130
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 221:
Line 221: + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
→Saddam's Links to Al Qaeda
Further, "While the study showed no link between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al Qaeda, <b>it does detail the former Iraq dictator's support for Middle Eastern terror groups, including those linked to Al Qaeda.</b> Also in the report are memos showing Uday ordered officials to “<b>start planning special <i>operations</i></b> in the centres of the traitors’ symbols in the fields of <b>London</b> / Iran / self-ruled areas [Kurdish northern Iraq]”, it was reported." <ref> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340745,00.html </ref>
Further, "While the study showed no link between Saddam Hussein's regime and Al Qaeda, <b>it does detail the former Iraq dictator's support for Middle Eastern terror groups, including those linked to Al Qaeda.</b> Also in the report are memos showing Uday ordered officials to “<b>start planning special <i>operations</i></b> in the centres of the traitors’ symbols in the fields of <b>London</b> / Iran / self-ruled areas [Kurdish northern Iraq]”, it was reported." <ref> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,340745,00.html </ref>
===Summary update on WMD and Iraq/terrorist/Al Qaeda connections NOT being falsified===
The Los Angeles Times article, <b>"Bush never lied to us about Iraq - <i>The administration simply got bad intelligence. Critics are wrong to assert deception.</i>"</b> By James Kirchick, June 16, 2008, a great deal of summary about these two previous sections on WMD and links to the Al Qaeda are given. The article states that, "Nearly every prominent Democrat in the country has repeated some version of the charge.. that the Bush administration deceived the American people. Yet in spite of all the accusations of White House "manipulation" -- that it pressured intelligence analysts into connecting Hussein and Al Qaeda and concocted evidence about weapons of mass destruction -- administration critics continually demonstrate an inability to distinguish making claims based on flawed intelligence from knowingly propagating falsehoods." <ref> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-kirchick16-2008jun16,0,4808346.story </ref>
In 2004, <b>the Senate Intelligence Committee</b> unanimously approved a report acknowledging that it <b><i>"did not find any evidence that administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments."</i></b> The following year, the bipartisan Robb-Silberman report similarly found <b><i>"no indication that the intelligence community distorted the evidence regarding Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."</i> </b>
Even concerning <b>the Senate Intelligence Committee report issued June 5, 2008</b>, quote, "what did this report actually find? That <b>Iraq-Al Qaeda links were <i>"substantiated by intelligence information."</i> The same goes for claims about Hussein's possession of biological and chemical weapons, as well as his alleged operation of a nuclear weapons program</b>."
The article contends that if Democrats wish to contend they were "misled" into war, they should vent their spleen at the CIA. It then asserts, "<b>This may sound like ancient history, but it matters.</b> After Sept. 11, President Bush did not want to risk allowing Hussein, who had twice invaded neighboring nations, murdered more than 1 million Iraqis and stood in violation of 16 U.N. Security Council resolutions, to remain in possession of what he believed were stocks of chemical and biological warheads and a nuclear weapons program. By glossing over this history, the Democrats' lies-led-to-war narrative provides false comfort in a world of significant dangers." <ref> http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-kirchick16-2008jun16,0,4808346.story </ref>
<b>Washington Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt</b> also brought out what Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee found in their June 5, 2008 report, saying, quote:
<ref> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/08/AR2008060801687.html </ref>
There's no question that the administration, and particularly Vice President Cheney, spoke with too much certainty at times and failed to anticipate or prepare the American people for the enormous undertaking in Iraq.
But dive into [Sen. Jay] Rockefeller's report, in search of where exactly President Bush lied about what his intelligence agencies were telling him about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein, and you may be surprised by what you find.
<b>On Iraq's nuclear weapons program?</b> <i>The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates." </i>
<b>On biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories?</b> <i>The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."</i>
<b>On chemical weapons, then?</b> <i>"Substantiated by intelligence information."</i>
<b>On weapons of mass destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)?</b> <i>"Generally substantiated by intelligence information."</i>
<b>Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles?</b> <i>"Generally substantiated by available intelligence."</i>
<b>Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs?</b> <i>"Generally substantiated by intelligence information." </i>
As you read through the report, you begin to think maybe you've mistakenly picked up the minority dissent. But, no, this is the Rockefeller indictment. So, you think, the smoking gun must appear in the section on Bush's claims about Saddam Hussein's alleged ties to terrorism.
But statements regarding <b>Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda</b> <i>"were substantiated by intelligence information."</i>
<b>Statements that Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda</b> <i>"were substantiated by the intelligence assessments,"</i> <b>and statements regarding Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda</b> <i>"were substantiated by intelligence information."</i>
The report is left to complain about "implications" and statements that "left the impression" that those contacts led to substantive Iraqi cooperation.
Hiatt then noted what the Republican part of the report said, <b><i>"the reports essentially validate what we have been saying all along: that policymakers' statements were substantiated by the intelligence." </i>
<ref> http://newsbusters.org/blogs/tim-graham/2008/06/09/bush-lied-argument-doesnt-match-facts-democrats-s ay </ref>
==The Duelfer Report==
==The Duelfer Report==