Kay Asks Why US Thought Iraq Had WMD

[kskiska]

(snip)

``I don't think they exist,'' David Kay said Sunday. ``The fact that we found so far the weapons do not exist - we've got to deal with that difference and understand why.''

Kay's remarks on National Public Radio reignited criticism from Democrats, who ignored his cautions that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction was ``not a political issue.''

(snip)

The CIA would not comment Sunday on Kay's remarks, although one intelligence official pointed out that Kay himself had predicted last year that his search would turn up banned weapons.

Kay said his predictions were not ``coming back to haunt me in the sense that I am embarrassed. They are coming back to haunt me in the sense of `Why could we all be so wrong?'''

(snip)

``The whole thing shifted from directed programs to a corrupted process,'' he told the Times. ``The regime was no longer in control; it was like a death spiral. Saddam was self-directing projects that were not vetted by anyone else. The scientists were able to fake programs.''

He said he has had U.S. intelligence analysts some to him, ``almost in tears, saying they felt so badly that we weren't finding what they had thought we were going to find - I have had analysts apologizing for reaching the conclusions they did.''

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,1280,-3668834,00.html

[dArKeR]

1. The dead children's families are in tears too!

It's called Manslaughter.

[brainwashed_youth]

2. Goddamn it

I keep being told by my repub mother to let the whole WMD thing go. But I just can't. Why does shrub do this to us. is oil really worth that much. god, i just wanna slap a repub right now.

[baby_bear]

11. Did you ask your mother why that is important to her?

I mean, is she feeling guilt over the dead Americans and Iraqis?

She should.

But not as much as the Bushistas, including Powell, who knew they were lying.

Tell her she didn't lie; just believed people she thought wouldn't lie to her.

Now she can leave it behind by voting for anyone but Bush.

I know; easier said than done.

Hang in there.

s_m

[bfusco]

31. it astonishes me how naive or blindly partisan some are

Point out what a bad precedent it is when our leaders will lie to it's population to sell a war that they/Congress would not have supported and did so using threats that intelligence never supported. Point out the irrational fear mongering, the bullying and bribing of the international community that squandered our nation's credibility at a time it is badly needed needed, a war that devastates a country, killed thousands and created a terror and security vacuum in a region that never had one, the inciting anti-US hatred in the Muslim world, the 200 billion and counting, the stretching of our badly needed military resources, the neglect that is now occurring in Afghanistan because so many resources are in Iraq and the list can go on and on. Also point out the result when the last time the US went to war on dubious/falsified/manipulated intelligence (Vietnam). I'm sorry but shrub is not getting free pass on this one and it's time to hammer away from now to November and hope people finally wake up.

[unblock]

3. 1939 poland was a far bigger threat to nazi germany

and that invasion was obviously based on fabricated pretense and fraudulent fear.

what will history say of the invasion of iraq?

history, that is, not republican propaganda.

[reprobate]

36. This may be the END of history.

See the thread on the cooling of europe.

[kskiska]

4. Blix's remarks

Hans Blix, the former chief U.N. inspector whose work was heavily criticized by Kay and ended when the United States went to war with Iraq, said Sunday the United States should have known the intelligence was flawed last year when leads followed up by U.N. inspectors didn't produce any results.

``I was beginning to wonder what was going on,'' he told The Associated Press in a telephone interview. ``Weren't they wondering too? If you find yourself on a train that's going in the wrong direction, its best to get off at the next stop.''

[coldwatercyn]

15. The lies continue

Didn't Bush also say he got info from the British? Hasn't Blair said he stands behind the WMD claim? Are they now going to blame the CIA? Amazing.

[JohnOneillsMemory]

22. Uh-oh. Blair faces the music on 1/28. Bush* survival threatened. Fireworks

are in the near future to rescue this cabal and their plans for empire.

I'm going out to buy plastic and duct tape. Maybe start digging a basement...

[LoneStarLiberal]

27. Howard Isn't Like IDS, Either

Howard looks to be the kind of pissy curmudgeonly Tory who will gladly roast Tony Blair's nuts over any issue he can, whether it's "top-up" fees at universities or Iraq.

[Zhade]

23. CIA versus Bush

Hmmm.

HMMMMMMMMMMMMM.

I don't know which horse to bet on. The CIA has a good motivator, though - Valerie Plame.

Yep, the Bushies will regret this. It's going to sting bad, George. Time to bend over and take it, because you are asking for it but good.

[jmusgrat]

5. and haven't we been saying that from the beginning?

Guess what, Hans Blix was right. GW wrong-- why am I not surprised...

[Metrix]

6. The mystery to me is why Chalabi hasn't been put out to pasture

or eliminated.

[Zhade]

24. 'Wellstone' Chalabi? Nah. Not just yet.

Of course, he did just voice support for al-Sistani's call for direct elections in Iraq...

Chalabi might want to stay away from small planes. :)

[daleo]

7. Liars are still spinning

Now it is the fault of 'unnamed analysts'. But it is alright - they are really sorry, and almost in tears. Poor babies.

