IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 0 active users | 0 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Salon: Bush knew in 2002 that Saddam didn't have WMDs.
[link|http://salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/print.html|Sidney Blumenthal] at Salon:

By Sidney Blumenthal

Sep. 06, 2007 | On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

On April 23, 2006, CBS's "60 Minutes" interviewed Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, who disclosed that the agency had received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. "We continued to validate him the whole way through," said Drumheller. "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."

Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it. They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell. According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.

[...]


There's not a lot new there, but the drip-drip-drip continues. If more in the CIA are willing to come forward to corroborate these things, or if Congress is able to dig up the original reports, this may have legs.

Cheers,
Scott.
New Probably should read "Bush should have known"
That should probably read "Bush should have known but didn't because he wasn't actually listening to his own advisors." Bush had already decided to support the war, thus anything that helped the war effort accepted as correct and anything that didn't was dismissed.

Jay
New No, probably should read "Bush lied, others died!"
Alex

Nobody has a more sacred obligation to obey the law than those who make the law. -- Sophocles (496? - 406 BCE)
New Maybe for the historians
but even with a drip, drip, drip... the vast majority of people do not care.

Whether or not Bush knew (and they'll argue that 'Everyone knew he had WMD'), they'll never be able come up with hard evidence proof that he KNEW there weren't WMD. That die has been cast and it won't change in the next 18 months...probably not in Bush's lifetime.

There will be books about it....and conspircy theories and those 'nutjobs who believe anything', but for the average American, the issue is closed (imo).

The argument now is whether or not we can/should just leave. There's LOT of evidence that General P and Bush have worked wonders selling THAT lie to everyone. (Bush's recent trip was a bit over the top, imo...but it'll work with him when he (not General P) gives the speech that they need to stay (with General P's blessing, of course).

We won't get any stuff counter to that argument for another 2 or 3 years...mostly cause journalists have gotten very lazy. (And the Democrats haven't figured out yet how to feed data to the journalists)
     Salon: Bush knew in 2002 that Saddam didn't have WMDs. - (Another Scott) - (3)
         Probably should read "Bush should have known" - (JayMehaffey) - (1)
             No, probably should read "Bush lied, others died!" -NT - (a6l6e6x)
         Maybe for the historians - (Simon_Jester)

Would you like fries with that?
77 ms