Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Poor George W; he was "disappointed" by the "flawed" US intell on Iraq.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:31 AM
Original message
Poor George W; he was "disappointed" by the "flawed" US intell on Iraq.
President Bush said Tuesday he was disappointed in "flawed intelligence" before the Iraq war ...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080514/ap_on_go_pr_wh/bush_iraq

There certainly was "flawed intelligence", but it wasn't the intell agencies. How very "disappointed" he must have been by the intell he did get:

SUMMER, 2002 – CIA WARNINGS (about lack of "WMD") TO WHITE HOUSE EXPOSED
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0630selling.htm

SEPTEMBER, 2002 – DIA TELLS WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS
http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/US/Pentagon/us-dod-iraqchemreport-060703.htm

SEPTEMBER 20, 2002 – DEPT. OF ENERGY TELLS WHITE HOUSE OF NUKE DOUBTS (aluminum tubes for conventional rockets, NOT nukes)

While National Security Adviser Condi Rice stated on 9/8 that imported aluminum tubes ‘are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs’ a growing number of experts say that the administration has not presented convincing evidence that the tubes were intended for use in uranium enrichment rather than for artillery rocket tubes or other uses. Former U.N. weapons inspector David Albright said he found significant disagreement among scientists within the Department of Energy and other agencies about the certainty of the evidence."
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_01/003147.php

OCTOBER 2002 – CIA DIRECTLY WARNS WHITE HOUSE

"The CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials in Africa."
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/6362092.htm

OCTOBER 2002 — STATE DEPT. WARNS WHITE HOUSE ON NUKE CHARGES

The State Department’s Intelligence and Research Department dissented from the conclusion in the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq’s WMD capabilities that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. "The activities we have detected do not ... add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquiring nuclear weapons."

INR accepted the judgment by Energy Department technical experts that aluminum tubes Iraq was seeking to acquire, which was the central basis for the conclusion that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, were ill-suited to build centrifuges for enriching uranium.
http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/pdf/Iraq/declassifiedintellreport.pdf

OCTOBER 2002 – AIR FORCE WARNS WHITE HOUSE (against "drones")

"The government organization most knowledgeable about the United States' UAV program -- the Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center -- had sharply disputed the notion that Iraq's UAVs were being designed as attack weapons" – a WMD claim President Bush used in his October 7 speech on Iraqi WMD, just three days before the congressional vote authorizing the president to use force.
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=2755&fcategory_desc=Under%20Reported

JANUARY, 2003 – STATE DEPT. INTEL BUREAU REITERATE WARNING TO POWELL

"The Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), the State Department's in-house analysis unit, and nuclear experts at the Department of Energy are understood to have explicitly warned Secretary of State Colin Powell during the preparation of his speech that the evidence was questionable. The Bureau reiterated to Mr. Powell during the preparation of his February speech that its analysts were not persuaded that the aluminum tubes the Administration was citing could be used in centrifuges to enrich uranium."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/justify/2003/0729powell.htm

FEBRUARY 14, 2003 – UN WARNS WHITE HOUSE THAT NO WMD HAVE BEEN FOUND
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/14/sprj.irq.un /

FEBRUARY 15, 2003 – IAEA WARNS WHITE HOUSE NO NUCLEAR EVIDENCE
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b24889.html

FEBURARY 24, 2003 – CIA WARNS WHITE HOUSE ‘NO DIRECT EVIDENCE’ OF WMD
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3340723 /

MARCH 7, 2003 – IAEA REITERATES TO WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF NUKES
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b24889.html

Doubts, Dissent Stripped from Public Version of Iraq Assessment
The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about deposed dictator Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows.

As a result, the public was given a far more definitive assessment of Iraq's plans and capabilities than President Bush and other U.S. decision-makers received from their intelligence agencies.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0210-02.htm

CIA to Bush: 'No clear Evidence of WMD'
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120103A.shtml

Why the CIA thinks Bush is wrong
The president says the US has to act now against Iraq. The trouble is, his own security services don't agree.
http://www.sundayherald.com/28384

CIA in blow to Bush attack plans
The letter also comes at a time when the CIA is competing with the more hawkish Pentagon, which is also supplying the White House with intelligence on the Iraqi threat.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

White House 'exaggerating Iraqi threat'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html

"I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied - finally denied access, a report came out of the Atomic -the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don't know what more evidence we need."
-Bush speaking at a news conference Sept. 7 with Tony Blair

There never was, never has been, any such report.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm

France & Russia knew;

'French intelligence was telling us that there was effectively no real evidence of a WMD program That's why France wanted a longer extension on the weapons inspections. The French, the Germans and the Russians all knew there were no weapons there -- and so did Blair and Bush as that's what the French told them directly. Blair ignored what the French told us and instead listened to the Americans.'

The debate on Iraqi WMD continues. For example, Russia was not convinced by either the September 24, 2002 British dossier or the October 4, 2002 CIA report. Lacking sufficient evidence, Russia dismissed the claims as a part of a "propaganda furor."
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/usallieswmd.html#back234

The UK knew
"They also ignore the statements of Robin Cook, the former British foreign secretary who resigned on the eve of the war to protest Prime Minister Tony Blair’s war policy. Cook was quoted in the June 18, 2003 Guardian newspaper as saying: “I think it would be fair to say that there was a selection of evidence to support a conclusion. I fear we got into a position in which the intelligence was not being used to inform and shape policy, but to shape policy that was already settled.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/06/05/nwmd05.xml

Don't forget Poland! Even they knew -and publicly admitted- it was for the OIL.

Poland, which has sent troops to support the US-led forces in Iraq, has acknowledged its "ultimate objective" is to acquire supplies of Iraqi oil.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3043330.stm

But George W. bUsh was..."mislead"...

"If I have a chance to invade….if I had that much capital, I’m not going to waste it. I’m going to get everything passed that I want to get passed and I’m going to have a successful presidency."

Does George W. bUsh count 7000+ dead American citizens (and hundreds of thousands of non-American citizens) as "successful"?

Probably.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:41 AM
Response to Original message
1. so are the hundreds of thousands dead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac2 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:47 AM
Response to Original message
2. Bush made up his own "intelligence" to go to war.
He's a Bush war monger.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BOSSHOG Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 10:05 AM
Response to Original message
3. And the ignorant trash which comprise his base laps it up
they also think he's a good christian who served honorably in the military. It must be extremely pathetic to have the brain of a "conservative."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VP505 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 10:10 AM
Response to Original message
4. Will that a-hole ever tell the truth about anything?
Edited on Wed May-14-08 10:11 AM by vpilot
Ya, like anyone would believe "he was disappointed in "flawed intelligence". More likely he is disappointed that some people could see through the lies, the bullshit spin and now know what a complete failure his Iraq misadventure has been.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 11:25 AM
Response to Original message
5. K&R, thanks for the collection of links. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC