CIA Faulted for giving GWB bad intel

[Gravitymaster 0]

http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040709/D83NB0AO0.html

Quote

WASHINGTON (AP) - U.S. intelligence agencies fell victim to false "group think" when assessing Iraq's weapons capabilities and ended up giving the Bush administration overstated or incorrect conclusions before the 2003 invasion, a scathing Senate Intelligence Committee report says.

Many factors contributing to those failures are ongoing problems within the U.S. intelligence community which cannot be fixed with more money alone, concluded a bipartisan report released Friday.

The report repeatedly blasts departing CIA Director George Tenet, accusing him of skewing advice to top policy-makers with the CIA's view and elbowing out dissenting views from other intelligence agencies overseen by the State or Defense Departments. It faulted Tenet for not personally reviewing Bush's 2003 State of the Union address which contained since-discredited references to Iraq's attempts to purchase uranium in Africa.

[Jimbo 0]

From another, similar, article:

Quote

But the committee absolved the Bush administration of charges that it put pressure on analysts to reach pre-set conclusions.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[AndyMan 7]

I'm confused.

Are you admitting that the justifications for the War in Iraq are false?

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[wmw999 2,587]

Ah, but it's all the CIA's fault, and that's because it had George Tenet (a Clinton appointee) at the helm.

It's still all Clinton's fault

Wendy W.

There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown)

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

I'm confused.

Are you admitting that the justifications for the War in Iraq are false?

_Am

I'm saying what I've said for quite a while. That GWB did not lie to the American People and the world. I have also said on many occaision that I thought he was given bad intel. I have argued extensively that acting on bad information is not the same as lying.

It's been the Libs who have been screeching Bush Lied, Bush Lied

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

Ah, but it's all the CIA's fault, and that's because it had George Tenet (a Clinton appointee) at the helm.

It's still all Clinton's fault

Wendy W.

Now you just sound bitter that you have to admit you were wrong.

Need some staws to grasp at? Here...////

[nacmacfeegle 0]

"Are you admitting that the justifications for the War in Iraq are false?"

Yes or no....

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[billvon 3,111]

And once again the Bush administration is saved from blame by finding someone else who screwed up worse than they did! "Hey, so we were wrong, but the CIA was REALLY wrong. That means we were right!"

[Gravitymaster 0]

Quote

"Are you admitting that the justifications for the War in Iraq are false?"

Yes or no....

You of all people know that I have argued extensively that the President did not lie to the American People. You also know that I have said that I thought the President was given bad intel. I have also asked repeatedly what happened to the WMDs we knew he had. I have also stated I would be willing to believe SH didn't have WMDs if somebody could explain to me what SH did with them. I still stand by all my statements.

[AndyMan 7]

Whats' amazing is that just last week Cheney was insisting that they were still right...

_Am

__

You put the fun in "funnel" - craichead.

[nacmacfeegle 0]

And my argument has been that the war was not justified, so please answer the question...

"Are you admitting that the justifications for the War in Iraq are false?"

A simple yes or no......

--------------------

He who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. Thomas Jefferson

[Ron 10]

Quote

And once again the Bush administration is saved from blame by finding someone else who screwed up worse than they did! "Hey, so we were wrong, but the CIA was REALLY wrong. That means we were right!"

If I tell you that a guy is a thief. And its my job to know if the guy is a thief or not, in fact I am the head of a large group who's job it is to find thiefs and tell you who they are...And I tell you that Bob over there is a thief, and I have proof that he is a thief.

Now when you act on that information...Information that I gave you that you thought was real...And Bob is not a thief...

It does not make you a liar.

Maybe GWB is innocent of being at fault since he was fed bad intel? Of course that thought would not fit into your narrow view of the world, so that can't be it.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

If I tell you that a guy is a thief. And its my job to know if the guy is a thief or not, in fact I am the head of a large group who's job it is to find thiefs and tell you who they are...And I tell you that Bob over there is a thief, and I have proof that he is a thief.

Now when you act on that information...Information that I gave you that you thought was real...And Bob is not a thief...

It does not make you a liar.

Now what if there is another giant organization who's specific job it is to find thieves, and they are telling you there is no evidence that he is a thief. That they have been specifically looking at the guy and investigating him for years. What if many of your peers are telling you this guy is not a thief.

What if you only believed what you wanted to hear. what if you only gave credibility to the "facts" that fit your story.

You are right, that would not make him a liar.

It would just make him plain stupid, but apparently for many a great choice for president.

[Jimbo 0]

Quote

And once again the Bush administration is saved from blame by finding someone else who screwed up worse than they did! "Hey, so we were wrong, but the CIA was REALLY wrong.

I suppose you're right. However, you should be aware that the Senate Intelligence Committe is split almost 50/50, Republican and Democrat. It's not as though it was a collection of Bush's best friends that wrote the report.

-
Jim

"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.

[billvon 3,111]

>It does not make you a liar.

No, but if I employ you to know who's a thief and who isn't, shame on me for hiring a fool for that job.

>Maybe GWB is innocent of being at fault since he was fed bad intel? Of
>course that thought would not fit into your narrow view of the world, so that
>can't be it.

I don't think he's intentionally lying. He's certainly told some whoppers ("We found them. We found the weapons of mass destruction." - GWB, 5/29/03) but I don't think he said "You know, I'm just gonna make some shit up." He believed what he wanted to. When Rumsfeld told him stuff that he wanted to believe he believed him. When Powell told him stuff he didn't want to believe, because it might have made it harder to sell the war, he didn't.

So the question becomes - do you want this to happen again? Want a war with North Korea because a defector with an ax to grind against Kim Jong-Il comes to Washington and tells someone that he has tons of Sarin loaded on ICBM's, ready to launch at a moment's notice? Want a war with China because a Taiwanese defector tells us that the marching hordes are ready to get on the boats? Then vote for the guy who would believe that sort of stuff - and then claim that his actions were not at fault at all, because he had bad info.

Perhaps you are impressed by someone who is infallible. I'm more impressed by people who can admit they made mistakes. And the justification for the Iraq war was a huge mistake, as this report demonstrates.

[Ron 10]

Quote

You are right, that would not make him a liar.

It would just make him plain stupid, but apparently for many a great choice for president.

A better choice than a guy with good hair that admitted to commiting war crimes.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

A better choice than a guy with good hair that admitted to commiting war crimes.

Well, I guess that means you agree that Bush is stupid, but that he is still a better choice than Kerry. I guess that is a good first step
Personally I would rather have some one who at least has the balls to openly admit things after he has made mistakes than a guy who is so stupid he keeps believing that he doesn't make any.

As a bonus, I would pick some one who doesn't hear voices in his head and believes that he has to follow God's will.

[Ron 10]

Quote

>It does not make you a liar.

No, but if I employ you to know who's a thief and who isn't, shame on me for hiring a fool for that job.

Didn't Tenent get appointed by Clinton?

Quote

I don't think he's intentionally lying

You have said he lied before? What caused the change?

Quote

He believed what he wanted to. When Rumsfeld told him stuff that he wanted to believe he believed him. When Powell told him stuff he didn't want to believe, because it might have made it harder to sell the war, he didn't.

As does every human being.

Quote

So the question becomes - do you want this to happen again?

Not really...But you forget...The only reason I need to want to kill you is you saying you want me dead and having shown me that you would do it if you could.

If a guy calls me his enemy...then he becomes my enemy.

Quote

Perhaps you are impressed by someone who is infallible

If I ever meet a guy that has never made a mistake...I'll let you know.

Quote

I'm more impressed by people who can admit they made mistakes.

Yeah, I am sure you would not use it against him if he said "Opps, we were a little off with that whole WMD thingy. See we knew he had them at one point, and he never did say what he did with them. And those trucks, those "mobile labs"...Well they turned out to be "Good Humor" trucks. My bad".

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[Ron 10]

Quote

Well, I guess that means you agree that Bush is stupid, but that he is still a better choice than Kerry. I guess that is a good first step

Personally I would rather have some one who at least has the balls to openly admit things after he has made mistakes than a guy who is so stupid he keeps believing that he doesn't make any.

As a bonus, I would pick some one who doesn't hear voices in his head and believes that he has to follow God's will.

No I think a guy that tries to do the right thing even if it is not popular (Bush) Is way better than a guy that does what he thinks will make him popular (Kerry)...Even if it means doing both things at different times.

