Senate report studies pre-war Bush lies

[gabosaurus]

And to think that Hillary Clinton was one of the main supporters of the non-truths.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel10mar10,0,5115595.story

[truthmatters]

It will be even weaker when it released because they will fight over what the public is allowed to see.

Remember all the redacting they have done? This will look like swiss cheese when we get to see it.

[hjmick]

And to think that Hillary Clinton was one of the main supporters of the non-truths.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-intel10mar10,0,5115595.story

Playing fast and loose with the title of the thread I see. No where in the article is it being asserted that lies were involved in the run up to the Iraq invasion. The article itself seems to imply that everything hinged on the interpretation of the intelligence.

The more pertinent parts of the article:


..."It's inherently problematic to try to climb inside the heads [of policymakers] and know what they knew at the time."

...

Each section includes a catalog of as many as 20 prewar claims, as well as a summary conclusion on whether the assertions were generally warranted.

"The whole purpose of this exercise is to answer questions about whether the administration was honest in its use of intelligence when it made the case for war," said a senior aide to Sen. John D. Rockefeller IV (D-W.Va.), the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

In many cases, statements that were later proven wrong -- such as President Bush's assertion in September 2002 that Iraq "possesses biological and chemical weapons" -- were largely in line with U.S. intelligence assessments at the time.

Prewar assertions about Iraq's nuclear program were more problematic because they were supported by some intelligence assessments but not others.

"They were substantiated," a congressional official said, "but didn't convey the disagreements within the intelligence community."



Now, while I'm not currently a big fan of the President, and even less of a Hillary fan, I do not believe they or anyone else lied in the run up to the Iraq invasion. I think they made the best use of what facts they had at the time, unfortunately it seems likely that, had they waited, within six or so months the intelligence available would have told another story.

So, I ask you, is it wrong to believe the facts as they are presented to you and act on the intelligence in a manner that is prudent and in the best interest of the nation and the world in general? Or is it better to sit back and hope the intelligence is wrong and everything will work out? When decisions are made based on the interpretation of analysts, human analysts, there will inevitably be questions and even mistakes. It's just the nature of the business.

This much I know, I'm glad these are not decisions I have to make.

[truthmatters]

I just dont understand how anyone can not see they gamed the intell to be able to attack Iraq.

It was a plan they wanted to do even before Bush was elected.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC

[jimnyc]

The Senate Intelligence Committee comprised of Democrats as well has already investigated the issue and stated they saw no lies.

http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf

[gabosaurus]

"Many reports were largely in line with intelligence statements at the time"

The intelligence statements that they chose to make public. The whole line of "Saddam has nuclear capability!" and "Iraq has nukes!" were a total sham. They presented this line to the Congress, got the authorization, then went ahead with the invasion.
When the statements were proven to be untrue, the Bushies fell back on "well, you all agreed to it!"
In other words, "you believed the lies we told you, so you are just as guilty as we are."

[jimnyc]

"Many reports were largely in line with intelligence statements at the time"

The intelligence statements that they chose to make public. The whole line of "Saddam has nuclear capability!" and "Iraq has nukes!" were a total sham. They presented this line to the Congress, got the authorization, then went ahead with the invasion.
When the statements were proven to be untrue, the Bushies fell back on "well, you all agreed to it!"
In other words, "you believed the lies we told you, so you are just as guilty as we are."

Do you mean the "lies" spoken by the Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee that were privy to the same documentation and updates from the intelligence agencies?

[manu1959]

I just dont understand how anyone can not see they gamed the intell to be able to attack Iraq.
It was a plan they wanted to do even before Bush was elected.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PNAC

you mean the clinton apointee gerorge tenant gamed the intel for 8 years prior to bush showing up....you mean like that.....

[truthmatters]

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz



The people from project for a new American century. They are the ones who said we NEED a new Pearl Harbor to get what we want from the government. There number one target was Iraq long before 911 or the silly Iraq invasion.

Anyone who believed the lies which took us to Iraq is still being fooled by them.

[Dilloduck]

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz



The people from project for a new American century. They are the ones who said we NEED a new Pearl Harbor to get what we want from the government. There number one target was Iraq long before 911 or the silly Iraq invasion.

Anyone who believed the lies which took us to Iraq is still being fooled by them.

Get over it---vote for a new president and quit WHINING.

[truthmatters]

What is with the obsession with the word whining?

Telling the truth about what people have asociated themselfs with to prove their motivations for lying to the American people about a war which has nearly destroyed our economy ahnd worldwide reputations, spilled the blood of our bravest and compromised our ability to protect ourselves from other threats is far from fitting the describtion of whining. You see it is how smart people make decisions for the future. If you dont know what really happened then you cant make a well informed decision for what to do today or in the future.

We were had my fellow Americans and if you refuse to believe it for political reasons then step aside and let the people who are willing to face the facts steer us into the future.

[Little-Acorn]

Playing fast and loose with the title of the thread I see. No where in the article is it being asserted that lies were involved in the run up to the Iraq invasion.

If gabby couldn't insert her own lies into the story that way, she'd have little to post about at all.

Be glad that she hasn't started changing the actual words of the article to suit what she wants to believe about Republicans.

Yet.

[Monkeybone]

What is with the obsession with the word whining?

um...that is what you do non-stop basically about how everything is Bush's fault? you're like Resparo (whatever the hell his name is) is about the military, cept it is Bush. dear lord!


If you dont know what really happened then you cant make a well informed decision for what to do today or in the future.
simple response: take your own damned advice.


We were had my fellow Americans and if you refuse to believe it for political reasons then step aside and let the people who are willing to face the facts steer us into the future.

