Posted on 07/14/2004 2:11:05 PM PDT by Shermy
Below are the "Additional Comments" of Sens. Roberts, Hatch and Bond that were appended at the very long Senate Intelligence report, along with other Senator's comments.
I've excerpted those that deal with the Niger uranium issue because of the popularity of the topic.
________________________________________
...Despite our hard and successful work to deliver a unanimous report, however, there were two issues on which the Republicans and Democrats could not agree: 1) whether the Committee should conclude that former Ambassador Joseph Wilson’s public statements were not based on knowledge he actually possessed, and 2) whether the Committee should conclude that it was the former ambassador’s wife who recommended him for his trip to Niger.
Niger
The Committee began its review of prewar intelligence on Iraq by examining the Intelligence Community’s sharing of intelligence information with the UNMOVIC inspection teams. (The Committee’s findings on that topic can be found in the section of the report titled, “The Intelligence Community’s Sharing of Intelligence on Iraqi Suspect WMD Sites with UN Inspectors.”) Shortly thereafter, we expanded the review when former Ambassador Joseph Wilson began speaking publicly about his role in exploring the possibility that Iraq was seeking or may have acquired uranium yellowcake from Africa. Ambassador Wilson’s emergence was precipitated by a passage in President Bush’s January 2003 State of the Union address which is now referred to as “the sixteen words.” President Bush stated, “. . . the British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” The details of the Committee’s findings and conclusions on this issue can be found in the Niger section of the report. What cannot be found, however, are two conclusions upon which the Committee’s Democrats would not agree. While there was no dispute with the underlying facts, my Democrat colleagues refused to allow the following conclusions to appear in the report:
"Conclusion: The plan to send the former ambassador to Niger was suggested by the former ambassador’s wife, a CIA employee."
The former ambassador’s wife suggested her husband for the trip to Niger in February 2002. The former ambassador had traveled previously to Niger on behalf of the CIA, also at the suggestion of his wife, to look into another matter not related to Iraq. On February 12, 2002, the former ambassador’s wife sent a memorandum to a Deputy Chief of a division in the CIA’s Directorate of Operations which said, “[m]y husband has good relations with both the PM [prime minister] and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity.” This was just one day before the same Directorate of Operations division sent a cable to one of its overseas stations requesting concurrence with the division’s idea to send the former ambassador to Niger.
"Conclusion: Rather than speaking publicly about his actual experiences during his inquiry of the Niger issue, the former ambassador seems to have included information he learned from press accounts and from his beliefs about how the Intelligence Community would have or should have handled the information he provided."
At the time the former ambassador traveled to Niger, the Intelligence Community did not have in its possession any actual documents on the alleged Niger-Iraq uranium deal, only second hand reporting of the deal. The former ambassador’s comments to reporters that the Niger-Iraq uranium documents “may have been forged because ‘the dates were wrong and the names were wrong,’” could not have been based on the former ambassador’s actual experiences because the Intelligence Community did not have the documents at the time of the ambassador’s trip. In addition, nothing in the report from the former ambassador’s trip said anything about documents having been forged or the names or dates in the reports having been incorrect. The former ambassador told Committee staff that he, in fact, did not have access to any of the names and dates in the CIA’s reports and said he may have become confused about his own recollection after the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) reported in March 2003 that the names and dates on the documents were not correct. Of note, the names and dates in the documents that the IAEA found to be incorrect were not names or dates included in the CIA reports.
Following the Vice President’s review of an intelligence report regarding a possible uranium deal, he asked his briefer for the CIA’s analysis of the issue. It was this request which generated Mr. Wilson’s trip to Niger. The former ambassador’s public comments suggesting that the Vice President had been briefed on the information gathered during his trip is not correct, however. While the CIA responded to the Vice President’s request for the Agency’s analysis, they never provided the information gathered by the former Ambassador. The former ambassador, in an NBC Meet the Press interview on July 6, 2003, said, “The office of the Vice President, I am absolutely convinced, received a very specific response to the question it asked and that response was based upon my trip out there.” The former ambassador was speaking on the basis of what he believed should have happened based on his former government experience, but he had no knowledge that this did happen.
These and other public comments from the former ambassador, such as comments that his report “debunked” the Niger-Iraq uranium story, were incorrect and have led to a distortion in the press and in the public’s understanding of the facts surrounding the Niger-Iraq uranium story. The Committee found that, for most analysts, the former ambassador’s report lent more credibility, not less, to the reported Niger-Iraq uranium deal.
During Mr. Wilson’s media blitz, he appeared on more than thirty television shows including entertainment venues. Time and again, Joe Wilson told anyone who would listen that the President had lied to the American people, that the Vice President had lied, and that he had “debunked” the claim that Iraq was seeking uranium from Africa. As discussed in the Niger section of the report, not only did he NOT “debunk” the claim, he actually gave some intelligence analysts even more reason to believe that it may be true. I believed very strongly that it was important for the Committee to conclude publicly that many of the statements made by Ambassador Wilson were not only incorrect, but had no basis in fact.
In an interview with Committee staff, Mr. Wilson was asked how he knew some of the things he was stating publicly with such confidence. On at least two occasions he admitted that he had no direct knowledge to support some of his claims and that he was drawing on either unrelated past experiences or no information at all. For example, when asked how he “knew” that the Intelligence Community had rejected the possibility of a Niger-Iraq uranium deal, as he wrote in his book, he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved “a little literary flair.”
The former Ambassador, either by design or through ignorance, gave the American people and, for that matter, the world a version of events that was inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and misleading. Surely, the Senate Intelligence Committee, which has unique access to all of the facts, should have been able to agree on a conclusion that would correct the public record. Unfortunately, we were unable to do so.
a shame that this will never get any play...maybe W can address it in the debates, along with several other slanderous issues...
"he told Committee staff that his assertion may have involved “a little literary flair.”"
Yeah, a little fictional flair. Thanks for the ping!
The Democrats are counting on Media allies to ignore this "smoking gun" memo.
Wilson = traitor = Novak = traitor = Plame = traitor = employers of same
The former Ambassador, either by design or through ignorance, gave the American people and, for that matter, the world a version of events that was inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and misleading. Surely, the Senate Intelligence Committee, which has unique access to all of the facts, should have been able to agree on a conclusion that would correct the public record. Unfortunately, we were unable to do so
Yes Pat Roberts, you as the Majority leader of the investigation failed in your duty to the American people and proved once again how weak you and your party are when it come to true leadership. Thank God we have George Bush as President because if we had to count on Republican Senators to guide this country we would be lost for certain.
What we need in the Senate is Tom DeLay x sixty. Right now we have Tom DeLay x zero. A bunch of spineless Republicans who let jerks like Rockefeller run all over them.
This investigation was 24/7 politics from the get-go. Any party worth their salt would have have seen this coming and would have resolved to write the truth and take the consequences which would have been a non-unanomous report. Big deal. We need a report that the lying Dems can sign up to like a hole in the head. Pat Roberts failed us. The Republican Party failed us. If they get tossed out of the leadership in November it should surprise no one.
Pingggggggg.
“a little literary flair.”
This from the guy whose book is called "The Politics of Truth" and whose website is www.restorehonesty.com
Thanks for posting.
Reality is vindicating Bush more and more each day.
Thanks for posting.
Reality is vindicating Bush more and more each day.
You are CORRECT.
The Republicans could have made a stink, called it a 'coverup' a 'partisan slander' that Dems are trying to support, etc. Dems pull cr*p and then dont get called on it or pay a price for it, so *of course* they do it again and again.
A conclusion that we were able to discern with very little effort within days of Wilson appearing on the scene.
The former Ambassador, either by design or through ignorance, gave the American people and, for that matter, the world a version of events that was inaccurate, unsubstantiated, and misleading.
We can eliminate "ignorance". I won't take the time to expound on the many reasons why that just didn't fly. It was by design. He continues with his outrageous charges to this very day.
bttt
A POX on all their asses!!
Semper Fi
I've got a little literary flair I'd like to lay on Joe Wilson, but I don't want to be banned.
LOL
We'll see...
You with charging Novak again.
I pointed out a few days ago to you that what Novak wrote turned out to be 100% correct and it's the Wilson faction that has lied.
Novak did us a favor by explaining how and why Wilson went off on his Niger jaunt.
But Wilson and Plame have done some things I hope are the focus of that grand jury...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.