Someone Please Help me...

ok... i just finished reading the transcript to john kerry on Imus this morning. pretty good interview i thought except i am still left hanging.

i like everyone knows that bush misled and lied to the american public and the world. what im confused about is how congress was misled. sure bush kept spouting the same old intelligence that he knew was false since he had the new intelligence report and didn't choose to acknowledge that everything in it basically said he was wrong. i am assuming that is what this report said. this is the same intelligence report from what i have gathered that was offered to congress and 6 people read it before authorizing war.

now kerry maintains that bush misled them but i havent seen him bring up that report. i haven't seen a single democrat who should have read this report say anything about it or what was inside, they keep maintaing that bush misled them. it is their job to read these reports and even if bush didn't tell them the truth in speeches, the truth was supposedly there for all of them to read.

so, was the intelligence in this report the same intelligence that bush had that said the uranium sale was false, there were no ties between iraq and al qaeda, iraq posed no imminent threat, they had no WMD's etc... or what?

anyone who can help me out with all of these questions, please do so because i havent been able to find squat.

Its about what they left out. They cherrypicked the bullshit they wanted to hear, and left the conflicting intell (which turned out to be true) out.

Thats how congress was misled.

And remember the DSM memo's. They fixed the intelligence around the policies.

final report went to Congress which stated consensus view.

and the cabal did the condensing.

you need a declaration of war for that. They gave the Chimp a blank check, something they never should of done. This guys said it better then I could It's a Q&A session.



Send to a friend

Therefore, under our system of government although the president is personally convinced that war against a certain nation is just and morally right, he is nevertheless prohibited by our supreme law of the land from waging it unless he first secures a declaration of war from Congress. That was precisely why presidents Wilson and Roosevelt, who both believed that U.S. intervention in World Wars
I and II was right and just, nevertheless had to wait for a congressional declaration of war before entering the conflict. And the fact that later presidents have violated the declaration-of-war requirement does not operate as a grant of power for other presidents to do the same.



What about the congressional resolution that granted President Bush the power to wage war against unnamed nations and organizations that the president determines were linked to the September 11 attacks? Doesn't that constitute a congressional declaration of war?

No, it is instead a congressional grant to the president of Caesar-like powers to wage war, a grant that the Constitution does not authorize Congress to make.

Therefore, when a U.S. president wages what might otherwise be considered a just war, if he has failed to secure a congressional declaration of war, he is waging an illegal war — illegal from the standpoint of our own legal and governmental system. And when the American people support any such war, no matter how just and right they believe it is, they are standing not only against their own principles and heritage, not only against their own system of government and laws, but also against the only barrier standing between them and the tyranny of their own government — the Constitution.


http://www.fff.org/comment/com0204a.asp

or aywhere on the net that there is a copy or a quick overview of exactly what was left out of the intelligence report that congress recieved? in case people are confusing my questions...i am talking about the 2nd intelligence report that was delivered to congress like 2 days or som before they voted on authorizing war.

and dont worry, im not a republican, i just like to make sure i have a nice bit of evidence rather opinions or what people think before i do batle with the neocons on a couple of message forums i belong to. nothng better than watching them talks in circles.

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/11/11/iraq-intel/

FACT — Dissent From White House Claims on Iraq Nuclear Program Consistently Withheld from Congress:

Several Congressional and intelligence officials with access to the 15 assessments said not one of them informed senior policy makers of the Energy Department’s dissent. They described a series of reports, some with ominous titles, that failed to convey either the existence or the substance of the intensifying debate.”

FACT — Sen. Kerrey: Bush “Has Much More Access” to Intel Than Congress:

Former Sen. Bob Kerrey (D-NE), ex-Senate Intelligence Committee vice chairman: “The president has much more access to intelligence than members of Congress does. Ask any member of Congress. Ask a Republican member of Congress, do you get the same access to intelligence that the president does? Look at these aluminum tube stories that came out the president delivered to the Congress — ‘We believe these would be used for centrifuges.’ — didn’t deliver to Congress the full range of objections from the Department of Energy experts, nuclear weapons experts, that said it’s unlikely they were for centrifuges, more likely that they were for rockets, which was a pre-existing use. The president has much more access to intelligence than any member of Congress

The Senate did NOT see the raw intelligence data that Bush* did...they only saw what he wanted them to see and it was skewed in every way possible.


Ninety-two Senators are stripped of their Security Clearances after an order is issued that limits access to classified intelligence only to 8 members of Congress — the Speaker of the House, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority Leader, Senate Minority Leader, and chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate intelligence committees.

http://thinkprogress.org/wp-images/upload/bushrestrictedintel.pdf



Minutes from a summer 2002 meeting involving British Prime Minister Tony Blair reveal that the Bush administration was ''fixing" the intelligence to justify invading Iraq.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-1593607,00.html


Excerpt from PNAC 101 - Rise of the Neocons

The Office of Special Plans (OSP) was a secret group of analysts and policy advisors with no status in the intelligence community. Nevertheless they reported directly to the White House and National Security office with cherry-picked intelligence from questionable sources to support the case for invading Iraq. The OSP circumvented formal, well-established oversight procedures, ignored intelligence that didn't further their agenda, expanded the intelligence on weapons beyond what was justified and over-emphasized the national security risk. They became more influential than the C.I.A. or the Defense Intelligence Agency who didn't even know the ultra-secret OSP existed for at least a year.

Because they were based in the Pentagon, it was assumed that the OSP was an intelligence-gathering agency that was second-guessing the C.I.A. but in actuality it was the White House Military Marketing Machine charged with the task of writing the PNAC's "Get Saddam" sales pitch for the public. Shading and bending reality to suit their own purpose, it wasn't important for the OSP's stories about Saddam to be factual, only that the average American believed them to be - in true Hollywood fashion.

http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?030512fa_fact