CSPAN 3 - Live Hearing on Pre-War Intelligence/DSM Memos

Dorgan starting the hearing now!
Link:

http://www.cspan.org/watch/index.asp?Cat=TV&Code=CS3&ShowVidDays=30&ShowVidDesc=&ArchiveDays=30

Thanks!

any Repugs there?

Looks like we're going to have to get through the five minute remarks before questioning begins.

K&R, lets get this on the greatest page so more folks will see/watch.

Feinstein bringing up Curveball situation

:) :thumbsup:

These are some really good witnesses... but will they be able to shake up the Senators enough?
And is Russ there? ;-D

I'm counting on you guys for the play by play :D

Lawrence Wilkerson first up.

"It's up to YOU to decide whether these are ... deserving of some sort of accountability."

:woohoo:

our intelligence that were not as 'discriminating' as he thought should be done.

The lowest point in his professional life...He's not proud of participating in what was a hoax.

:rofl:

Was that a rhetorical question?

:shrug:

was the "perpetration of a hoax".

:hi:

Greatest page. But hey, I am MORE than happy to add to the totals.

Good show, guys! I'm glad this is finally happening to one extent or other. It's almost two years overdue if I'm not mistaken, since the 9/11 Commission DID promise to get straight to this piece of business immediately after the 2004 election...

Remains to be seen what will come of this, though.

I hope some Senators are truly shocked by this

or other countries would have adopted similar policy

nie said several years away from nuclear & unlikely to use weapons UNLESS we invaded :wow:

said there was any connection between Terrorists and Iraq.

said an invasion would cause sectarian violence

would create sympathy to terrorist factions, and make Iraq a magnet for those groups

on, rather than the other way around.

this is damning

for a decision that had already been made.

There it is!

it has to do with the environment.

(o.o) Not what I expected to hear from him. Where's he going?

Edit: long on opinion, short on substance. He blames the intelligence community, says they emphasize news over scholarship.

Blame the intelligence community

isn't he the guy who testified against Mustache Bolton?

He's got a funny way of talking. :)

Maybe, maybe not. BUT, what he's saying supports the cherry-picking by the Admin.

i think we need to listen to the whole thing. he is after all the guy who took on Bolton, hardly an apologist

:hi:

Every time you post to a thread I feel like I just saw a celebrity at my local supermarket, you're my hero :)

:hi:

and when people do come up to me, i am usually much more nervous about the whole thing than they are and I usually feel totally stupid. but thankfully, few people know me or anything i do (unless they are busy smearing me, then they know what I had for dinner) and I am hardly a hero. but i thank you very kindly for your words and your support:)

goes so far with the some truth and then turns it around in some positive way so Bush doesn't get the focus of blame.

I've watched him do those for a few years now.

Did he work for the CIA? Does he still work at the same job?

he is in private sector now

:hi:

under Powell. And yes, he spoke out strongly AGAINST Bolton.

:hi:

If you doubt us, push us (intelligence) and we'll do better. If you don't trust what you're seeing, don't behave as if you do. Don't listen to our formulaic "confidence levels."

those who analysed, those who caved to pressure and provided dubious information, and those who voted for war.

about the aluminum tubes.... Theilman, a state analyst said that no one without a political agenda thought that the aluminum tubes could be used for nuclear weapons.

saying there was a problem with the aluminum tubes. Perhaps it is his style of talking as you say.

debate in the bars later.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/truth/interviews/thielmann.html

The interview with Thielman is stunning.

better late than never....:hi:

Need all the help we can get keeping all up to date! :hi:

Ford is acting as an administration shill

He stated quite clearly when speaking out against Bolton that analyst's were quite pressured. While I agree in general that Tenent and others allowed this to be sure, I do not agree the blame on career analysts as opposed to the appointed political and agenda driven crowd... I am confused by these comments now. I really don't know what he is pointing to.

In any case, watching all of this feels like I lifted a box of all my work for the last 2.5 years and watch it finally get some discussion. That is at least comforting.

Why don't you provide them, you asshat?

Former State Dept. Principal Iraq Analyst

I'm not really familiar with him.

Wasn't he supposed to speak?

There may be a second panel with him on it.

he said... he is in the UK.

you come to my rescue again ;-D

NGO's operating on the battle field

I think I likey!

He told them about insurgents, unemployment, chaos. He was pessimistic about our 'success in Iraq'.

I bet there are many of them.....

White is debunking every damn reason for the Iraq war. Impressive !!!!

Especially the post-invasion and the POI's.

:popcorn:

When Congress members are provided intelligence from the intelligence community, is it required that any dissenting opinions be provided?

intelligence by the CIA, Sec of State, (etc) is there a requirement for the intelligence...to be on all sides of the issue.

Mentioning aluminum tubes how other agency was omitted from the delivery.

FORD: There is no obligation for the DCIA to tell you what NSA, FBI, etc. think. They should, but there's no formal obligation. Some of the obligation has to rest with you (Congress) to ask that question.

Wilkerson: There is no issue about what we were given at Langley more complex than the aluminum tubes...different tubes, different consignments, French got tubes to assess. At a critical moment with Powell, Tenet, McClaughlin...information form "a particular country" (hmmmmm.....) was quite persuasive. But, Powell was still not completely convinced such that it should go into his presentation at the UN.

presentation to UN ....

http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Powell_expressed_reticence_on_prewar_intelligence_1109.html

President Bush’s former Secretary of State, Colin Powell, may have known that the case for military action in Iraq was thin before he presented it to the United Nations, RAW STORY has learned.

In an interview earlier this year, Powell told ABC News’s Barbara Walters that he felt misled by the intelligence community and found the entire experience of presenting questionable information to the United Nations to be “painful.”

“George Tenet did not sit there for five days with me misleading me," he said. “He believed what he was giving to me was accurate.”

<snip>

During this conversation, Biden reiterated much of what he had said during the Senate Foreign Relations Committee’s hearing on the evidence as presented by Powell deputy Richard Armitage. According to sources, Biden expressed his concerns to Powell about the reliability of the evidence, and encouraged the Secretary to speak only about intelligence that he was sure of.

“Mr. Secretary, tell them what you know,” Biden said, according to those familiar with the conversation.

“…When we are both out of office for two years, I will tell you what is going on here,” they say Powell replied.

One individual familiar with the conversation said it suggested Powell had personal reservations about the intelligence.

Senator Biden's office declined to comment on the conversation, saying the exchange was private. A spokesman for the Secretary said he was traveling and declined to comment.

that what they touted as evidence that the tubes were being used to enrich uranium was actually evidence they weren't...

these senators serious things went on before the war, fixing the intelligence, this administration must be held accountable isn't anyone listening. Wishful thinking on my part.

Now they need to ask about Feith, Rhode, Franklin, Wolfie and Rummy... The sources were picked by OSP and their identity was kept from analysts by OSP = cooking intel.

activities...yes, Perle is a big factor in this.

or unreliability of the multiple sources about the mobile bio labs.

Apparently, that was Curveball.

Germany had doubts. (So it wasn't EVERYONE)

analysis and background... we should have our own show

what is the intelligence vs. getting specific information (fixing the intelligence around the policy)

Pillar: By the Spring, April 2002, questions coming their way it was consistent with the DSM!

said very factually...

the decision had been made (to invade Iraq).

W: I only can say the Secy was very, very involved in diplomacy right up to the point the French and others told him they wouldn't support a second resolution. Powell was still looking at diplomacy as late as Jan 2003. Powell still believed he had influence (on the final decision).

The guy we picked up in Afghanistan and tortured into saying what was wanted by Bushco

to you.

W: We were simply told there were interrogations involved with high level operative of AQ...

F: When did DIA dissent?

W. I was told that no US personnel were there when alLibby was being tortured/water boarded. I was told DIA dissented on Feb 3; we went to the UN on Feb 5

:wow:

W. We were told it was an Iraqi engineer who worked there (paraphrased). They made it very credible.

F. So they were CIA drawings.

W. Yes.

wait... we have to rewind all of this section with Diane

:wow:

W: (listing everyone, mentioning Feith and saying that Feith worked with John Hanna). Told Tenet it's not going to do it. DCI said okay let's use the NIE and make it the base for the presentation.

:shrug: (I'm not familiar with it, sorry)

W. I can't imagine why Drumheller would be saying those things.

all I can remember is them saying (as it turns out, truthfully), that the Bush administration was fabricating that they had WMDs, that it was all "smoke and mirrors" or words to the that effect. I did a google search, but with thousands of hits (which I don't have time to go through) they all seem to be modern references to the smoke and mirrors of today's lies.

anyone else remember this? I remember them outside the UN chamber, outraged that Powell was lying.

(or maybe it wasn't Rather) :shrug:

I want to see what he looks like.

anyone will ever see him:)

Just kidding lala.

and an alchoholic?

W. That's my understanding.

always walking drunk? :rofl:

What the hell is he saying????

but never sent an American to interrogate curveball...disingenuous or what??

I'm really going to need lala or someone in the blogosphere to go through this and pull out the narrative and how it jibes with previous versions of the narrative... this is serious private-eye time.

:popcorn: