Skip to comments.White House 'never told' of WMD doubts (Powell opens up!)
Posted on 12/17/2005 6:14:13 PM PST by Aussie Dasher
click here to read article
The Administration is not run by inexperienced children. Its leaders are well aware of the limitations and uncertainties which accompany all intelligence.
This statement is reasonable in that it describes an awareness of limitations and uncertainties in general. But no generalization is 100%. Therefore no presidential administration will be aware of each and every instance of faulty intelligence, especially when the intelligence community has been infiltrated, as in this case, with cowardly traitors who are directed by their very ideology to work through deception and fraud.
That is, your statement contains no refutation of the assertion that the Bush administration was not aware of the doubts in the intelligence leading to the Iraq war.
"What really upset me more than anything else was that there were people in the intelligence community that had doubts about some of this sourcing, but those doubts never surfaced to us," he said.
It is my understanding that she asked if the moon was really made of green cheese.
I believe it to be true.
It just all adds up, ya know?
Right. I said long ago that when Saddam saw W was really coming, he hid, buried or exported a lot of stuff. He wasn't going to let WMD finds vindicate W. Of course the guys that hid it are insurgents or dead. But hopefully as the gov't takes hold some may squeal.
It's not possible that the Administration was not aware of such doubts given the position of Cheney and others on the worthiness of the intelligence community.
But it is true that Bush asked Tenet about the reliability of claims that Saddam possessed WMD and was assured that they were a "slam dunk".
The magnitude of error committed by the left regarding the Iraq war is so monstrous that the only hope for them lies in the extent to which their current falsification of news and general trickery is accepted as truth by the American people.
Things dont look good for the liberals.
Thank God for President Bush.
A liberal? Moi?
Reread my response. I used pure and "INNOCENT". Pure and innocent as in a unborn human being. Innocent as in regards to your son serving a meal in a restraunt and God forbid being shot. I would not feel obligated to extend the same respect for the life of your son's assailant as I would for the life of your son. Would you?
I served twenty years in the USAF, during Korea, Vietnam and most of the cold war. I would be willing to reeinlist and serve again, but they are far from being so desperate as to take a worn out ol' seventy three old codger.
"There was a large amount of evidence that Saddam DID have WMD. Based on that evidence everyone was sure he had them.
The fact that we didn't find any proves that we couldn't find them, or that maybe they weren't there WHEN we went in, but it's not proof that they weren't there a month before. Yet people keep insisting, that if we couldn't find them, that's absolute proof that he never had any, despite of all previous evidence."
All one needs do is dial your mind back to the lead-up to the invasion and the rhetoric coming from the Dim potty about the gigantic numbers of casualties the U.S. was going to suffer.
"The article neglected Sheila Jackson Lee who suggested we hide the troops in the desert so nobody will know we are there."
"How about next to our flag on Mars instead" said Lee in a further statement.
Yikes! This is pretty bad. Good for Powell for *finally* bringing this out but what took him so long?
He needs to be saying it on this side of the pond.
Bump to read later....
'..turn the chanel when Reid speaks..'
I do the same when Weasle Clark comes on Fox news (drives me nuts that they hired him). I mute the TV when Rangel or Levin come on....yuck!
'..what took him so long.....'
that's what I'd like to know. Why'd he let them keep bashing the President.....??
Powell waited until now to disclose this info?
that's what I'd like to know. Why'd he let them keep bashing the President.....??
Because not very deep down, Powell is just another RAT B@st@rd RINO whose only real interest is to bash Bush or the conservatives, and to pander/capitulate/appease to the hate-America crowd. Of course Bush lets them get away with it again and again, with not even a peep of protest, let alone a real smackdown! Geez, you would think Bush would get tired of getting stabbed in the back over & over again by supposed members of his party!
I think he has a concience... the lionozing of Bush by MSM is beyond belief, this the same crowd that lowered the bar on Clinton to criminal in chief.. it was fine by them cus it was Clinton
Wow! What a brilliant idea! Why didn't Rumsfield or Bush think of that? That Yale Law School grad is a genius.
The Left does not speak with one voice but I agree that they have grossly underestimated the threat posed by Islamic extemists.
I could support Powell/Rice as a ticket just fine. My evaluation was not derived from any anti abortion intensity on my own part. It was a dispassionate evaluation of the probabilities that our hardliners could support candidates who are abortion moderates.
Abortion seems to arrive on the scene with three criteria.
1) Human life starts at conception and even the morning after pill is murder.
2) Human life starts at some very hard to define point on the calendar when . . . perhaps the earliest date ever noted of an EEG scan showing brain wave activity has arrived on the calendar. Somewhat who is moderately pro Life would evaluate that point on the calendar as very close to conception -- perhaps a few weeks. A pro choice person would push that way out with moderately pro choice be defined as perhaps a few months, but utterly opposed to partial birth abortion.
3) Pro Choice extremists would say PBA is just fine, that fetuses are not children at all and deserve no more concern than a tumor and only women (who vote Democrat) are of any concern in the matter.
So I evaluate Rice and Powell as pro Life moderates by that criteria . . . and I suspect our hardliners won't accept it.
I believe the US behaviour in Iraq will encourage every country on planet earth to develop a nuclear weapon.
Saddam violated UN resolutions so the US decided to attack despite disapproval by the UN. In doing so, we are guilty of the same thing we are accusing Iraq of. During the first Gulf war the UN was very useful to us, they listened to our case for war and agreed to it. In that war like the present one, many of those claims are in dispute. Since they refused to go along with the war this time the UN has been accused of sex crimes, all sorts of corruption, and we have an ambassador who appears to have nothing but contempt for the institution. The crimes the UN is accused of are no different from the ones I read about taking place in this country every day. Why should we expect the UN to be any different? Could it be they were always a corrupt institution, but they were our institution?
I fail to understand the reasoning in any of this.
We don't need to worry about weapons in the hands of enemies, the Rats are going to beat our enemies down with word games, and cliches. And if that doesn't work, they are going to use rhetoric on them.
Our enemies are shaking in their boots.
Everyone knows Iraq had the weapons. We even found some. But, the rats care more about power than America.
Just like they secretly cheer when another soldier is killed or maimed.
Damn the rats to hell.
What in tarnation are you talking about? You fail to understand all of it because you're wrong in your analysis! The US doesn't need the approval of the UN to do diddly-squat. Saddam broke the GW ceasefire agreement, that in itself justifies this war. After violating 14 un res., colluding with terrorist, continually violating pacts. and the mere fact he gased his own people give us not only the RIGHT to go take his ass out, but an obligation.
We are NOT anything like the UN and for you to suggest such a thing is not only ludicrous, but stupidly asserted! Get back to your anti-American left/libertarian, and listen to err-america...it's where you'll find a home, not here!
Thank you sir/madam, not looking for a home. Just speaking truth to power.
You're speaking pure B.S. and you know it!