[Catherine Vincent]

8. I have never smelled more bullshit than from this guy.

Kay says we shouldn't be trying to put the blame on the administration but we (the media and the people) should question why the intelligence was wrong. This Kay guy wants to keep this away from Bush/Cheney as much as he can and more than likely the media will let him.

Aaargh!!

:mad:

[kskiska]

9. But at the same time…

(the article ends with this:

Kay said he resigned Friday because the Pentagon began peeling away his staff of weapons-searchers as the military struggled to put down the Iraqi insurgency last fall.

Kay hopes to draw on his experiences to write a book on weapons intelligence.

[fjc]

35. For the very first time Bush wants to site Clinton as reliable?

Someone on the Democratic side should point out how quickly, how often, and how completely this administration reputiated anything and everything about the Clinton administration. Now, they want to turn around and use him as reliable testimony on WMD. As with all conservatives, the truth is whatever's comming out of their mouths at the moment.

[Pax Argent]

13. The CIA and other credible intelligence agencies didn't know

This was said repeatedly in the build-up to the war and it is repeated in Suskind/O'Neill's book, The Price of Loyalty. They were never able to tack down concretely what was going on in Iraq.

The Bush Administration cherry-picked and weasel-worded a justification for war that crossed the line into outright lies on several occasions. If the rest of the world ever trusts America again, they are as big a fool as most of our poor, benighted country.

[earthside]

10. I heard it again ...

:mad:
I heard it again tonight on some political talk show ... "Everybody believed Saddam had WMD! Even Clinton believed it! " so on and so forth. Trying to justify the invasion because Bush acted on what everybody believed.

That point is completely irrelevant! The UN inspectors were on the ground in Iraq looking all over the place for any evidence of WMD. Hans Blix present two reports, both said they were finding nothing. So no matter what Bush believed or what the CIA told him on the basis of satellite photos and analysis --- we had real people in Iraq doing real inspections! The UN, France, Germany, Russia kept saying to wait until Blix finished his work ... but George couldn't wait ... he had to get the killing started.

So Bush made Blix pull out the weapons inspectors so he could attack. That means that morally, Bush is guilty of murder. He is a war criminal.

See: "Is Bush a War Criminal"

www.earthside.com/bush-war-crimes.html

[Hamlette]

14. the red neck at my office

who HATES Clinton pulled the "but Clinton believed there were WMD too" line on me last week.

I responded: "but Clinton was impeached. Why would you believe anything he said?"

Shut him up.

[kskiska]

19. Another one you can try

"Well, Clinton believed that oral sex isn't sexual relations. Do you believe that, too?"

[stopbush]

17. Yep, the "Clinton believed it, too" line is incredibly lame.

Clinton believed the USSR had WMD - he didn't start a war

Clinton believed SH had WMD - he didn't start a war

Hell, Clinton may believe that OJ did it - he didn't call for his execution

The mind games the bushistas try are as incredible as they are infantile. They had bad info, were told it was bad info by the CIA, pushed and pulled and cherry picked that bad info, lied to fill in the blanks in the bad info, ignored the pleas of their real allies (France, Germany) in the run-up to their illegal war, and now that the whole thing has proven without a doubt to have been an absolute sham, their best defense is "he knew, too"?

How about you're on trial for murdering someone with a kitchen knife? What's your defense, "Geez, judge, everyone owns a kitchen knife, so everyone's just as guilty as me"? No, it's what you DO with the effing knife, not that you had one.

They're going down in flames...and they'll try to take the world with them.

[coldwatercyn]

18. They will blame everyone else.

If Clinton believed it why he didn't invade Iraq? God knows he was trying to do everything he could to deflect the Monicagate situation. The lying liars.

[pacifictiger]

21. don't I remember

that it was the holy roller republicans who were jumping up and down screaming, denouncing clinton's sporadic military targeted air strikes in afghanistan and iraq at various times, as his totally unjustified ploy to evade the big sex crime?

[TacticalPeek]

12. Shrub is such a little man.

"The CIA made me invade Iraq. The buck stops with the CIA."

"9/11 ruined the economy and lost the jobs. The buck stops with 9/11."

"Bill Clinton thought Saddam was dangerous, so I waged a war of agression. The buck stops with Clinton."

"Dick Cheney leaked the name, cover and task of a CIA agent, so I investigated Paul O'Neill. The buck stops with O'Neill."


Wimp.

[pacifictiger]

20. I just read

that the british intelligence service is upset that they are the ones being blamed for wrong information too and are starting to speak out on the truth because they feel their reputation is on the line. They say analysis was either ignored or they were not given enough time to do proper analysis, and that certain info was cherry picked to fit the political objective to invade iraq. I wonder if the CIA & MI6 whistleblowers might team up for the big expose perhaps. Also, FBI arabic interpreter who stepped forward when the govt was begging for interpreters following 9/11, was later fired for asking too many questions about inconsistencies surrounding 9/11, has been threatened on more than 1 occasion and has been trying for months to get her testimony heard by the senate commision. The 9/11 widows have stepped in and may be getting some action to have someone listen to her.

