ken

Oops, more left-wing lies about unsubstantiated Bush lies exposed. Bye bye
to your Watergate-revisited dreams, lefties. LOL!


http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/18/international/worldspecial/18WIRE-INTEL.html?hp


'Compelling Evidence' of Iraq Weapons Cited in Report
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

WASHINGTON (AP) -- An intelligence assessment last October cites "compelling
evidence" that Saddam Hussein was attempting to reconstitute a
nuclear-weapons program, according to do***ents released Friday by the White
House.

Mounting a campaign to counter criticism that it used flawed intelligence to
justify war with Iraq, the White House made public excerpts of the
intelligence community's October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate. That
report helped shaped now-challenged comments by President Bush in his State
of the Union address that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium in Africa.

The report asserts that Baghdad "if left unchecked...probably will have a
nuclear weapon during this decade."

It also cites unsubstantiated reports that Iraq was trying to buy uranium
from three African countries: Niger, Somalia and "possibly" Congo.

ken

<Leftists@Useful_Idiot_Savants.com> wrote:


No assertion is made that the intelligence used was totally accurate, but it
certainly knocks down the big lie that we were misled by the administration.
If anything, the admin. had some conflicting information on the Niger
situation but felt they needed to act on a worst-case scenario emanating
from the worst parts of the intel he had, not to mention several other
pieces of intel on WMD's that even Dems like Evan Bhay (sp?) have said still
have validity regardless of the Niger connection. At worst, it was an
honest mistake not affecting anything.

Period and end of story,
Ken

bush screws the troops

Bankrupt the USA, get Americans and their troops harmed
and killed, earn the contempt of the world, and do all that
just to line their pockets ...

Your idolization of the Bush crime organization is misplaced,
but by definition you as a Bushit addict can't see that.

gzuckier

The material released by the White House also included a "footnote" by
the State Department that said "claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural
uranium in Africa are...highly dubious."

In fact, the NIE shows that at the time of the president's speech the
U.S. intelligence community judged the threat of Saddam to be
unlikely. The intelligence services were much more worried that
Hussein might give weapons to al Qaeda terrorists if he were facing
death or capture and his government was collapsing after a military
attack by the United States.

One of the judgments was that Hussein "appears to be drawing a line
short of conducting terrorist attacks with conventional or [chemical
or biological weapons] against the United States fearing that exposure
of Iraqi involvement would provide Washington a stronger case for
making war."

Another judgment was that Iraq would "probably" attempt a clandestine
attack against the United States, as mentioned by Bush -- not on "any
given day" as the president said Oct. 7, but only "if Baghdad feared
an attack that threatened the survival of the regime were imminent or
unavoidable."

"Saddam, if sufficiently desperate, might decide that only an
organization such as al Qaeda, ... already engaged in a life-or-death
struggle against the United States, could perpetrate the type of
terrorist attack that he would hope to conduct," one key judgment of
the estimate said. It went on to say that Hussein might decide to take
the "extreme step" of assisting al Qaeda in a terrorist attack against
the United States if it "would be his last chance to exact vengeance
by taking a large number of victims with him."

The NIE's findings also raise concerns about the dangers posed by
Hussein, who is believed to be in hiding, and the failure to find any
of his alleged stocks of chemical and biological weapons. If such
stocks exist, a hotly debated proposition, this is precisely the kind
of dangerous situation the CIA and other intelligence services warned
about last fall, administration officials said. A senior
administration official said yesterday that the U.S. intelligence
community does not know either "the extent to which Saddam Hussein has
access or control" over the groups that are attacking U.S. forces, or
the location of any possible hidden chemical or biological agents or
weapons. Asked whether the former Iraqi leader would today use any
chemical or biological weapons if he controlled them, the senior
official said, "We would not put that past him to do whatever makes
our lives miserable."

The official said the judgment of last fall's intelligence estimate --
that a desperate Hussein, in hiding and with U.S. troops searching for
him in Iraq, could turn to al Qaeda -- "had not been supplanted."

