"WE WERE ALMOST ALL WRONG !"

[CaptnKirk]

David Kay on the Inteligence
(From the Washington Post)
(clip)

Former top U.S. weapons inspector David Kay told members of the Senate Wednesday that the failure to turn up weapons of mass destruction in Iraq exposed weaknesses in America's intelligence-gathering apparatus.

We've had a number of surprises," Kay told reporters after meeting behind closed doors with the Senate Intelligence Committee. "It's quite clear we need capabilities that we do not have with regard to intelligence."

Later, he told the Senate Armed Services Committee that "we were almost all wrong -- and I certainly include myself here," in believing that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

But Kay denied suggestions by Democrats that intelligence analysts felt pressured by the administration to shape intelligence to help President Bush make the case for war. He said he spoke to many analysts who prepared the intelligence and "not in a single case was the explanation that I was pressured to this.

Now my turn - As I recall the Intilegance Community tried to get the word out that there was a 'manipulation' of the data
and what ended up in the hands of the Whiteouse and Cabinet had been rendered to present a different analisys than
that which the original data supported. There lies the fraud, be it from the inner circle 'Cabal' as they called themselves,
along with the Bush Executive Branch letting it be known that they only expected data that would support what their
preconceived notin was - find me the evidence that I want or make it up. Success driven 'Can-Do' Team Player style.
We have seen this mentality used at NASA to destroy 2 Shuttles and kill 14 Astronauts.
Why was it allowed to do so much damage to our country in the eyes of the world community for the bennefit
of a select self worshiping Political Agenda. All the blame lays on Bush for setting up his entire structure as such.

 

[Moonbeam]

You are talking about 'the buck stops anywhere but here' regime. Please get real.

And remember too that the issue for Bush was never WMD. He wanted to go to war and his admin is filled with Psycho-cons who had that idea and published it in PNAC. We have embarked on the New American Century while Americans slept in their beds where they're out of the way and less likely to do any damage. All Bush needs from us is our fear and of course a few dead good young men.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You are talking about 'the buck stops anywhere but here' regime. Please get real.

I disagree M.
This is the "what's a buck?" admin. Your statement implies they have a concept of accountability

Oh, and Capt., Kay was not pressured. If the admin felt he was not on board before the fact, he would never have gotten the position. You can't force the willing.
You are also correct that there was much dissent regarding reports being handed in, at least initially. After a while, those who didn't "share the vision" were either gone or silenced. Very much like that Pentagon official who stated he wasnt going to be reading the War College's paper about Iraq, since it did not fit the "facts". Better to shape reality to match perception it seems than the other way around.

 

[Moonbeam]

My apologies, Winston. You are quite correct.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
My apologies, Winston. You are quite correct.

That's OK M. There are times when I wish I could be shown to be completely mistaken. It is hard to imagine it to be so in this case, since Bush will not take responsibility, yet says he has complete confidence in the intel communities that others in the admin are saying is wrong. Neither he nor they are to blame it seems, yet at least one of them got it wrong, and that is being charitable.

 

[Moonbeam]

Interesting that you can't see what you wish like so many others can. Doesn't seem fair does it.

 

[tcsenter]

Now my turn - As I recall the Intilegance Community tried to get the word out that there was a 'manipulation' of the data and what ended up in the hands of the Whiteouse and Cabinet had been rendered to present a different analisys than that which the original data supported. There lies the fraud, be it from the inner circle 'Cabal' as they called themselves, along with the Bush Executive Branch letting it be known that they only expected data that would support what their preconceived notin was - find me the evidence that I want or make it up.

There was some dissent within the Intelligence community about the veracity or reliability of specific information or reports cited by the White House. There was no dissent among the Intelligence community, and that includes the consensus among international intelligence communities, about the fundamental issue of Iraq possessing WMD.

 

[NightCrawler]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
You are talking about 'the buck stops anywhere but here' regime. Please get real.

And remember too that the issue for Bush was never WMD. He wanted to go to war and his admin is filled with Psycho-cons who had that idea and published it in PNAC. We have embarked on the New American Century while Americans slept in their beds where they're out of the way and less likely to do any damage. All Bush needs from us is our fear and of course a few dead good young men.

Moonbeam loves Saddam :heart:

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Now my turn - As I recall the Intilegance Community tried to get the word out that there was a 'manipulation' of the data and what ended up in the hands of the Whiteouse and Cabinet had been rendered to present a different analisys than that which the original data supported. There lies the fraud, be it from the inner circle 'Cabal' as they called themselves, along with the Bush Executive Branch letting it be known that they only expected data that would support what their preconceived notin was - find me the evidence that I want or make it up.

