Skip to comments.
Expert Said to Tell Legislators He Was Pressed to Distort Some Evidence
New York Times ^
| 6/24/03
| JAMES RISEN and DOUGLAS JEHL
Posted on 06/25/2003 4:37:20 AM PDT by marvlus
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
1
posted on
06/25/2003 4:37:20 AM PDT
by
marvlus
To: marvlus
Mr. Westermann told lawmakers last week that while he felt pressure, he never actually changed the wording of any of his intelligence reports.
Whine Alert!
Sounds like Mr. Westermann might have his own agenda.
2
posted on
06/25/2003 4:45:33 AM PDT
by
TomGuy
To: marvlus
"The congressman does not comment on closed hearing information." Well, at least not until after leaking spurious, unsubstantiated BS that is not cross-examined. And they wonder why some of us hate them.
3
posted on
06/25/2003 4:46:54 AM PDT
by
jammer
To: marvlus
State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and ResearchState Department. He's not a real intelligence analyst. He's a Foggy Bottom PC hack hired by some leftist middle manager to toe the left-wing line. The Bush administration was probably just pressuring him to return to reality.
To: TomGuy
There's nothing here! He "felt pressure" that had nothing to do with Iraq. It is your typical Clintonista smear campaign in the NY Slimes.
5
posted on
06/25/2003 4:51:47 AM PDT
by
LarryM
To: TomGuy
Mr. Westermann told lawmakers last week that while he felt pressure, he never actually changed the wording of any of his intelligence reports. This part of the article got my attention too!
6
posted on
06/25/2003 4:57:13 AM PDT
by
marvlus
To: TomGuy
Mr. Westermann told lawmakers last week that while he felt pressure, he never actually changed the wording of any of his intelligence reports.So now we are going to condem Bush for lying because of what this snooty asswipe feels?
To: marvlus
Coming from such a dubious source of known liers (NYT) I'll wait to hear the report from someone credible.
8
posted on
06/25/2003 5:02:41 AM PDT
by
evad
(The pfrench..double-crossing..It's WHAT they do, it's ALL they do and they WON'T stop...EVER!!)
To: sirchtruth
So what is he?
Victim of abuse of power...
Or hero because he withstood the pressure from the executive branch.
9
posted on
06/25/2003 5:06:08 AM PDT
by
carton253
(You are free to form your own opinions, but not your own facts.)
To: marvlus
What does "felt pressure" mean? A while back it was reported that some intelligence people "felt pressure" simply because Dick Cheney spent some time in their offices.
10
posted on
06/25/2003 5:07:35 AM PDT
by
alnick
To: All
Just what does "overstating" mean?? There is the possibility that Saddam will have nuclear weapons in 6 months, 6 years?? What's the difference. Either way, the games have begun.
Evidence???....SADDAM IS THE EVIDENCE...His mere existence is the threat. Thousand of dead Iraqis, Iranians and Kuwaitis are the evidence. He is a mass murderer who has used WMD before WHILE THE WORLD WATCHED!!!!!!
Even the smallest nuclear weapon would be devastating. Anthrax...we already know the lessons of a one ounce packet of Anthrax.
11
posted on
06/25/2003 5:10:58 AM PDT
by
Sacajaweau
(God Bless Our Troops!!)
To: marvlus
He never actually changed the wording of any of his intelligence reports.
That should have been the end of it. I soppose there is a lot of wasted time to be spent to stop this whining reoprt that has NO evidence and NO purpose other than wasting time.
12
posted on
06/25/2003 5:18:23 AM PDT
by
chiefqc
To: marvlus
An administration official said that Mr. Westermann had clashed repeatedly with Mr. Bolton. A State Department official sympathetic to Mr. Bolton's views said of Mr. Westermann, "He doesn't have anything that he can point to, and he doesn't have anything more recent than Cuba." That official added, "We're in a period where people are looking for particular evidence of intelligence being altered, and he's talking about mood swings."
But other administration officials said there had been ongoing tensions between the two since the Cuban issue first came up, to the point that Mr. Bolton has unsuccessfully sought to have Mr. Westermann reassigned.
Can you say axe to grind? At least the NY Times got around to the crux of the matter, even if it was in the last three paragraphs.
13
posted on
06/25/2003 5:26:51 AM PDT
by
randita
To: chiefqc
That should have been the end of it. I soppose there is a lot of wasted time to be spent to stop this whining reoprt that has NO evidence and NO purpose other than wasting time. Precisely. The guy is in his 40s (Klintonista?), works for a small, but important office in the State Department, and now is whining because he felt pressured. Any guesses at his party affiliation?
14
posted on
06/25/2003 5:28:17 AM PDT
by
Carolina
To: alnick
What does "felt pressure" mean? I felt pressure after I ate beans last night. That sounds like the same thing this guy is talking about.
To: Thane_Banquo
State Department. He's not a real intelligence analyst. He's a Foggy Bottom PC hack hired by some leftist middle manager to toe the left-wing line.Ding Ding! We have a winner!
16
posted on
06/25/2003 5:33:57 AM PDT
by
cardinal4
(The Senate Armed Services Comm; the Chinese pipeline into US secrets)
To: marvlus
A top State Department expert on chemical and biological weapons told Congressional committees in closed-door hearings last week that he had been pressed to tailor his analysis on Iraq and other matters to conform with the Bush administration's views, several Congressional officials said today.
He did not immediately provide lawmakers with details about his complaints, and it remains uncertain the degree to which his concerns related to Iraq or other regional issues.
Administration officials said his most specific complaints concerned issues related to intelligence on Cuba, and he has not yet provided similar specific complaints about the handling of intelligence on Iraq.
The above contradict each other. If the title for the thread is the NYTimes own title, it was meant to mislead. Many people only scan newspapers and read the titles and first few paragraphs. The newspapers know this and bury the truth further in the article so they can point to it when someone calls them on it.
To: marvlus
"A number of analysts ...were angered that senior Bush administration officials ... making it seem as if there was an imminent threat to the United States." Their attempts to take the heat off themselves and blame Bush won't fly.
Here are President Bush' own words (in his most recent State of the Union address this year before we toppled Saddam):
"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?"
18
posted on
06/25/2003 6:09:54 AM PDT
by
Matchett-PI
(Marxist DemocRATS, Nader-Greens, and Religious KOOKS = a clear and present danger to our Freedoms.)
To: marvlus
A State Department official sympathetic to Mr. Bolton's views said of Mr. Westermann, "He doesn't have anything that he can point to, and he doesn't have anything more recent than Cuba."Cuba? I thought this was about Iraq. Hmmm, not a misleading headline is it?
19
posted on
06/25/2003 6:12:52 AM PDT
by
eyespysomething
(Breaking down the stereotypes of soccer moms everyday!)
To: marvlus
A state department official. That is how Newt begins to look good. These folks never shut up and they leak like an old chevy radiator.
20
posted on
06/25/2003 6:38:29 AM PDT
by
q_an_a
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-24 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson