Replies

For anyone that desires to download the complete Acrobat Reader formated report...........go to:
http://www.wmd.gov/report
If you just want to examine a particular chapter on line (html) format all the chapters are hyperlinked. You can also find the chapters in html form at globalsecurity.org site.

Take the time to at least examine the front end, and perhaps Chapter One to understand what the report encompasses. If you read second hand info on what it contains as usual, you cannot be sure who is being honest verse subversive etc.. The issues revolve around the fact much of the various forms of WMD's simply where not found. We cannot get around this point. I for one had been a super supporter since day one that Saddam had tons of stuff based on what was leaking out over a period of time. Best estimates now indicate that after Desert Storm, Iraq did not reconstitute it's damaged WMD programs as believed. Hey just a week and a half ago, I made a comment on one thread, that why did our soldiers find vials of atrophine and hyperdermic needles at some previous weapons sites. All along I contended that eventually we would find hundreds of barrels of things like VX nerve agent precursors, Sarin, perhaps piles of packages of Ricin, tons of active, recent binary shells etc., etc.. But if you don't take the time to read the report, then you should not scream to high heaven how GWB, Collin etc., missed the mark. The report vindicates the administration of any wrong doing and or deceit. Clearly the burden falls on our Intel orgs.

Second the motion to read the WMD report. Even if you only read the Iraq section it will be worthwhile. The CIA and other intelligence agencies are criticized harshly for being wrong (it happens), but more importantly for portraying their evidence as conclusive and hiding just how shaky it was. According to the report, the Presidential Daily Briefs were a hyped-up view of the current intel with a "headlines" style that served up highlights with no perspective.

We all need to read this report, and the Senate Select Intelligence Committee's report so we can honestly rebut the criticism of our country and in particular our President.

For example, the Senate committee chronicled the entire process by which the Uranium in Africa claim made it into the Preseident's SOTU. Every intelligence agency reviewed and signed off on it after quibbling over every word. There was no distortion by the President. He simply relayed to us what he had been told.

If someone says the Administration hyped the intel or skewed it, you can show what the CIA told the President and compare it to what he told us.

Another media canard that needs debunking is that the Administration "pressured" the intelligence agencies into skewing their conclusions. This is stupid on its face since their conclusions were essentially the same across two Adminsitrations. Both investigations specifically looked for examples of this, interviewing hundreds of analysts. The only one who said he was pressured was someone dealing with Cuba. At least one analyst volunteered that the scrutiny applied by the Adminstration actually helped him/her do better work.

Read them. Be informed. Bitch slap the "Bush Lied" crowd with honest rebuttals.