Today the situation is changed. Hussein is alive but in hiding, and
his alleged stocks of chemical or biological weapons or agents have
not been found. Meanwhile, the president and other leaders have yet to
mention publicly the intelligence assessment that Hussein may be a
potentially bigger threat now than before the United States attacked.

In fact Bush, in his May 1 speech from the deck of the aircraft
carrier USS Abraham Lincoln, appeared to take just the opposite
position. "We have removed an ally of al Qaeda," Bush said. "No
terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi
regime."

raymonlux

Greenpeace wants the U.S. to track down all the uranium that was
looted in Iraq. The uranium the liberal say does not exist. LOL!
Dems are delusional.

gene

IF, THIS DECADE, TRYING. Yep, an eminent threat if there ever was one.

If you give me $1000.00 dollars today. I will try to give you 100,000
this decade. Deal?

rico_001

If Dems are delusional, how do you accoutn for the fact that 3 months after
bushies declared vistory, not one WMD has been found in iraq. What
immeniant threat? THe delusional one was bushies telling us:

"We have seen intelligence over many months that they have
chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and
that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command
and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush,
Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

Where are these weapons?

fred freedom

No imminent threat. Lies about aluminum tubes. Lies about ties to Al
Qeada. Lies about uranium. Lies about 45 minute lead time to use chem
and bio weapons. Lies abouthundreds of tons of chem and bio weapons.
Hidden? Are you out of your ****ing mind? The Iraqi army couldn't pick
it's nose without being observed since the end of the gulf war. There
is no way in hell they would have been able to move hundreds of tons
of anything.

Your president is a liar and murderer.

rico_001

Run that one by me again:


"The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its
nuclear weapons program ... 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." --
President Bush, Oct. 7, 2002, in Cincinnati.

"We believe [Saddam] has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear
weapons." -- Vice President Cheney on March 16, 2003 on "Meet the
Press."

"[The CIA possesses] solid reporting of senior-level contacts
between Iraq and al-Qaeda going back a decade." -- CIA Director George
Tenet in a written statement released Oct. 7, 2002 and echoed in that
evening's speech by President Bush.

"We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in
bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases ... Alliance with terrorists
could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any
fingerprints." -- President Bush, Oct. 7.

"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. We
are concerned that Iraq is exploring ways of using these UAVs
[unmanned aerial vehicles] for missions targeting the United States."
-- President Bush, Oct. 7.

"We have seen intelligence over many months that they have
chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and
that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command
and control arrangements have been established." -- President Bush,
Feb. 8, 2003, in a national radio address.

"Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile
of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is enough
to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets." -- Secretary of State Colin
Powell, Feb. 5 2003, in remarks to the UN Security Council.

"We know where [Iraq's WMD] are. They're in the area around
Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south, and north somewhat." --
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, March 30, 2003, in statements to
the press.

Which of these statements by the administration are you claiming was not misleading?

trevor zion bauknight

Read much? Nobody is disputing that Iraq had uranium ore. They bought
lots of it way back when, from Niger, even. That's one of the reasons
cited by Blair that he considered his country's intelligence
"genuine"...that they bought yellowcake from Niger before, and so the
idea that they'd buy it there again isn't far-fetched (the eyes of the
UN and Western European and American intelligence eyeballing their every
move and bombing them more or less daily notwithstanding).

They used to dump it in the middle of the floor when the inspectors came
so they'd have to stop and catalogue the amount of it, creating a
diversion. The lie is that Iraq tried to buy more yellowcake "recently"
(as in, 1999 at the latest according to the forged do***ents). The
bigger lie is that unprocessed uranium ore represented an imminent
threat to the US and its interests in the Middle East. To be of any
military use, they'd have needed lots (hundreds) more of the things they
dug up from under that scientists rosengarten (and the rest of the
missing pieces), correct their error-marred blueprints and then work at
it for quite a while under the watchful eye of the rest of the world.

Talk about delusions.

--
Trev

"Hypotheses are initially assumed false, by definition. Science is about
proving them true." - Daniel Seriff