Vanity: I would like some help refuting this blog.

Whether or not Congress had access to or was given complete, factual, and accurate information by Bush & Co. prior to the “vote to go to war with Iraq” has been a topic of much debate on my blog. The same individuals who want to believe that Bush & Co. are on the “up and up” also believe that Bush & Co. were forthright with their information and incapable of manufacturing reasons to go to war with Iraq.

Ten (10) days after September 11th, Bush & Co. received the President’s Daily Briefing (PDB). He was told via this briefing that the US Intelligence Committee had NO evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda. The information contained in PDB’s are derived from electronic intercepts, human agents, and reports from foreign intel services, as well as news reports and public statements by foreign leaders. The PDB was later incorporated into a lengthier CIA analysis.

The ultra classified CIA assessment was distributed to Bush, Cheney, the President’s national security adviser and deputy national security adviser, the Secretary and Undersecretary of State and Defense, and other Bush & Co. policy makers.

The very existence of the 9/21/2001 PDB was not even disclo9sed to the Intel Committee until the summer of 2004. Republicans and Democrats have been requesting to review these documents since 2004. Bush & Co. have REFUSED all requests to provide it, even on a classified basis, and they refuse to discuss the document other than to acknowledge that it exists. Why would they want to keep it under lock & key if their actions had been honest to begin with? Here’s why:

Bush & Co.’s primary rationale for going to war against Iraq was that Saddam had (as in definite possession of) biological and chemical weapons and that he was aggressively pursuing a program to build nuclear weapons. NO weapons have been discovered since the start of this war either by the UN inspectors or the US military.

The CIA assessment and the 9/21/2001 PDB both concluded the exact opposite of what was being said by Bush & Co. In April of 2004, the Senate Intel Committee found in a bipartisan report that the CIA’s prewar assertion (the “conclusion” presented by Bush & Co.) that Saddam was “reconstituting its nuclear weapons program” and “has chemical and biological weapons” were “overstated”, or were not supported by underlying intelligence provided.

They also found NO evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda. However, Bush, Cheney, and Rummy all made statements to the contrary in the days leading to the congressional vote. Cheney continued to give mis-information even after he was briefed by the CIA and the FBI that the information was erroneous.

Bush & Co. were well aware that the intel just wasn’t there to support their reasonings for war. So, they did what any other dishonest, scheming, and clearly, in the wrong politican would do-----they manufactured their “proof”. THIS is why they won’t release the CIA assessment and the 9/21/2001 PDB.

Bush, Cheney, & Rummy made statements purporting to have evidence of Al Qaeda-Iraq ties. Well, they did. This information came from a “covert-intel unit” set up shortly after 9/11 by then Under Secretary of Defense Policy_Douglas Feith. The “secretive” unit was set up because Cheney, Rummy, Wolfowitz, and Libby did not believe the CIA would “be able to get to the bottom of the matter of Iraq-Al Qaeda ties” (read: See things their way).

Feith directed the “Iraqi Intelligence Cell” of the Pentagon and it consisted primarily of 2 former journalists, Michael Maloof and David Wursmer. NEITHER one of them had any experience or formal training in intelligence analysis. Maloof later lost his security clearance and Wursmer is now Cheney’s Middle East Advisor. In January, 2002, they were succeeded by 2 Naval Reserve Officers. The intel analysis from this “covert” unit later served as the basis for many of the erroneous public statements made by Bush & Co.

Feith is now under investigation as to whether he engaged in “unauthorized, unlawful, or inappropriate intelligence activities.” Apparently the Pentagon is now also being investigated.

This unit also routinely second-guessed the CIA’s highly classified assessment. Regarding one report entitled “Iraq and Al Qaeda: Interpreting a Murky Relationship”, one of the Naval Reserve Officers wrote, “…CIA report should be read for content only and the CIA’s interpretation should be ignored.”

Cheney’s own notes jotted in the margins of one of Feith’s reports that detailed purported “evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda” clearly indicates his support of anything that supported his ideas. He wrote, “…this is very good indeed…encouraging…not like the crap we are all so used to getting out of the CIA.”

Hell yes, Bush & Co. most certainly lied by omission. They even manufactured evidence to support their statements. What they pulled was the equivalent of a child who asks a parent a question but doesn’t get the answer he wants so he asks another parent/adult and another and another until, finally, he gets the answer he wants, all the while omitting that he had already asked and been denied. Is that the kind of leadership America wants? I don’t.

Bush & Co.’s own supporters are beginning to question him and yet Bush & Co. keep up the charade. They are like the busted cheating husband whose motto is “deny, deny, deny”. I’d have just a little bit of respect for Bush if he’d just admit he f**ked up bad!!!!

"We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." — President Bill Clinton on Feb. 17, 1998.

"(Saddam Hussein) will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, the national security adviser to President Clinton, on Feb. 18, 1998.

"(Saddam Hussein) has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeleine Albright, secretary of state in the Clinton administration, on Nov. 10, 1999.

"There is no doubt that . . . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." — Sen. Bob Graham of Florida, among others, in a letter to President George W. Bush, on Dec., 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." — Sen. Carl Levin of Michigan on Sept. 19, 2002. (Sen. Levin now has demanded that President Bush set a timetable for the withdrawal of American troops from Iraq, but he isn't fooling anybody. He was clearly part of this pro-war plot.)

"We know that (Saddam Hussein) has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country . . . . Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter, and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore on Sept. 23, 2002. (The former vice president could sound remarkably like the current one. Clearly both veeps were in this together.)

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Ted Kennedy, Sept. 27, 2002. Yes, the same Ted Kennedy who would later claim that President Bush and his cronies cooked up this war on his ranch in Texas, but that was probably just to mislead us.

"The last U.N. weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons . . . ." — Sen. Robert Byrd of West Virginia, who nevertheless would oppose the war, on Oct. 3, 2002.

"When I vote to give the president of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat — and a grave threat — to our security . . . ." — Sen. John F. Kerry of Massachusetts on Oct. 9, 2002.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation . . . . And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons program and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new." — Sen. John F. Kerry again, this time on Jan. 23, 2003.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members . . . . It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." — Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, now of New York, on Oct. 10, 2002.

Goodness. So many conspirators. That ranch house outside Crawford, Tex., where Ted Kennedy told us the war was hatched, must have been awfully crowded.

Of course there are those who portray all these conspirators as just innocent victims of intelligence reports manipulated by the Bush administration and carefully fed to innocents like Bill Clinton, Al Gore, John Kerry and so many other Washington figures known for their simple naivete.

Unfortunately for that theory, one bipartisan investigation after another into the collection and interpretation of pre-war intelligence has found no evidence of such manipulation.

To quote the Senate Intelligence Committee's unanimous report back in 2004, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, manipulate, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities." Which is a fairly sweeping judgment. The independent Robb-Silberman Committee reached similar conclusions.

Jay Rockefeller, the ranking Democratic member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, signed on to the committee's report but, almost as soon as it was out, he began charging that the Bush administration had coerced, influenced or pressured analysts to reach the conclusions it had wanted. Maybe not directly, but somehow. Just how, like Sen. Rockefeller's reasoning, remains sketchy.

And, yes, this is the same Jay Rockefeller who, on Oct. 10, 2002, had declared: "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . . . .We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."

"Whether or not Congress had access to or was given complete, factual, and accurate information by Bush & Co. prior to the “vote to go to war with Iraq” has been a topic of much debate on my blog. The same individuals who want to believe that Bush & Co. are on the “up and up” also believe that Bush & Co. were forthright with their information and incapable of manufacturing reasons to go to war with Iraq. "

No one (with a brain) ever said anything about "manufacturing" reasons.

"Ten (10) days after September 11th, Bush & Co. received the President’s Daily Briefing (PDB). He was told via this briefing that the US Intelligence Committee had NO evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda. The information contained in PDB’s are derived from electronic intercepts, human agents, and reports from foreign intel services, as well as news reports and public statements by foreign leaders. The PDB was later incorporated into a lengthier CIA analysis."

Wrong. It said there were no connections between Iraq, Saddam, and Sept. 11. There has been quite extensive evidence that Saddam and Al Qaeda were co-operating on several levels. Many top level Al Qaeda's had met with Iraqi intelligence.

"The ultra classified CIA assessment was distributed to Bush, Cheney, the President’s national security adviser and deputy national security adviser, the Secretary and Undersecretary of State and Defense, and other Bush & Co. policy makers. "

PDB's are not "ultra classified." This demonstrates to the ignorance of the whole argument.

"The very existence of the 9/21/2001 PDB was not even disclo9sed to the Intel Committee until the summer of 2004. Republicans and Democrats have been requesting to review these documents since 2004. Bush & Co. have REFUSED all requests to provide it, even on a classified basis, and they refuse to discuss the document other than to acknowledge that it exists. Why would they want to keep it under lock & key if their actions had been honest to begin with? Here’s why:

Bush & Co.’s primary rationale for going to war against Iraq was that Saddam had (as in definite possession of) biological and chemical weapons and that he was aggressively pursuing a program to build nuclear weapons. NO weapons have been discovered since the start of this war either by the UN inspectors or the US military."

Not true, over and over and over. Why would the Senate intel commite get a PDB? True, they get a different assesment from a different CIA guy than the President does. However, as previously states, the PDB in question only confirms that there was no operation connection between Iraq and Al Qaeda in regards to Sept. 11. Also, no insignificant quantities of "dual use" chemicals have been found, not to mention a mustard gas shell that blew up in an EOD guys face.

"The CIA assessment and the 9/21/2001 PDB both concluded the exact opposite of what was being said by Bush & Co. In April of 2004, the Senate Intel Committee found in a bipartisan report that the CIA’s prewar assertion (the “conclusion” presented by Bush & Co.) that Saddam was “reconstituting its nuclear weapons program” and “has chemical and biological weapons” were “overstated”, or were not supported by underlying intelligence provided."

Are we talking about WMD's or Al Qaeda? This is making my head hurt. See above.

"They also found NO evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda. However, Bush, Cheney, and Rummy all made statements to the contrary in the days leading to the congressional vote. Cheney continued to give mis-information even after he was briefed by the CIA and the FBI that the information was erroneous. "

There were CONFIRMED contacts between Iraq and Al Qaeda before the war. Zarqawi was in Iraq, as was Ansar al Islam. These facts are not in dispute.

"Bush & Co. were well aware that the intel just wasn’t there to support their reasonings for war. So, they did what any other dishonest, scheming, and clearly, in the wrong politican would do-----they manufactured their “proof”. THIS is why they won’t release the CIA assessment and the 9/21/2001 PDB. "

If they won't release the PDB how does this clown know what it says?

"Bush, Cheney, & Rummy made statements purporting to have evidence of Al Qaeda-Iraq ties. Well, they did. This information came from a “covert-intel unit” set up shortly after 9/11 by then Under Secretary of Defense Policy_Douglas Feith. The “secretive” unit was set up because Cheney, Rummy, Wolfowitz, and Libby did not believe the CIA would “be able to get to the bottom of the matter of Iraq-Al Qaeda ties” (read: See things their way)."

See above.

"Feith directed the “Iraqi Intelligence Cell” of the Pentagon and it consisted primarily of 2 former journalists, Michael Maloof and David Wursmer. NEITHER one of them had any experience or formal training in intelligence analysis. Maloof later lost his security clearance and Wursmer is now Cheney’s Middle East Advisor. In January, 2002, they were succeeded by 2 Naval Reserve Officers. The intel analysis from this “covert” unit later served as the basis for many of the erroneous public statements made by Bush & Co.

Feith is now under investigation as to whether he engaged in “unauthorized, unlawful, or inappropriate intelligence activities.” Apparently the Pentagon is now also being investigated.

This unit also routinely second-guessed the CIA’s highly classified assessment. Regarding one report entitled “Iraq and Al Qaeda: Interpreting a Murky Relationship”, one of the Naval Reserve Officers wrote, “…CIA report should be read for content only and the CIA’s interpretation should be ignored.”

Cheney’s own notes jotted in the margins of one of Feith’s reports that detailed purported “evidence linking Saddam to Al Qaeda” clearly indicates his support of anything that supported his ideas. He wrote, “…this is very good indeed…encouraging…not like the crap we are all so used to getting out of the CIA.”

Hell yes, Bush & Co. most certainly lied by omission. They even manufactured evidence to support their statements. What they pulled was the equivalent of a child who asks a parent a question but doesn’t get the answer he wants so he asks another parent/adult and another and another until, finally, he gets the answer he wants, all the while omitting that he had already asked and been denied. Is that the kind of leadership America wants? I don’t.

Bush & Co.’s own supporters are beginning to question him and yet Bush & Co. keep up the charade. They are like the busted cheating husband whose motto is “deny, deny, deny”. I’d have just a little bit of respect for Bush if he’d just admit he f**ked up bad!!!!"

This whole rambling is a non-sequiter. The whole point of pretzel logic is to make the argument infallible. Just point out that the first point is wrong and the whole thing falls apart.

USA vs. Osama Bin Laden
(US District court Southern district of new york)

...4. ...in adition al qaeda reached an understanding with the government of Iraq that al qaeda would not work against that government and that on particular projects,specifically including weapons development,al qaeda would work cooperatively with the government of Iraq.

Signed by Mary Jo White US Attorney

FrontPageMagazine.com | June 20, 2005
While Western press agencies continue to report years-old allegations of Qu'ran abuse from detainees as if they were new, the Exempt Media completely missed important corroboration from Iraq's new government that Saddam sheltered and even encouraged al-Qaeda terrorists during his reign of terror. CQ reader Jason Smith at Generation Why? notes this revelation from the Italian news portal AKI which confirms that Saddam's regime sponsored an Islamist conference and specifically invited AQ's #2 man and Zarqawi to attend:
The number two of the al-Qaeda network, Ayman al-Zawahiri, visited Iraq under a false name in September 1999 to take part in the ninth Popular Islamic Congress, former Iraqi premier Iyad Allawi has revealed to pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. In an interview, Allawi made public information discovered by the Iraqi secret service in the archives of the Saddam Hussein regime, which sheds light on the relationship between Saddam Hussein and the Islamic terrorist network. He also said that both al-Zawahiri and Jordanian militant al-Zarqawi probably entered Iraq in the same period.
"Al-Zawahiri was summoned by Izza Ibrahim Al-Douri – then deputy head of the council of the leadership of the revolution - to take part in the congress, along with some 150 other Islamic figures from 50 Muslim countries," Allawi said.
According to Allawi, important information has been gathered regarding the presence of another key terrorist figure operating in Iraq - the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
"The Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi entered Iraq secretly in the same period," Allawi affirmed, "and began to form a terrorist cell, even though the Iraqi services do not have precise information on his entry into the country," he said.
Last week, King Abdullah told a Saudi newspaper that the Jordanians knew Saddam to be sheltering Zarqawi in the last years of the Ba'athist reign of terror and demanded his extradition. Saddam refused to turn Zarqawi over to the Jordanians. Abdullah had been clear on that point; the Ba'athists had not claimed they could not reach him, but that they flatly refused to hand him over.
Last year, Stephen Hayes wrote about the Islamist conference in his book The Connection, which outlined a number of such ties between the Saddam regime and the AQ network, as well as other terrorists. Now that the new Iraqi government has possession of Saddam's old files, they have begun to corroborate Hayes' work. Far from being an enemy to the Islamists, Saddam reached out to the fanatics as an ally in order to covertly support attacks on Western nations, either directly or indirectly. The IIS records that Allawi has on Zawahiri shows that al-Douri -- currently running the ex-Ba'athist insurgency in Iraq -- knew who to contact in order to set up those connections.

The Commission on the
Intelligence Capabilities
of the
United States
Regarding
Weapons of
Mass Destruction
Report to the President of the United States
March 31, 2005

Pg.579

The Intelligence Community did not make or change any analytic
judgments in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion,
but the pervasive conventional wisdom that Saddam retained
WMD affected the analytic process.

http://www.wmd.gov/report/wmd_report.pdf

adnokronosinternational | May 24, 2005
The number two of the al-Qaeda network, Ayman al-Zawahiri, visited Iraq under a false name in September 1999 to take part in the ninth Popular Islamic Congress, former Iraqi premier Iyad Allawi has revealed to pan-Arab daily al-Hayat. In an interview, Allawi made public information discovered by the Iraqi secret service in the archives of the Saddam Hussein regime, which sheds light on the relationship between Saddam Hussein and the Islamic terrorist network. He also said that both al-Zawahiri and Jordanian militant al-Zarqawi probably entered Iraq in the same period.

"Al-Zawahiri was summoned by Izza Ibrahim Al-Douri – then deputy head of the council of the leadership of the revolution - to take part in the congress, along with some 150 other Islamic figures from 50 Muslim countries," Allawi said.

According to Allawi, important information has been gathered regarding the presence of another key terrorist figure operating in Iraq - the Jordanian militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.

"The Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi entered Iraq secretly in the same period," Allawi affirmed, "and began to form a terrorist cell, even though the Iraqi services do not have precise information on his entry into the country," he said.

