Posted on 04/01/2005 6:37:44 PM PST by Former Military Chick
SPRINGFIELD -- The United States' pre-war intelligence on Iraq was dead wrong, according to the president's Commission on Weapons of Mass Destruction. Despite the report, Missouri's senior U.S. senator says the decision to go to war was still the right one.
Bond is a member of the Select Committee on Intelligence. In an interview here on Thursday, Bond said the bad intelligence came from an archaic system based on assumptions rather than thorough analysis and human intelligence. He also placed much of the blame on the Clinton administration.
The commission’s report says the harm done to American credibility will take years to undo.
“The intelligence community had not challenged its own assumptions, did not provide the caveats they should have about some of their sources,” said Bond.
The senator notes that the commission cleared the Bush administration of manipulating the intelligence for political purposes. He took a shot at the Democrats.
“The Clinton administration cut the intel budget by 20 percent. The Director of Intelligence got rid of spies -- human intelligence that we badly needed in the war against terror,” said Bond.
An expert on terrorism, Southwest Missouri State University political science professor Mehrdad Haghayeghi, says many Democrats and even some Republicans never would have voted for the war if the president hadn’t hyped the threat.
“Traditionally, intelligence is the foundation for policymaking. In this case, unfortunately, the Bush administration had devised the policy of intervention in Iraq and looked for intelligence that fit that policy,” said Haghayeghi.
Bond fears the new director of National Intelligence doesn’t have enough power and says his daily briefings to the president will be critical as other foreign threats emerge.
The report also says the United States knows disturbingly little about current nuclear threats. And some experts believe this report will make it harder to push for sanctions against countries that may be gaining that capability, like Iran.
Bond also isn’t sure whether the United States has good enough intelligence about Iran and North Korea.
“It's getting better but it’s not nearly as good as it should be,” he said.
Rep. Ike Skelton, D-Missouri, also was in the area on Thursday. He says there's enough blame to spread around all agencies in government. ----
Here's The Associated Press' report on the commission's report:
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- The 3 1/2 years since the terrorists' attacks on Sept. 11, 2002, have seen the creation of a new Homeland Security Department, a major reorganization of spy agencies and countless condemnations of the way things were done. Still, the $10 million presidential commission says, the nation's spies are still missing the mark.
"Our collection agencies are often unable to gather intelligence on the very things we care the most about," the President Bush's commission on weapons of mass destruction concluded in a bruising report on Thursday.
"Dead wrong" on Saddam Hussein's weapons, the report said. "Too little innovation to succeed in the 21st century."
Though Bush initially opposed the panel's creation, he promised immediate action at a news conference with retired Judge Laurence Silberman, a Republican, and former Democratic Sen. Charles Robb of Virginia, the commission's co-chairmen.
"To win the war on terror, we will correct what needs to be fixed," Bush said.
The commission offered 74 recommendations aimed at changing the structure and culture of the nation's 15 spy agencies. It called for more clarity in the powers of the newly created national intelligence director, an overhaul of national security efforts in the Justice Department and dozens of changes in intelligence collection and analysis.
"There is no more important intelligence mission than understanding the worst weapons that our enemies possess, and how they intend to use them against us," the commission said. "These are their deepest secrets, and unlocking them must be our highest priority."
The report, approved unanimously by the bipartisan nine-member panel, followed the failure of U.S. inspectors in Iraq to turn up any weapons of mass destruction. The existence of weapons stockpiles - detailed in dozens of intelligence reports before the March 2003 invasion - was the administration's leading argument for toppling Saddam.
The report painted a picture of a clumsy intelligence apparatus struggling to penetrate Iraqi operations and wrongly concluding that Saddam had weapons capable of causing catastrophic damage. Commissioners found intelligence collectors didn't provide enough information or were deceived by discredited sources and analysts relied on old assumptions about Saddam's intentions and overstated their conclusions.
"On a matter of this importance, we simply cannot afford failures of this magnitude," said the report, which exceeded 600 pages.