[eablair3]

16. Kay: U.S. Must Explain Iraq WMD Research

yeah David, ...maybe they should have explained it all BEFORE going and bombing and terrorizing citizens of another country and killing thousands.

Kay: U.S. Must Explain Iraq WMD Research

33 minutes ago

By SCOTT LINDLAW, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - U.S. intelligence agencies need to explain why their research indicated Iraq (news - web sites) possessed banned weapons before the American-led invasion, says the outgoing top U.S. inspector, who now believes Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) had no such arms.


"I don't think they exist," David Kay said Sunday. "The fact that we found so far the weapons do not exist — we've got to deal with that difference and understand why."


Kay's remarks on National Public Radio reignited criticism from Democrats, who ignored his cautions that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction was "not a political issue."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&e=1&u=/ap/20040126/ap_on_re_mi_ea/us_iraq_weapons

[radfringe]

25. Intelligence now the scapegoat

Kay Says Iraq Likely Had No Banned Arms
By SCOTT LINDLAW, AP
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040125125309990005

----snip---

Kay's remarks on National Public Radio reignited criticism from Democrats, who ignored his cautions that the failure to find weapons of mass destruction was "not a political issue.''

"It's an issue of the capabilities of one's intelligence service to collect valid, truthful information,'' Kay said. Asked whether President Bush owed the nation an explanation for the gap between his warnings and Kay's findings, Kay said: "I actually think the intelligence community owes the president, rather than the president owing the American people.''

=============================

so now it's the intelligence community's fault? not a political issue???? :WTF:
of course it's a political issue - Bush lied and people died - Bush is still lying and people are still dying

the next question is will the intelligence agencies stand still for this and take on the roll of being a scapegoat?

[LoneStarLiberal]

26. Ummm...Probably Because That's What the President Told Us

Kay's not going to get out of this one in one piece; either the public will rip him to shreds or the administration will bury him.

[Cat Atomic]

28. How does he square that with the fact that

Bush referenced the Nigerian uranium in his State of the Union speech, even though it had been discredited by the intelligence agencies?

Seems pretty obvious that the blame is indeed in the administration. They buried any intelligence that didn't support their premise for invasion, period.

[leetrisck]

29. Shouldn't someone be asking Scott Ritter

why he was so sure there wasn't any WMD? I know I saw Ritter & Kay on an interview together (before we went to Iraq) and their disagreement was intense. Ritter was frantically trying to tell the world it wasn't there.

[stickdog]

30. I'm in tears as well. They are tears of rage.

You are all so full of shit.

[treepig]

32. all this weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth

over "where are the WsMD?" is so incredibly lame.

ms. rice and mr. powell knew full well they didn't exist in 2001:

two years earlier, Powell said just the opposite. The occasion was a press conference on 24 February 2001 during Powell's visit to Cairo, Egypt. Answering a question about the US-led sanctions against Iraq, the Secretary of State said:

We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they )the sanctions) have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...



http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm

in fact, pretty much everyone knew there were no WsMD long ago:

BAGHDAD and AMMAN - Chief United Nations weapons inspector Hans Blix knew it. Former weapons inspector Scott Ritter knew it. French, German and Russian intelligence knew it. Sultan Hashim Ahmad - Iraq's former minister of defense, now safe after a cosy deal with the Americans - knew it. In 1995, Hussein Kamel, married to one of Saddam Hussein's daughters and the man in charge of it all, knew it. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) in Langley and the MI6 in London knew it. Saddam's regime was not lying when it claimed that it had destroyed all its WMD after the 1991 Gulf War. Whatever the spin, the fact of the matter is that now there's conclusive proof that both US President George W Bush and UK Prime Minister Tony Blair lied about the reason for invading Iraq.

On August 22, 1995, Hussein Kamel was interviewed in Amman by three top Western officials: Rolf Ekeus, executive chairman of UNSCOM from 1991 to 1997; Professor Maurizio Zifferero, deputy director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and head of the inspections team in Iraq; and Nikita Smidovich, a Russian diplomat who led UNSCOM's ballistic missile team, and Deputy Director for Operations of UNSCOM. Major Izz al-Din al-Majid, a cousin of Saddam Hussein's who defected with the Kamel brothers, was also present. Unlike the brothers, he remained in Jordan and exiled himself in Europe in an undisclosed location.

The key document - shown to Asia Times Online by a Jordanian intelligence source - is in the form of an internal UNSCOM/IAEA report classified as "sensitive". On page 13 of what is the transcript of the UNSCOM/IAEA interview with Hussein Kamel, he categorically says, "I ordered the destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed." He also says that "not a single missile was left, but they had blueprints and molds for production. All missiles were destroyed."


http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/EJ07Ak02.html

[NNN0LHI]

33. Over 500 dead Americans because someone made a mistake? WTF? n/t

[treepig]

34. mr. kay, is it

(yeah, i know i'm over-using this graphic, but it just seems to apply in so many places . . . )