Allawi's remarks come after statements to al-Hayat by King Abdallah II of Jordan over Saddam's refusal to hand over al-Zarqawi to the authorities in Amman.

On this question Allawi said: ''The words of the Jordanian King are correct and important. We have proof of al-Zawahiri's visit to Iraq, but we do not have the precise date or information on al-Zarqawi's entry, though it is likely that he arrived around the same time."

In Allawi's view, Saddam's government "sponsored" the birth of al-Qaeda in Iraq, coordinating with other terrorist groups, both Arab and Muslim. "The Iraqi secret services had links to these groups through a person called Faruq Hajizi, later named Iraq's ambassador to Turkey and arrested after the fall of Saddam's regime as he tried to re-enter Iraq. Iraqi secret agents helped terrorists enter the country and directed them to the Ansar al-Islam camps in the Halbija area," he said.

The former prime minister claims that Saddam's regime sought to involve even Palestinian Abu Nidal - head of a group once considered the world's most dangerous terrorist organisation - in its terrorist circuit. Abu Nidal's organisation was responsible for terrorist attacks in some 20 countries, killing more than 300 people and wounding hundreds more.

He added that Abu Nidal's refusal to cooperate with Islamist groups was the reason for his death in Iraq, in the summer of 2002.

• In July 2004, the Senate Intelligence Committee released a bipartisan 500-page report that found numerous failures of intelligence gathering and analysis. As for the Bush Administration's role, "The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officials attempted to coerce, influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq's weapons of mass destruction," .

• The Butler Report, published by the British in July 2004, similarly found no evidence of "deliberate distortion," although it too found much to criticize in the quality of prewar intelligence.

• The March 2005 Robb-Silberman report on WMD intelligence was equally categorical, finding "no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. . . .analysts universally asserted that in no instance did political pressure cause them to skew or alter any of their analytical judgments. We conclude that it was the paucity of intelligence and poor analytical tradecraft, rather than political pressure, that produced the inaccurate pre-war intelligence assessments."

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

Without a hint of irony, Edith Lederer of The Associated Press reported June 3 that "U.N. satellite imagery experts have determined that material that could be used to make biological or chemical weapons and banned long-range missiles has been removed from 109 sites in Iraq."

WMD:

Duelfer report:

"ISG was unable to complete its investigation and is unable to rule out the possibility that WMD was evacuated to Syria before the war,"

"Whether Syria received military items from Iraq for safekeeping or other reasons has yet to be determined," he said. "There was evidence of a discussion of possible WMD collaboration initiated by a Syrian security officer, and ISG received information about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved. In the judgment of the working group, these reports were sufficiently credible to merit further investigation."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3872201.stm

al tuwaitha

US reveals Iraq nuclear operation
The US has revealed that it removed more than 1.7 metric tons of radioactive material from Iraq in a secret operation last month.

"This operation was a major achievement," said US Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham in a statement.
He said it would keep "potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists".
Along with 1.77 tons of enriched uranium, about 1,000 "highly radioactive sources" were also removed.
The material was taken from a former nuclear research facility on 23 June, after being packaged by 20 experts from the US Energy Department's secret laboratories.
It was flown out of the country aboard a military plane in a joint operation with the Department of Defense, and is being stored temporarily at a Department of Energy facility.

The United Nations nuclear watchdog - the International Atomic Energy Agency - and Iraqi officials were informed ahead of the operation, which happened ahead of the 28 June handover of sovereignty.

'Dirty bomb'?
The explosion of a so-called "dirty bomb" in a city by a terrorist group is a major concern of Western intelligence agencies.

Rather than causing a nuclear explosion, a "dirty bomb" would see radioactive material combined with a conventional explosive - probably causing widespread panic and requiring a large clean-up operation.
Uranium would not be suitable for fashioning such a device, though appropriate material may have been among the other unidentified "sources".

Mr Abraham added that the operation had also prevented the material falling into the hands "of countries that may seek to develop their own nuclear weapons".
The 1,000 "sources" evacuated in the Iraqi operation included a "huge range" of radioactive items used for medical purposes and industrial purposes, a spokesman for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration told AP news agency.
Bryan Wilkes said much of the material was "in powdered form, which is easily dispersed".

The IAEA has been among organisations which have warned that many countries have lost track of radioactive material.

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.