Welcome to PatsFans.com

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! So utterly satisfying.

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by PressCoverage, Jun 5, 2008.

  1. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    let's see how they spin this one....


    Bush misused Iraq intelligence: Senate report

    By Randall Mikkelsen
    Thu Jun 5, 1:23 PM ET

    http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20080605/...qvAFcR_ssb.3QA

    President George W. Bush and his top policymakers misstated Saddam Hussein's links to terrorism and ignored doubts among intelligence agencies about Iraq's arms programs as they made a case for war, the Senate intelligence committee reported on Thursday.

    The report shows an administration that "led the nation to war on false premises," said the committee's Democratic Chairman, Sen. John Rockefeller of West Virginia. Several Republicans on the committee protested its findings as a "partisan exercise."

    The committee studied major speeches by Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney and other officials in advance of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in March 2003, and compared key assertions with intelligence available at the time.

    Statements that Iraq had a partnership with al Qaeda were wrong and unsupported by intelligence, the report said. It said that Bush's and Cheney's assertions that Saddam was prepared to arm terrorist groups with weapons of mass destruction for attacks on the United States contradicted available intelligence.

    Such assertions had a strong resonance with a U.S. public, still reeling after al Qaeda's September 11, 2001, attacks on the United States. Polls showed that many Americans believed Iraq played a role in the attacks, even long after Bush acknowledged in September 2003 that there was no evidence Saddam was involved.

    The report also said administration prewar statements on Iraq's weapons programs were backed up in most cases by available U.S. intelligence, but officials failed to reflect internal debate over those findings, which proved wrong.

    ... (continued)

    PS: The committee voted 10-5 to approve the report, with two Republican lawmakers supporting it.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2008
  2. Harry Boy

    Harry Boy Look Up, It's Amazing PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2005
    Messages:
    38,881
    Likes Received:
    120
    Ratings:
    +299 / 1 / -9

    Who Gives A Sh!t
    :singing:---:singing:---:singing:
  3. scott c

    scott c Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 9, 2006
    Messages:
    409
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    No shock here....they both belong in jail IMHO......
  4. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    George W. Bush : Leagcy of Murder and Fear

    You have killed our soldiers, and destroyed our great nations reputation. All for a bunch of lies.

    You believed the lies, you retold them. You joked about not finding WMDs.

    You have killed hundreds of thousands of Iraqi people, displaced millions more.

    You have given away BILLIONS of tax payers' money to contractors and merenaries. They answer to nobody.

    You are responsibe for having no strategy, and not following the ones that military experts said you should. Instead, listening to the words of your top military advisors, who had never served in the military.

    Your legacy will be of a complete Failure, your grade is an F MINUS. And the people in your cabinet and party have the fukcing BALLZ to cry partisan politics when someone call you and your crime family out. You people are a disgrace to our nation. YOu will have your day in court, just not now. Now you seem to think your power is limitless, and unchecked. We will see what happens when you become a private citizen again, and lose your power to pardon.


    I hate you.
  5. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    From the same article:

    "The committee finds itself once again consumed with political gamesmanship," the Republicans said. The effort to produce the report "has indeed resulted in a partisan exercise." They said, however, that the report demonstrated that Bush administration statements were backed by intelligence and "it was the intelligence that was faulty."

    White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said: "We had the intelligence that we had, fully vetted, but it was wrong. We certainly regret that and we've taken measures to fix it."



    Given the breakdowns in intelligence (there's a hanging curve for sure), it's not shocking. All this report does is cast blame on the intelligence sources--and it's still the same evidence they all saw.

    The only one that really comes out ahead is Obama--which is probably about half of what Rockefeller was up to.

    But the intelligence analysis and gathering this country has sucks. There's no pretty way to say it--it's sucked for a long time. We can't use certain people as informants or agents, they don't want to put actual people on the ground, too much reliance on spy satellites and so forth...etc etc.
  6. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    This is the mantra of this administration

    "The Buck stops THERE"

    these guys accept zero % of the blame for anything.
  7. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    So...are you going to hold blameless the democrats who voted to authorize and continue to vote to fund?

    And I'm not sure they're accepting zero blame. Maybe they are, I don't know...but if the intelligence was faulty....
  8. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Their assessment seems pretty on target to me, you (and others) have provided examples of various members of the admin overstating intelligence, or ignoring some possible contradictions in what they had and only stating that part that helped their cause (to drum up support for the war). I agree with this. I would also point out though that this is very different from falsifying intelligence or withholding intelligence from other decision makers, of which there is no evidence. It still sucks, don't get me wrong, and they deserve criticism for what they did.