Hell, how can you not like a guy that agrees with you, 100% of the time...Of course he also agrees with your opponent 100% of the time.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[markd_nscr986 0]

Quote

better choice than a guy with good hair that admitted to commiting war crimes


I dont think his hair is that good........he could probably win an "eddie munster" look-a-like contest with it

Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004

• Quote

[Ron 10]

Quote

better choice than a guy with good hair that admitted to commiting war crimes


I dont think his hair is that good........he could probably win an "eddie munster" look-a-like contest with

Well with Eddie Munster hair, he kinda looks like Mr. Ed and sounds like Herman Munster....He is a lock for those who like nick at night

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,111]

>As does every human being.

Most don't. Some do. I see them every week at the DZ. They'll ask a dozen people if they can jump that Xaos 98. One person will say "Whatever." They will ignore what the other 11 people say and take the 12th person's response to mean "Go for it!"

Fortunately, most people at DZ's are not like that.

>If a guy calls me his enemy...then he becomes my enemy.

I sure as hell hope we're smarter than that! China is a greater threat to our future than North Korea, even though PRK has said they will destroy us and China hasn't said that recently. If, as a result, we attack PRK and ignore China, we are fools.

>Yeah, I am sure you would not use it against him if he said "Opps, we
>were a little off with that whole WMD thingy. See we knew he had them at
>one point, and he never did say what he did with them. And those trucks,
>those "mobile labs"...Well they turned out to be "Good Humor" trucks. My
>bad".

A lot of people would claim victory. And he would have to sit there and take it. A big part of being an adult is being able to admit your mistakes and take your lumps.

[jdhill 0]

Quote

Now what if there is another giant organization who's specific job it is to find thieves, and they are telling you there is no evidence that he is a thief. That they have been specifically looking at the guy and investigating him for years. What if many of your peers are telling you this guy is not a thief.

But what if that was not what the group was saying... they were saying that the guy was a thief, but we can't tell if still is, because he is not providing the information and access that is needed to determine whether or not he is still a theif, or still has stolen property?

J

All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. - Edmund Burke

[Ron 10]

Quote

>If a guy calls me his enemy...then he becomes my enemy.

I sure as hell hope we're smarter than that! China is a greater threat to our future than North Korea, even though PRK has said they will destroy us and China hasn't said that recently. If, as a result, we attack PRK and ignore China, we are fools.

Are you calling me stupid Bill? That would be a personal attack. Your own forum rules ya know greenguy.

No, I am not joking...If a guy has waged war once already, fired at my people and tried to kill my leader...All the time saying how I am the greatist evil in the world and he will crush me and that I am his enemy....Well he is now my enemy if thats what he wants...Only a fool would ignore a guy that is openly wishing for your destruction.

Now that does not mean that I should hit him in the jaw the next time I see him....But if I have a restraining order against him..(UN resolution) and he keeps ignoring it. And I see him as a credible threat...then I DO have the right to hit him first.

Now maybe he was not actively planning on hitting me...But he has made several claims that he will, and I would be stupid to ignore a guy that is openly threatening my life.

Like I said, say I am your enemy, and I will be...Be careful what you ask for.

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334

[billvon 3,111]

>Are you calling me stupid Bill?

Note the "WE" in my sentence. I hope that we, as a country, are smarter than that. And if we do attack PRK just because of their latest rant, we _are_ fools.

>Only a fool would ignore a guy that is openly wishing for your destruction.

Didn't suggest that at all! You keep a very careful eye on him and make sure that, if he tries to destroy you, he will fail miserably.

Take a look at what Bush is currently doing with Kim Jong Il, a man who has stated on several occasions that he will destroy the US (and whose country fought against us in the Korean War.) Is he dropping bombs, killing civilians, launching ICBM's against a nuclear power that has threatened to destroy us?

Nope, he's offering a trade package - aid (in the form of food and fuel oil) if they discontinue their nuclear program. That's a good move, I think. We get what we want, he gets what he wants, and no one dies from a US bombing campaign.

Are we "appeasing a terrorist?" "being conciliatory towards a madman?" Perhaps. But you can always bomb later; peace is a much better option of first resort.