The commission found the spy community ill-prepared to penetrate adversarial nations and terror groups. It said agencies must do a better job of preventing attacks with biological agents and learning about the spread of nuclear weapons.
"Across the board, the intelligence community knows disturbingly little about the nuclear programs of many of the world's most dangerous actors," the report said. "In some cases, it knows less now than it did five or 10 years ago."
REPORT IN BRIEF
CONCLUSION: America's spy agencies were wrong in most prewar assessments about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and know "disturbingly little" about current nuclear threats, a presidential commission said yesterday.
RECOMMENDATIONS: It recommended dozens of organizational changes and said President Bush could implement most of them without congressional action. It also urged the president to support John Negroponte, his choice to be the new director of national intelligence, in any bureaucratic turf battles ahead.
Well NOW one of them start stating where the blame lies. Why didn't a group of them make this case a year ago?
Interesting that some would have done nothing and allowed another 100,000 dead in mass graves, the rape and torture rooms and so forth.
Mind boggling.
Well, I'm not so sure it's spin, regarding the Senator's remarks... what we "knew" about Iraq came straight from the Clinton Administration, and the Intel agencies right under him during the 90's. Hopefully something can be done, and quickly, to do away with the politics within our Intel agencies. The in-fighting and back stabbing has to stop.
Now here is the only statement in this article I will agree with.
Does this make Ike a DINO? Or me a RINO?
Good reporter, good reporter - introduce this moron as an expert on terrorism and then go on to report not his opinions on terrorism, but his opinions on U.S. politics and the status of our intelligence system.
I hope the report gives 'credit' to ex-Sinator Torricelli for his 'contribution' to destroying our intel capabilities; I'd hate to see him overlooked in this regard.
The Church Amendment did not help any. Nor did Jimmy Carter. The main damage was done way before Bill Clinton.
Frank Church and Jimmy Carter were the two main perpertrators.
Bill Clinton did not help but he can't be blammed for all it.
Exactly. Those cowards in Congress on our side were scared they would be accused of politicizing 9/11 so they said nothing. Then the democrat polticians politicize 9/11 and get away with it. Incredible.
It's interesting how statements like that seem to be in blinking neon. I would credit Art Bell [really] and FR for teaching us to spot such failures of rationality and making up a deficiency in the public school education product.
Rush also!
I saw this yesterday.
Very interesting.
New Senator just elected who has nothing to lose (like Norm Coleman) and no skeletons/chits to make them hold their tongue.
This is exactly why we need to rotate Congress out after every term. The ones we have now are believing they are royal.
Read it again.
He's blaming the anonymous bureaucrats. He doesn't want to defend the Clinton Administration, so he uses choice words to make it look like agrees to some degree.
"An expert on terrorism, Southwest Missouri State University political science professor Mehrdad Haghayeghi, says many Democrats and even some Republicans never would have voted for the war if the president hadn’t hyped the threat."
See Post #40
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1376069/posts
Again, a blatant lie by a sycophant of the left. The victims of 9/11 are experts on terrorism. This Mehrdad? is an expert?
Bush did not hype Saddam's WMD! That is a Leftist Damnable Lie.
Read Bush's statements to the Congress, the American people and to the U.N.
Years of violating U.N. resolutions, attacking his neighbors, paying nihlists bombers $25grand, having used WMD on his own people, mass murder.....
Those were in Indictments! Not WMD singly or in the top 3!
"An expert on terrorism, Southwest Missouri State University political science professor Mehrdad Haghayeghi, says many Democrats and even some Republicans never would have voted for the war if the president hadn’t hyped the threat."
See Post #40
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1376069/posts
Again, a blatant lie by a sycophant of the left. The victims of 9/11 are experts on terrorism. This Mehrdad? is an expert?
Bush did not hype Saddam's WMD! That is a Leftist Damnable Lie.
Read Bush's statements to the Congress, the American people and to the U.N.
Years of violating U.N. resolutions, attacking his neighbors, paying nihlists bombers $25grand, having used WMD on his own people, mass murder.....
Those were in Indictments! Not WMD singly or in the top 3!
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.