Bush's CIA Critic Claim Exposed as Untrue (More CIA Attempts to Undermine Bush and Sell Books)

NewsMax ^ | 09/13/06 | Ronald Kessler

[MikeA]

WASHINGTON -- In a "60 Minutes" interview on April 23, Tyler Drumheller, a former chief of the CIA's Europe division, made a sensational charge.

He claimed that President Bush and his White House ignored intelligence before the invasion of Iraq indicating that Saddam Hussein had no had weapons of mass destruction.

On the CBS-TV show, and in subsequent media interviews that appeared throughout the world, Drumheller said that the White House was excited about the fact that the CIA was getting information straight from Naji Sabri, the then Iraqi foreign minister. But when the White House found out this source was reliably saying that Saddam had no WMD, Bush and his White House weren't interested.

"He [Sabri] told us that they had no active weapons of mass destruction program," Drumheller told correspondent Ed Bradley in a segment called "A Spy Speaks Out."

"So in the fall of 2002, before going to war, we had it on good authority from a source within Saddam's inner circle that he didn't have an active program for weapons of mass destruction?" Bradley asked.

"Yes," Drumheller said, proclaiming himself outraged.

According to Drumheller, Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, and National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice brushed aside the CIA report on what Sabri had to say because "the policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy."

Drumheller saw "how the Bush administration time and time again welcomed intelligence that fit the president's determination to go to war and turned a blind eye to intelligence that did not," Ed Bradley said in the introduction to the "60 Minutes" piece.

Now it appears Drumheller's claim was untrue, according to the findings of a Senate Select Committee on Intelligence investigation. Rather than undercutting the Bush administration's rationale for invading Iraq, Sabri's account shows how well-founded the intelligence on Saddam's weapons program appeared to be.

Ironically, just as Drumheller claimed that Bush ignored the truth about Iraq, the media have ignored the documentation in the Senate report demolishing Drumheller's claim.

An addenda to the Senate report on postwar findings about Iraq's WMD program says all the operational documents relating to Sabri indicate he told the CIA just the opposite of what Drumheller claimed. The Senate report refers to Sabri as a source with direct access to Saddam Hussein and his inner circle but does not name him.

"Both the operations cable and the intelligence report prepared for high-level policy-makers [based on interrogation of the source] said that while Saddam Hussein did not have a nuclear weapon, ‘he was aggressively and covertly developing such a weapon,'" the Senate report said.

The documents said "Iraq was producing and stockpiling chemical weapons," according to the addendum, signed by Sens. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., Orrin G. Hatch, R-Utah, and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga. Iraq's weapon of last resort was mobile launched chemical weapons, which would be fired at enemy forces and Israel, the CIA documents said.

Moreover, there is "not a single document relating to this case which indicates that the source said Iraq had no WMD programs," the addenda said. "On the contrary, all of the information about this case so far indicates that the information from this source was that Iraq did have WMD programs."

What the source said was consistent with the CIA's October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate, the report said. The report added: "The committee is still exploring why the former chief/EUR's public remarks differ so markedly from the documentation."

At least 134 stories and TV shows have referred to Drumheller's claims and his criticism of the CIA and Bush administration in general. One of the stories ran as the second lead of the June 25, 2006 Washington Post.

"Warnings on WMD ‘Fabricator' Were Ignored, Ex-CIA Aide Says," the headline over the Post story said. According to the story, Drumheller was dumbfounded when he saw a classified version of the speech Secretary of State Colin Powell was about to give to the United Nations citing Iraq's biological weapons factories on wheels. Drumheller claimed he had warned George Tenet, the director of Central Intelligence, in a phone call, and John McLaughlin, the deputy director, in a personal meeting that the source for that claim, code-named Curveball, was a fabricator.

Not until the 32nd paragraph of the Post story did the reader learn that both Tenet and McLaughlin said they had no recollection of warnings Drumheller allegedly gave them. Both men said they would have taken immediate action if he had.

While two former CIA officials said they recalled Drumheller telling them at the time about warnings he allegedly gave McLaughlin, no meeting with Drumheller appeared on McLaughlin's official calendar, according to the report of the Commission on Intelligence Capabilities of the U.S. Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, known as the Silverman-Robb commission. Carroll & Graf is publishing Drumheller's book, "On the Brink: How the White House Has Compromised American Intelligence," written with Elaine Monaghan, on Sept. 28, according to the Amazon listing. The publisher's Web site lists the publication date as this winter.

Neither Drumheller nor a Carroll & Graf spokesperson responded to messages seeking comment.