:lmao: ppl like you? :lmao: we need broad thinkers and yes ppl that can move on and face things. not one track minders. would take someone like Gabs and MFM (which i do respect both of ya{most of the time:cheers2:}, you're just examples right now) over your kind of person TM.

[jimnyc]

Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett Jeb Bush

Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky Steve Forbes

Aaron Friedberg Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle

Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz

Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen

Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz



The people from project for a new American century. They are the ones who said we NEED a new Pearl Harbor to get what we want from the government. There number one target was Iraq long before 911 or the silly Iraq invasion.

Anyone who believed the lies which took us to Iraq is still being fooled by them.

How many of those you listed were personally involved in the gathering of intelligence related to Iraq? How many of them were involved in intelligence gatherings from other countries? How many of them were on the Senate Intelligence Committee?

Are you implying that the intelligence committee, which had a Democrat majority at the time, and Democrat chairman, were complicit in these supposed "lies"? Or were they involved in assisting PNAC in some way?

[truthmatters]

How many were involved in the Bush admin?

Nearly every one.

[Mr. P]

How many were involved in the Bush admin?

Nearly every one.

How many were in the German admin, the French admin, the UK admin?

All those intell communities had the same intell. as I recall.

[Nukeman]

How many were involved in the Bush admin?

Nearly every one.
OHHHH MY GOD BREAKING NEWS..............BUSH DID IT!!!!!!!

[jimnyc]

How many were involved in the Bush admin?

Nearly every one.

And yet not one single person listed gathered the evidence. Not a single one was an intelligence analyst that gave the intelligence to our politicians. Not a single one was on the intelligence committee comprised of both parties who all backed up and reported their findings to the American people.

Again, do you think that the Democrats that were on the Senate Intelligence Committee lied to us about the intel they were privy to? What about the briefings they received directly from the agencies, and not from this administration? What about the statements they made of certainty about Iraq and their weapons? Or are you delusional again and think that the whole thing was orchestrated from the intelligence grunts in the field, to their bosses, other countries, the CIA, FBI, NSA - and that the wool was pulled over thousands of eyes?

Glad to see you back from your hiatus, TM! Had to go in for a tinfoil re-wrapping? :laugh2:

[Nukeman]

And yet not one single person listed gathered the evidence. Not a single one was an intelligence analyst that gave the intelligence to our politicians. Not a single one was on the intelligence committee comprised of both parties who all backed up and reported their findings to the American people.

Again, do you think that the Democrats that were on the Senate Intelligence Committee lied to us about the intel they were privy to? What about the briefings they received directly from the agencies, and not from this administration? What about the statements they made of certainty about Iraq and their weapons? Or are you delusional again and think that the whole thing was orchestrated from the intelligence grunts in the field, to their bosses, other countries, the CIA, FBI, NSA - and that the wool was pulled over thousands of eyes?

Glad to see you back from your hiatus, TM! Had to go in for a tinfoil re-wrapping? :laugh2:
Jim, please see post #17 for all of life's answers to the really big bad problems..... At least in TM's world!!:laugh2:

[Said1]

How many were involved in the Bush admin?

Nearly every one.

Bill Clintion supported and passed a bill (or something) supporting their suggestion of financing and supporting the over throw of Saddam Hussein, from within.

Francis Fukuyama for one, does not support Bush's present policies in the mid-east and despises Cheney and Rumsfeld -so much so that he actually distanced himself from the so called 'necon-cabal'. Do you even know who any of those people are - aside from the buzz names?

[truthmatters]

What part of nearly do you not understand?

[Yurt]

saddams own generals thought he had nukes, chem weapons

who is the one that lied?

[Said1]

What part of nearly do you not understand?

Name them and discuss their political views in 1997 and today.

And what part of the rest of my post did you not understand? Clinton supported some of their suggestions back in 1997.

[truthmatters]

Name them and discuss their political views in 1997 and today.

And what part of the rest of my post did you not understand? Clinton supported some of their suggestions back in 1997.

I dont see his name on the list do you?

[Said1]

I dont see his name on the list do you?

Oh. I didn't know that his support and implimentation of suggestions was not relevant. If that is not relevant, than your entire opinion on the matter is redundant.

Also, stop cherry picking and address the first part of my post.

[Said1]

This is where TM makes an exit. First the generic one line answers then the quick exit. Poor predictable TM.

Bye TM, smell ya later. :laugh2:

[jimnyc]

This is where TM makes an exit. First the generic one line answers then the quick exit. Poor predictable TM.

All you have to do is ask her questions if you want to get rid of her. You'll see her rant a little, post a few useless links, make a few off topic rants - ask her one last time - and *POOF* - she's gone like the wind!

[avatar4321]

im sure its a short study.

[Said1]

All you have to do is ask her questions if you want to get rid of her. You'll see her rant a little, post a few useless links, make a few off topic rants - ask her one last time - and *POOF* - she's gone like the wind!

Being that it's so close to the end of the work day, I'm sure she's busy ridding the den of dead farts. Thank gawd for Hamburger Helper!

[jimnyc]

Being that it's so close to the end of the work day, I'm sure she's busy ridding the den of dead farts. Thank gawd for Hamburger Helper!

Maybe it's colostomy changing time? :laugh2:

[Yurt]

Being that it's so close to the end of the work day, I'm sure she's busy ridding the den of dead farts. Thank gawd for Hamburger Helper!

:lol: learn something new everyday

[jimnyc]

I wonder if TM will answer my questions.

[Said1]

I wonder if TM will answer my questions.

All signs point to no. :laugh2: