JD50
Lifer
- Sep 4, 2005
- 11,750
- 2,335
- 126
Originally posted by: Gaard
JD50 - Did my 06/08/2008 06:58 AM post give you something to think about?
Yes, I wondered what the hell you were talking about.
Originally posted by: Gaard
JD50 - Did my 06/08/2008 06:58 AM post give you something to think about?
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
I think the sub title for this thread should be:
Congress Reports, Harvey Distorts.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok, here are the "lies" according the article in the OP. (Note, only Harvey calls them lies.)
1. They wrongly linked Saddam Hussein to the Sept. 11 attacks and al-Qaida;
2. They claimed Iraq would give terrorist groups chemical, biological or nuclear weapons,
3. They said Iraq was developing drone aircraft to spread chemical or biological agents over the United States.
Now here are the basis of the 'lies'
1. In September of 2002 Cheney said he did not know if AQ and Iraq cooperated on 9-11.
It seems like a stretch to go from "did not know" to "linking"
2. Intelligence agencies did not think Saddam would give terrorists the nasty stuff. But Bush thought that the risk was too big to take. Again, seems like a stretch to call this a 'lie' seems more like a difference in opinions.
3. Don't know anything about this claim
Now here is some great information contained in the report.
From a Jan 31, 2003 memo written by Carl Ford "assistant state secretary for intelligence and research"
"Our evidence suggests that Baghdad is strengthening a relationship with al-Qaeda that dates back to the mid-1990s, when senior Iraqi intelligence officers established contact with the network in several countries."
"We have some evidence that Iraqi Intelligence has been in contact with elements in the northeastern area. And the al-Qaeda operatives there are in regular contact with other operatives located in Baghdad. The Iraqi government has also received information from other sources alerting it to the presence of al-Qaeda operatives in Baghdad."
"We have hard evidence that al-Qaeda is operating in several locations in Iraq with the knowledge and acquiescence of Saddam's regime."
He also wrote that Abu Musab Zarqawi "has had a good relationship with Iraqi intelligence officials." He added that intelligence on Qaeda "revealed the presence of safe house facilities in the city as well as the clear intent to remain in Baghdad. Also, foreign NGO workers outside of Iraq who are believed to provide support to al-Qaeda have also expressed their intent to set up shop in Baghdad."
What is interesting about this memo is that it shows us exactly what Bush and company were being told during the run up to the war, as opposed to post war analysis.
If we wanted to do an honest appraisal on the lead up to the war, which of course no one on the left wants to do, we would only concern ourselves with what we knew PRIOR to the invasion.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Ok, here are the "lies" according the article in the OP. (Note, only Harvey calls them lies.).
.
.
Blah, blah, BULLSHIT!
or maybe this part??It is ironic that the Democrats would knowingly distort and misrepresent the Committee?s findings and the intelligence in an effort to prove that the Administration distorted and mischaracterized the intelligence,? said Bond.
What a hack job.The minority was entirely cut out of the process and that the report was written solely by Democratic staffers ? For example, Republican amendments, including those of the Vice Chairman, were not even given a vote;
The Democratic staff who authored the report twisted policy makers? statements and cherry picked intelligence in order to reach their misleading conclusions, often leaving out pertinent intelligence;
The report does not review any statements of Democrats, only Republican administration officials;
The Democratic staff did not seek to interview those whom they accuse;
The Rome report violates the Democrats? own criteria for the Phase II report and should have been excluded.
Bond stressed that this type of partisan gamesmanship is beneath the Senate Intelligence Committee and takes away from the important national security issues the Committee should be focused on. Congress has failed to pass a terrorist surveillance bill, or intelligence authorization act, both of which are critical to improving the intelligence community. These failures are a result of injecting partisan politics into the Committee?s oversight responsibilities, emphasized Bond. With this final Phase II report now complete, Bond concluded that it is critical the Senate Intelligence attempts to move forward in a nonpartisan manner.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
You mean this part of the report?
or maybe this part??It is ironic that the Democrats would knowingly distort and misrepresent the Committee?s findings and the intelligence in an effort to prove that the Administration distorted and mischaracterized the intelligence,? said Bond.
What a hack job.The minority was entirely cut out of the process and that the report was written solely by Democratic staffers ? For example, Republican amendments, including those of the Vice Chairman, were not even given a vote;
The Democratic staff who authored the report twisted policy makers? statements and cherry picked intelligence in order to reach their misleading conclusions, often leaving out pertinent intelligence;
The report does not review any statements of Democrats, only Republican administration officials;
The Democratic staff did not seek to interview those whom they accuse;
The Rome report violates the Democrats? own criteria for the Phase II report and should have been excluded.
Bond stressed that this type of partisan gamesmanship is beneath the Senate Intelligence Committee and takes away from the important national security issues the Committee should be focused on. Congress has failed to pass a terrorist surveillance bill, or intelligence authorization act, both of which are critical to improving the intelligence community. These failures are a result of injecting partisan politics into the Committee?s oversight responsibilities, emphasized Bond. With this final Phase II report now complete, Bond concluded that it is critical the Senate Intelligence attempts to move forward in a nonpartisan manner.
They could have just asked you to write them a report...
It says right in the report that everything the President said was backed up by the intelligence that we had at the time.
Byrd said it in his speech. Maybe I'm reading it differently than you, but it sounds like they are giving him the authority, not declaring war.Originally posted by: JD50
Originally posted by: Gaard
JD50 - Did my 06/08/2008 06:58 AM post give you something to think about?
Yes, I wondered what the hell you were talking about.
Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Harvey, nice to see you try and refute my post...
BTW I have yet to see anyone make a good case that the administration 'lied.'
Wow, you actually made that statement in a non-joking manner. Folks, we have a new Alice in Wonderland award winner!Originally posted by: ProfJohn
BTW I have yet to see anyone make a good case that the administration 'lied.'
Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
Also, if GWB lied, then Tony Blair lied, Bill Clinton lied and the rest of the intelligence offices across the globe lied. There will never be any proof that he lied about going to war, just blind vitriol for GWB.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Originally posted by: Corbett
Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
Also, if GWB lied, then Tony Blair lied, Bill Clinton lied and the rest of the intelligence offices across the globe lied. There will never be any proof that he lied about going to war, just blind vitriol for GWB.
No only Bush lied DUHHHHHH!
Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
Also, if GWB lied, then Tony Blair lied, Bill Clinton lied and the rest of the intelligence offices across the globe lied.
Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
There will never be any proof that he lied about going to war, just blind vitriol for GWB.
Originally posted by: JSt0rm01
Ohh he will get his day in court. As for all you neocon supporters of bush you should all pay as well.
Originally posted by: Harvey
Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
Also, if GWB lied, then Tony Blair lied, Bill Clinton lied and the rest of the intelligence offices across the globe lied.
Bush did lie, and so did Blair. Clinton had nothing to do with pulling the trigger on their war of lies, and when it comes to your shit about "the rest of the intelligence offices across the globe," you should consider putting down the crack pipe.
In his State of the Union Address, 1/28/2003, George W. Bush said:In a speech to the nation, October 7, 2002, George W. Bush said:
- "Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.?
Fact: No usable chemical weapons found anywhere in Iraq.
- ?U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents.
Fact:
Aside from a few buried, degraded shells from the war with Iran, not chemical weapons munition has been found anywhere in Iraq.
- ?We have also discovered through intelligence that Iraq has a growing fleet of manned and unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to disperse chemical or biological weapons across broad areas."
Fact:
No aerial vehicles capable of dispersing chemical or biological weapons have been found anywhere in Iraq
- "Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida."
Fact: Prior to the U.S. invasion, no evidence connecting Hussein with Al Qaida or any other known terrorist organizations has been revealed. All evidence indicates Saddam wanted nothing to do with Bin Laden and Al Qaida, and even the name, Al Qaida, only came to prominence with the formation of "Al Qaida in Iraq" under Zarkawi.
- "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
Fact: The documents implied were known at the time by Bush to be forged and not credible. This was confirmed by intelligence agencies from several nations.
Ask Joseph Wilson what he found in Niger. Ask Scooter Libby why he's on trial for lying to the Grand Jury about his involvement in Whitehouse attempts to smear Joseph Wilson by outing the identity of his wife, Valerie Plame Wilson as a covert CIA operative.
Before you answer, you'd better check the testimony and evidence from Libby's trial about, especially the evidence of Cheney's hands on participation.On ?Meet the Press,? March 16, 2003, VP Dick Cheney said
- "Iraq has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes and other equipment needed for gas centrifuges, which are used to enrich uranium for nuclear weapons."
Fact: Months before the war, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and dozens of leading scientists declared those tubes unsuitable for nuclear weapons production.
- "Satellite photographs reveal that Iraq is rebuilding facilities at sites that have been part of its nuclear program in the past."
Fact: The IAEA reported to the UN Security Council on 1/27/2003 that two months of inspections at these former Iraqi nuclear sites found zero evidence of prohibited nuclear activities.
- We know he's been absolutely devoted to trying to acquire nuclear weapons, and we believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons.
Fact:
The IAEA reported to the UN Security Council on 3/7/2003 that it had found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons program in Iraq.Originally posted by: JohnnyGage
There will never be any proof that he lied about going to war, just blind vitriol for GWB.
Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to disprove the above. If you can't, or if you decline to do so, your mission is to STFU, and go home and practice, little boy.![]()
Originally posted by: JD50
Apparently Harvey still hasn't learned that the ACCUSER is the one that has the burden of proof.