So far, no media outlet has run the Senate committee's addendum demolishing Drumheller's claim that Bush and his White House did not want to hear the truth about whether Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

Ronald Kessler is Chief Washington Correspondent for NewsMax.com. Get his dispatches FREE sent you via e-mail – Click Here Now.

[MikeA]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell you that the media isn't rushing to correct the record on this story like they're always so quick to do to counter anyone exposing a Democrat, like their attempts to smear the Swift Boat vets.

But let me guess, this filthy traitor is a Clinton hold over at the CIA...

For any who might try to diminish the credibility of this information by attacking the source, Ronald Kessler is a highly reputable journalist who has written several best selling books that exposed government malfeasance, including at the CIA and FBI. He has written exposes of presidents from both parties and has not always been conservative or pro-Republican. He is a former investigative journalist at the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. He's won 16 journalistic awards including 2 George Polk awards.

[icwhatudo]

The claim was he said "no WMD".

The article says he said the opposite, (implying he said they did have WMD) but then uses the term "WMD programs".

Possible he said "no WMD but has WMD programs"?.

I'm all for the point you are making, just want to make sure it isn't a wording deal.

[oolatec]

So if the guy in the report is unnamed, how do we really know it was Sabri?

[GodfearingTexan]

i doubt the entire article is based off of confusion to the wording.

[endthematrix]

"no active nuclear program" was the way I read that. there's the CBS trans and video link below too. Guy has yellowcake up his tail cuz his intel was passed over by POTUS...



http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/04/21/60minutes/main1527749.shtml

[SandRat]

Take a look at what Mike found

[knews_hound]

bttt

[FlingWingFlyer]

Clintonistas in the CIA. I hope we've weeded the majority of them out.

[MHGinTN]

"So far, no media outlet has run the Senate committee's addendum demolishing Drumheller's claim ..." Golly gee, I thought Timmy Rustbucket and Chrissy democrat hissy Matthews would be all over this, to defend the president. Oh, that's right, I forgot, they serve the democrat party not the nation. Seditious, selective, lying, sycophantic bastards.

[raftguide]

Wasn't it CBS on 60 Minutes that stated W shirked his guard responsibilities? If so, then nothing they say is credible. I smell another D Rather unhinging.

[Free Vulcan]

self-ping

[Free Vulcan]

Fox news, Rush, Hannity, Mike Reagan?

[endthematrix]

Don't know if this posted to FR yet...


CIA Learned in '02 That Bin Laden Had No Iraq Ties, Report Says
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/14/AR2006091401545.html

[Stallone]

The War on Terror begins with Democrats and the Liberal Media.

Terror is ineffective without the domestic sycophants and complicit political and media traitors.

Do your part: destroy Liberal Media and Democrats with extreme prejudice.

[Dilbert56]

This highlights the weakness of the recent Senate "report". This guy said there was no link to AQ and that Saddam had WMD. The Senate "report" quotes him on the first piece and ignores the second.

The Senate Select Committee on "Intelligence" have:

1. Castigated the intelligence community for ignoring intelligence that didn't fit preconcieved notions.
2. Criticized them for relying too much on the word of people who had reasons to lie, like the ANC.
3. Its Democrats have criticized the Administration for "cherry-picking" data to support their conclusions. They do this publicly but had nothing in their reports to support that charge.

This report then:

1. Ignores all intelligence except the NIE input. It concludes no Saddam AQ link. To do so it has to ignore an entire decade of published reports in the media, the intelligence community and the entire world. They have to ignore the Iraqi Perspective Project conclusions. They have to ignore the documents translated after the fall of Saddam. They have to a priori dismiss any other documents that may arise. They embody the notion of ignoring evidence that doesn't fit a preconcieved notion.
2. They take the word of Saddam Hussein and Tariq Aziz to support their conclusions! That's right. The Intelligence Community are scum for listening to the ANC and defectors but they've found their touchstone in Saddam and his Foreign Minister. They are doing the same thing they criticize the CIA for only they are taking the word of proven liars rather than just suspects.
3. They take the parts of the ISG reports that fit their conclusions and leave out the portions that contradict them. For example, the ISG noted that former Iraqi officials had good reason to lie rather than admit complicity in war crimes. This report is the poster child for "cherry picking".

The latest Senate "report" is a sick, sick joke perpetrated at taxpayer expense. It is riddled with contradictions. It's focus is so narrow (NIE inputs only, thank you) so as to be worthless. It's conclusions are, however, portrayed as sweeping. Hagel and Collins should be booted off the Committee for allowing this to happen.

[bmwcyle]

The Kurds just fell over dead by themselves. /sarcasm

[MikeA]

Another intelligence miss by the CIA if they're claiming no Saddam-Al Qaeda ties when Saddam's own files, and a mountain of circumstancial and factual evidence all indicate he did.