    This quote caught my intention, sums it up in a nutshell:

    Also why would this be satisfying to you PC? I know you hate the administration for what they did, and all this is is a useless report. At the end of the day they won re-election, continued their policies until the end of their run (at least to mid-2008) and got away with everything they did scot-free (is that how you write "scot" in scot-free? Weird expression). If anything I would think this would be more frustrating.
  9. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    Yes, that's how. A play on the scottish people's reputation for being...cheap. Frugal. Thrifty. Cheap.
    LOL

    Actually, kind of a derogatory statement, and were there a similar one about certain other ethnic groups, it would probably be enough to get one in serious trouble with the PC police.

    :D
  10. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    When the administration was 'leaking' stories to teh NY times, then quoting them as fact the next day, and threatening everyone with nuclear and biological attacks by Saddam Hussein....yeah, everyone was afraid. They succesfully played on your fear of 9-11 to invade Iraq with NO EVIDENCE.

    I recall when the invasion was being debated, and was on the brink of happening. I talked to my parents (HUGE BUSH supporters, you have no idea) I told my mother that if we don't find WMDs there, it will destroy us. It wil ruin our credibilty on a global scale. I was pretty positive that they would turn up, but here we are......

    Bottom line, we fed and overplayed the intel that we had. Heck, the CIA never even met 'curveball' the Germans had him. Rewatching Colin Powel's speech to the UN, its clear that HE was the only source. Anyone who claimed otherwise was outted, or called unamerican. They told you the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud, and that the republicans were the only people wo could keep you safe.

    every ounce of that is BULL$H!T.

    NO the democrats are not blameless, they are spineless. They had a chance to stop the funding, and overspending for an endless war to stop a 'tactic'. I stepped off this boat about a year after the invasion, when it was clear that we had searched the country, and captured their leader. Yet nothing turned up.....

    I hear you sheep say that truckloads of weapons are in Syria..blah...blah...blah...

    Thats a frickin lie too. NOBODY KNOWS! because the CIA had exactly ZERO agents in Iraq, ZERO. How can you possibly know what they are doing when you have no people on the ground. If they are in Syria....why not invade there to get them and grab the evidence for this war? This kind of hearsay intel spin is what got us involved in this in the first place.

    Backing the decision making of this administration is treason, and unamerican. YOU are the problem. Throwing blame at a misinformed congress, and american public is defending liars and war mongerers.
  11. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Essentially, they concluded

    1) Claims by President Bush that Iraq and al Qaida had a partnership “were not substantiated by the intelligence.”

    2) The president and vice president misrepresented what was known about Iraq’s chemical weapons capabiliies [sic].

    3 )Rumsfeld misrepresented what the intelligence community knew when he said Iraq’s weapons productions facilities were buried deeply underground.

    4) Cheney’s claim that the intelligence community had confirmed that lead Sept. 11 hijacker Mohammed Atta had met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 was not true.

    All well and good, so long as you ignore that fact that #1 has been proven by CAPTURED DOCUMENTS to have been true and that Saddam supported at least 2 AQ groups.

    Oh yeah, and also, ignore the fact that for #4 that the confirmed intelligence come from the CZECH OFFICIALS, who are still insistent that the meeting occurred. The 911 commission concluded it didn't based on Atta's cell phone usage, like he couldn't have given that to his buddies for the weekend while he was away.


    Other than that PRESS, this stuff is ROCK SOLID :rolleyes:


    file this under more partisan rhetoric.....
  12. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Oh yeah, in between ranting on what a moron and neo-con mindless drone I am, feel free to counter my post with actual Pentagon documents and verifiable news reports, like I did (not political commentary).
  13. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Satisfying because the legislative branch finally acknowledged it. It's pretty clear what I'm getting at.
  14. Holy Diver

    Holy Diver Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    10,800
    Likes Received:
    6
    Ratings:
    +6 / 0 / -0

    SUPPORTED AQ GROUPS!!!!!?????????????????????


    dude......


    Al Qaeda is the CIA....Al Qaeda means "The Base" referring to the Mujahadeen fighters in the CIA's dataBASE.....

    We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th," Bush said in an impromptu session with reporters. He contended, however, that "there's no question that Saddam Hussein had Al Qaeda ties."


    Seriously? So now there are 'ties' to AQ, thats all we need to invade a nation? Well, invade the White House, invade Crawford. Bin Laden's Brother and Bush Sr. were meeting ON 9-11, thats a tie.


    "On 11 September, while Al-Qaeda's planes slammed into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, the Carlyle Group hosted a conference at a Washington hotel. Among the guests of honour was a valued investor: Shafig bin Laden, brother to Osama."
  15. Patriot_in_NY

    Patriot_in_NY Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2007
    Messages:
    8,525
    Likes Received:
    12
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    Again, your trying to turn heads. The committee found the link between the two were unsubstantiated. I'm saying, that is now known to be incorrect. All that other stuff aside.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2008
  16. PressCoverage

    PressCoverage Banned

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2005
    Messages:
    8,609
    Likes Received:
    13
    Ratings:
    +13 / 0 / -0

    I recognize your attempt to prod, in the wake of such an admission by the legislative branch. So, very well. I'll satisfy your incessant need for one-to-one conflict.

