Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush, Aides Ignored CIA Caveats on Iraq( Clear-Cut Assertions ) Wash Post

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 » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
jbfam4 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-07-04 06:43 AM
Original message
Bush, Aides Ignored CIA Caveats on Iraq( Clear-Cut Assertions ) Wash Post

Bush, Aides Ignored CIA Caveats on Iraq
Clear-Cut Assertions Were Made Before Arms Assessment Was Completed
By Walter Pincus and Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writers
Saturday, February 7, 2004; Page A17


In its fall 2002 campaign to win congressional support for a war against Iraq, President Bush and his top advisers ignored many of the caveats and qualifiers included in the classified report on Saddam Hussein's weapons that CIA Director George J. Tenet defended Thursday.

In fact, they made some of their most unequivocal assertions about unconventional weapons before the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) was completed.

Iraq "is a grave and gathering danger," Bush told the United Nations on Sept. 12, 2002. At the White House two weeks later -- after referring to a British government report that Iraq could launch "a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order" is given -- he went on to say, "Each passing day could be the one on which the Iraqi regime gives anthrax or VX -- nerve gas -- or someday a nuclear weapon to a terrorist ally."

Three weeks later, on the day the NIE was delivered to Congress, Bush told lawmakers in the White House Rose Garden that Iraq's current course was "a threat of unique urgency."

On Thursday, summarizing the NIE's conclusions, Tenet said: "They never said Iraq was an imminent threat."

The administration's prewar comments -- and the more cautious, qualified phrasings of intelligence analysts -- are at the heart of the debate over whether the faulty prewar claims resulted from bad intelligence or exaggeration by top White House officials -- or both.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A20194-2004Feb6.html


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Dr Fate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-07-04 06:56 AM
Response to Original message
1. Good editorial- does not let Bush get away witht he "imminent" spin...
Edited on Sat Feb-07-04 06:57 AM by Dr Fate
...if you notice- the author intentionally gives several Bush quotes that are alternatives to the word "imminent"-

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-07-04 07:13 AM
Response to Original message
2. how many ways
can it be presented that only in the bushco admin did anybody raise the bar on the threat that iraq posed?
it's bizarre that the congress is yawning behind it's hand over the grave situation bushco has created for america.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
nixonwasbetterthanW Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-07-04 07:57 AM
Response to Original message
3.  WMD Commission has an easy task

1.) Read this story.

2.) Read Sy Hersh's work in The New Yorker.

That is all you need to know. The intelligence was right. It was misused, politicized and so twisted as to endanger this country far more than any scenario of which the former leader of Iraq was capable.

Case closed.
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 Thu Dec 26th 2024, 05:57 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles 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