus who have died in Iraq.

I believe "the powers" already have an idea that the administration misused intelligence. If the whole story were told, the outrage would bring down the presidency. Since the first Senate Intelligence Committee report, the administration has been spinning the story to say the end justifies the means: "We may have lied about the reasons for going into Iraq, but look how we've helped the Iraqis. We have Saddam Hussein in prison. Look how we are stabilizing the oil supply out of the Middle East."

..more..

[AWorkerBee]

14. stabilizing the oil supply? 3.4% Surge Pushes Oil Above $57!

3.4% Surge Pushes Oil Above $57

By JAD MOUAWAD

Published: April 2, 2005

Oil prices jumped 3.4 percent to a record yesterday, prompted by concerns over the level of gasoline stockpiles in the United States before the summer driving season.

The May contract for crude oil on the New York Mercantile Exchange rose $1.87 and settled at $57.27 a barrel after reaching $57.70 in earlier trading. The closing futures price was the highest since trading began in 1983

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/04/02/business/02oil.html

Thanks for all the articles, very informative.

[Harlequin]

11. Analysis: 1. False. 2. False 3. Probably true.

The CIA prepares "white papers", which are hopefully objective, then gives them to the president. The president and his handlers then use the information for politics.

There was a story a while ago which clearly portrayed the content of the white papers against the content of the State of the Union Speech, and other Administration publications, in which meaning was actually turned 180-degrees on its ear.

[leftchick]

12. Here you go... THE best graphic of how the War was designed

and by whom....From Motherjones



http://www.motherjones.com/news/feature/2004/01/12_405.html

[Pounder]

19. In yer face!

That's an excellent flow chart, leftchick...it is all right there in our face.

Disgusting.

:puke:

[bush_is_wacko]

13. Your Republican friend is accurately repeating

what the report STATES. However he/she seems to be under the impression that the report was INDEPENDENT! It was not and is yet another attempt at propaganda from he administration. Several newspapers and even the MSM have questioned it.

My local paper even printed a story asking who the hell intimidated these lackeys into releasing this "report?"

[RBHam]

16. Tenet's punishment was the Medal of Freedom Award...

THAT'LL LEARN HIM!

[Pounder]

18. Don't forget Condi...

The whole thing is an exercise in arrogance. Ten million dollars was spent by that committee...for what? We already knew there was an intelligence snafu!

I believe it was the head of the committee even stated outright that they weren't trying to find out why the Executive Branch..i.e., Bushco., didn't even attempt to verify, (yeah, right), the intelligence that had been received, or who in the administration is directly responsible for this incredible screw-up...nope, the committee was in place to determine if an intelligence error had occurred.

WE ALREADY KNEW THAT!

And Bush rewarded these enablers of "The Con" on the American people!

:puke:

[johnaries]

17. This report was generated by the same Administration

that had EPA reports changed on Global Warming and also had the EPA report that the Air Quality at 9-11 ground zero was safe when it hadn't even tested the air, and in fact many rescue and clean-up workers are having health issues because of the unsafe air quality.

No pressure? Bad Intelligence? HA! :

http://www.thebushpresidency.org/IraqPrelude.htm

http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/070703A.shtml

http://www.democrats.org/specialreports/iraq_intelligence/

http://www.wsws.org/articles/2004/feb2004/bush-f07.shtml