There was some dissent within the Intelligence community about the veracity or reliability of specific information or reports cited by the White House. There was no dissent among the Intelligence community, and that includes the consensus among international intelligence communities, about the fundamental issue of Iraq possessing WMD.

There was considerable dissent. It was crushed. I am thinking specificaly of the CIA report. Many in the Agency did NOT endorse it, yet it came out as it did. It was an indictment against Saddam as you know. Why? Because it had to be. When the Boss says your report will say X, you can better damn well believe it will, facts for or against if the Boss is GWB. Specifically, many said there was no credible evidence to support claims being made regarding nukes, or the state of weapons programs or the actual PRESENT threat of Saddam (vs past capability). Opposing POVs were disgarded, not on merit, but because it did not fit the agenda. Eventually, they knew who to ask to get the "right" kind of answers. Well of course when that happens, that leaves you free to blame the Agency? The tail wagged the dog, and that was wrong. As far as other agencies overseas, it depends on who and when we are talking. Many said 10 years ago Saddam was a threat, and I suspect they were referring to those days. When this administration says the world intel community believed Saddam had unconventional weapons, we dont know if that was from yesterday or 20 years ago. It all depends on what "had" means. Bush likes word games as much as Clinton, and I have no use for this from any politico. We need a fully independent CIA, accountable for it's actions to Congress when it screws up and with ground rules plainly spelled out, but free from the kind of manipulation administrations try. Intel should not be a political tool.

 

[chess9]

tcsenter:

I find that very hard to believe. Furthermore, the final assessments are massaged at the Director level. The guys who collect the data rarely recognize their data after its been "assessed". Lead is regularly turned into gold by the administration's gophers. This has been happening for over 50 years. Roosevelt and Churchill both hid intelligence from their people and both manipulated intelligence. One of the most poignant examples, and quite difficult for Churchill, was him not telling the people of a town when they KNEW the Germans were going to bomb it.

Anyway, Washington is fascinating, Byzantine, driven by power hungry power addicts. Always assume the worst skullduggery in Washington and then raise it one or two orders of magnitude for good measure and you MIGHT be close to the level of nonsense these boys pull.

-Robert

 

[chess9]

Capt:

I had my a/c man in today to assess my air handler and we got to talking about the primaries. He offered that his father, age 60, who was a UDT man during 'Nam voted for Bush and now HATES him. His father goes ballistic at the mere mention of Bush's name on t.v. The guy is retired Navy (24 years) and thinks the invasion of Iraq is the dumbest thing we've done since 'Nam. The son said he voted for Gore and will vote for anyone but Bush. Oh, and the son did 4 years in the Army including Desert Storm.

So, Bush may pay a heavy price for everyone being wrong. We'll see.... Maybe America is waking up.

Nice post.

-Robert

 

[onelove]

perhaps bush should consider revealing the fact that, like the blues brothers, he is on a mission from God, the purpose and dimensions of which mere mortals cannot be expected to fathom.
good post.

 

[tcsenter]

There was considerable dissent. It was crushed. I am thinking specificaly of the CIA report. Many in the Agency did NOT endorse it, yet it came out as it did. It was an indictment against Saddam as you know. Why? Because it had to be.

It will repeat again, and perhaps if you don't like it, come up with some evidence in support of your position.

There was indeed some (considerable) dissent within the Intelligence community about the veracity or reliability of specific information or reports cited by the White House. There was no dissent among the Intelligence community, and that includes the consensus among international intelligence communities, about the fundamental question of Iraq possessing WMD.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

I like how the Post forgot to include this quote:

As I look back at the evidence, I understand President Bush's decision."

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I like how the Post forgot to include this quote:

As I look back at the evidence, I understand President Bush's decision."

I understand his decision too, it was predetermined by Bush and his handlers that the first chance they got they would take out Hussien.

 

[xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: xxxxxJohnGaltxxxxx
I like how the Post forgot to include this quote:

As I look back at the evidence, I understand President Bush's decision."

I understand his decision too, it was predetermined by Bush and his handlers that the first chance they got they would take out Hussien.

baaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhh

 

[sandorski]

Don't forget the aluminum tubes and the alleged attempt to acquir nuclear materials from Africa. How long did the Bush admin continue to banter those around as credible evidence even after they were thoroughly denounced?