The White House used false intel — which they knew was false

[OzmO]

The White House used false intel — which they knew was false
Posted June 5th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
Share This | Spotlight | Permalink

We’ve been waiting for the Senate Intelligence Committee to report on the misuse of pre-war intelligence for so long, it’s easy to forget what a debacle the endeavor really is.

Here’s a quick primer. The Intelligence Committee began a comprehensive investigation nearly five years ago. Initially, the committee was prepared to release one authoritative document on the Iraq intelligence, what it said, and how it was handled. With the 2004 presidential election looming, then-Intelligence Committee Chairman Pat Roberts (R-Kan.) split the report in two — one on how wrong the intelligence community and agencies were (released before the ‘04 election) and another on how the White House used/misused/abused the available information (to be released after the ‘04 election).

Roberts played fast and loose for years. First he said publicly that he’d “try” to have Phase II available to the public before the 2004 election. He didn’t. Roberts then gave his word, in writing, that members of the Senate Intelligence Committee would have a draft report on controversial “public statements” from administration officials by April 2006. That didn’t happen, either. Then he indicated that he wanted to give up on the second part of the investigation altogether. (In January, we learned that the investigation was impeded by the Vice President.)

Today, the wait is over. And you’ll never guess what investigators found.

A long-awaited Senate Select Intelligence Committee report made public Thursday concludes that President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney made public statements to promote an invasion of Iraq that they knew at the time were not supported by available intelligence.

In a statement, Intelligence Committee Chairman John Rockefeller (D- W. Va.) said, “There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate.”

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/244/story/39963.html

[War-Horse]

This is in line with bugliosi in Deckers thread.  All is going well.....

[Hugo Chavez]

There's been so many things posted that show exactly this.  The end result is the same every single time, rightwingers don't give a rats ass nor are they likely to ever.

[Dos Equis]

In a statement, Intelligence Committee Chairman John Rockefeller (D- W. Va.) said, “There is no question we all relied on flawed intelligence. But, there is a fundamental difference between relying on incorrect intelligence and deliberately painting a picture to the American people that you know is not fully accurate.”

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/244/story/39963.html

Yes, Senator Rockefeller, tell us more:

On October 10, 2002, he said that "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late... Saddam Hussein represents a grave threat to the United States, and I have concluded we must use force to deal with him if all other means fail."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rockefeller#Iraq_War

[War-Horse]

Yes, Senator Rockefeller, tell us more:

On October 10, 2002, he said that "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late... Saddam Hussein represents a grave threat to the United States, and I have concluded we must use force to deal with him if all other means fail."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rockefeller#Iraq_War

Good gawd.  Notice the date.  This is when the whole country has belief in a presidents words.  The case was built on lies and deceptions and now the world is going to want justice.   Bush killed 3000 americans and 4000 more in the war........he will pay-up soon.

[OzmO]

Yes, Senator Rockefeller, tell us more:

On October 10, 2002, he said that "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years... The global community -- in the form of the United Nations -- has declared repeatedly, through multiple resolutions, that the frightening prospect of a nuclear-armed Saddam cannot come to pass. But the U.N. has been unable to enforce those resolutions. We must eliminate that threat now, before it is too late... Saddam Hussein represents a grave threat to the United States, and I have concluded we must use force to deal with him if all other means fail."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jay_Rockefeller#Iraq_War

Notice he used the word "WE"  we relied on false evidence.

then suggests BUSH knew it was false.

The rebuttal of you using dem statements based on the same false intel is overplayed irrelevant. 

[Dos Equis]

Notice he used the word "WE"  we relied on false evidence.

then suggests BUSH knew it was false.

The rebuttal of you using dem statements based on the same false intel is overplayed irrelevant. 

I will continue to repeat them.  Keep in mind these statements start as early as 1998, before Bush took office.  If this wasn't so serious it would be comical how they are now trying to spin their earlier extremely strong statements.  I guess big bad Bush tricked everybody, including Clinton Admin officials.   

[OzmO]

I will continue to repeat them.  Keep in mind these statements start as early as 1998, before Bush took office.  If this wasn't so serious it would be comical how they are now trying to spin their earlier extremely strong statements.  I guess big bad Bush tricked everybody, including Clinton Admin officials.   

Some statements were said for political reasons, some were said from fear based hysteria. 

The main sales pitch hinge on current intel, not crap from 1999 or earlier.  Current intel that looks like it was deliberately presented to these people falsely. 

Hence.  What they said don't mean jack.


The issue here, is irresponsibly sending our young to war based on deliberately manipulated intel that EVERYONE bought.

Hence again, their statements don't mean jack Sh1t.

[Dos Equis]

Some statements were said for political reasons, some were said from fear based hysteria. 

The main sales pitch hinge on current intel, not crap from 1999 or earlier.  Current intel that looks like it was deliberately presented to these people falsely. 

Hence.  What they said don't mean jack.


The issue here, is irresponsibly sending our young to war based on deliberately manipulated intel that EVERYONE bought.

Hence again, their statements don't mean jack Sh1t.

We just disagree.  They mean a whole lot IMO.  If it was just a few or only members of one party I might agree.  But to say that Bush tricked all of those members of Congress, the UN, and the more than twenty countries who participated in the war really doesn't make any sense. 

On one hand, he's one of the dumbest men alive.  On the other hand, he tricked a large part of the world into supporting a war.  Which is it?   

[OzmO]

We just disagree.  They mean a whole lot IMO.  If it was just a few or only members of one party I might agree.  But to say that Bush tricked all of those members of Congress, the UN, and the more than twenty countries who participated in the war really doesn't make any sense. 

On one hand, he's one of the dumbest men alive.  On the other hand, he tricked a large part of the world into supporting a war.  Which is it?   

It doesn't matter if agree or disagree.  He didn't "trick" them.  He fed them intel that he knew was false. 

[Dos Equis]

It doesn't matter if agree or disagree.  He didn't "trick" them.  He fed them intel that he knew was false. 

I'm going to spend some time this weekend (if I can) looking at precisely what he supposedly fed Congress, the UN, and this other countries and when he did it.  Will pick this up later.