    The documents captured and translated (by the Pentagon) concluded no operational link, and that's been covered here in this forum, probably during one of your hiatuses whereby you couldn't deal and left us. But you go right ahead and parrot PF13's long-debunked favorite talking points. Unfortunately, the Pentagon report summarized there was no operational link, and any AQ in the country was there only after Saddam knew invasion was imminent.

    Secondly, are you going to sit here and STILL pretend Atta WAS in Prague, even though much smarter people than you determined otherwise? What a joke. There was a little more to it than his cell phone records, but it's amazing the leaps in logic Con men will take in order to leave the door open a crack for their belief system to breathe. Yeah, he "gave his cell phone to a buddy." GOod one.

    Here's Czech police saying its unfounded:

    THE case for widening the war on terrorism against Iraq suffered a major setback yesterday when a vital piece of evidence allegedly linking Baghdad to the September 11 attacks appeared unfounded.

    Czech police said yesterday they had no evidence that the ringleader of the suicide attacks, Mohammed Atta, met an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague earlier this year. Administration hardliners in Washington had cited the alleged meeting in support of their argument that Saddam Hussein's regime had been backing terrorism
    .​

    here' the alledged agent himself, denying ever meeting with Atta:

    A former Iraqi intelligence officer who was said to have met with the suspected leader of the Sept. 11 attacks has told American interrogators the meeting never happened, according to United States officials familiar with classified intelligence reports on the matter.

    Ahmad Khalil Ibrahim Samir al-Ani, the former intelligence officer, was taken into custody by the United States in July. Under questioning he has said that he did not meet with Mohamed Atta in Prague, according to the officials, who have reviewed classified debriefing reports based on the interrogations.

    note also that Atta's own religious and political convictions made him violently opposed to the Saddam regime... here's page 161 of the 9/11 Commission Report:

    "In his interactions with other students, Atta voiced virulently anti-Semitic and anti-American opinions, ranging from condemnations of what he described as a global Jewish movement centered in New York City that supposedly controlled the financial world and the media, to polemics against governments of the Arab world. To him, Saddam Hussein was an American stooge set up to give Washington an excuse to intervene in the Middle East."​

    Here's FBI director Robert Mueller:

    "there was no evidence Atta left or returned to the U.S. at the time he was supposed to be in Prague." FBI Director Robert S. Mueller III went on the record at a San Francisco meeting in April 2001 saying the evidence wasn't there: "We ran down literally hundreds of thousands of leads and checked every record we could get our hands on, from flight reservations to car rentals to bank accounts..."​

    But, yeah... Just cell phone records... :rolleyes:

    Maybe you can hunt down a Bill Safire NYT column with more leaps of logic that leaves that door cracked. He's a big fan of Atta in Prague. Hooray!

    What was that you were saying recently about "zero credibility?" The irony is so thick, you can cut it with a knife.
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2008
  17. otis p. driftwood

    otis p. driftwood Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    5,271
    Likes Received:
    4
    Ratings:
    +4 / 0 / -0

    I have to say, I spent some time trying to locate Atta/Prague, but I couldn't, all I could find was inconclusive. If PFiNY has some actual proof I'd like to see it.
  18. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I apologize to all our sheep fcuking Scottish friends for my use of that hateful phrase.:D
  19. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    I suppose that's a good step (the acknowledgement I mean), I was just thinking that ultimately having Congress agree that there were shenanigans and still have it go unpunished would be even more frustrating for you.
  20. Stokes

    Stokes Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    2,423
    Likes Received:
    1
    Ratings:
    +1 / 0 / -0

    Apologies for the total thread hijack PC, and I'll end the silliness with this, but I wanted to show I've got nothing against the Scottish:

    "Scot free has no connection with Scotsmen, frugal or otherwise. It’s an accidental connection, just as it is in hopscotch.
    Scot is from an Old Norse word that meant a payment or contribution and which is linked to the modern French écot, a share of communal expenses, as in payer son écot, to pay one’s share. It is a close relative of shot, which at one time could have the same meaning of a contribution or a share of expenses.
    The expression scot free derives from a medieval municipal tax levied in proportional shares on inhabitants, often for poor relief. This tax was called a scot, as an abbreviation of the full term scot and lot, where scot was the sum to be paid and lot was one’s allotted share. (This tax lasted a long time, in some places such as Westminster down to the electoral reforms of 1832, with only those paying scot and lot being allowed to vote.) So somebody who avoided paying his share of the town’s expenses for some reason got off scot free.
    Scot was also used for a payment or reckoning, especially one’s share of the cost of an entertainment; when one settled up, one “paid for one’s scot”. Again, someone who evaded paying their share of the tab got off scot free."

    from: http://www.worldwidewords.org/qa/qa-sco1.htm

    Same answer found on Yahoo answers.

    http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20060627063538AAITp1I

Share This Page

unset ($sidebar_block_show); ?>