Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Tenet Fiasco - Discussion Thread
self

Posted on 07/12/2003 12:52:33 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford

George Tenet's admission last night that it was his mistake that caused President Bush to use faulty intelligence in his State of The Union address is interesting at the same time as it is convienent. In the statement itself, which is lengthy and filled with reasons as to the intelligence failure, Tenet wholeheartedly takes responsility for his agency.

"Let me be clear about several things right up front. First, CIA approved the President's State of the Union address before it was delivered. Second, I am responsible for the approval process in my Agency. And third, the President had every reason to believe that the text presented to him was sound. These 16 words should never have been included in the text written for the President. "

On the face of it, this admission seems like the perfect solution to the growing problems for both the Bush and Blair administration. It's all CIA's fault, they can claim. But is that really viable?

On the face of it, perhaps. But Bush is the President. He has to take final responsibility, doesn't he?

If Bush can truly claim to know absolutely nothing, then don't we have a serious problem - wouldn't that imply that Bush is either incompetent or is simply not paying attention?

For discussion purposes - has Bush been conned by Tenet? And if he has, isn't that rather serious?

And if he wasn't conned by Tenet, what is the alternative?


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Government; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: attackedbyharpies; banningkeywords; skullofmush
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 941 next last
To: cyncooper
He admitted that the CIA screwed up.
541 posted on 07/12/2003 8:15:16 PM PDT by Dan from Michigan ("Crashed and Burned, eh gungrabbers?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 533 | View Replies]

To: Mo1; PhiKapMom
Also noted was the fact that Wilson NEVER provided a report

That part I found to be odd myself

In my link at #30 to Jack Straw's statement he does say they reviewed the reports filed by Wilson, so I do believe Wilson filed some report. I don't think for a second that Cheney's office directed Wilson personally to go or were apprised of his "findings" such as they were (they weren't conclusive, that's for sure), from the 2002 visit.

Most interesting is Jack Straw reveals that Wilson had an account of a 1999 incident that Wilson kind of "forgot" to include in his NY Times "piece" last week.

542 posted on 07/12/2003 8:15:47 PM PDT by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 241 | View Replies]

To: arasina
Uhhhhhhhhhhhhh, I don't have a clue what you're trying to say.

Whether it's fatigue or general thick-headedness, please spell it out either hereon or in a FREEPMAIL. Your choice.

Thanks.
543 posted on 07/12/2003 8:17:25 PM PDT by Quix (LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: arasina
If you're talking about avoiding enough personal details to avoid having China know who I am--I've probably long ago failed that need many times over. Will have to trust God with that while trying to not be toooooooooo overt or rub toooooo much in their face should I be able to go back in any capacity.

544 posted on 07/12/2003 8:20:30 PM PDT by Quix (LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Quix
If you're talking about avoiding enough personal details to avoid having China know who I am--I've probably long ago failed that need many times over.

Okay, that's it. Now you're scarin' me.

545 posted on 07/12/2003 8:25:29 PM PDT by DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 544 | View Replies]

To: onyx; PhiKapMom; Cathryn Crawford
"Take your complaints to PMK, but don't count on her to waste time on you. " part #2

Let's see, who do I want to waste their time on me..

A) Someone that waste alot of other's time, on a petty so-called problem or:

B) Someone that writes this:

http://www.washingtondispatch.com/article_5845.shtml

"Pro-abortionist women have hijacked the name of feminism for their own gain. What used to be a legitimate and worthy cause has now become something completely different. True feminists, women who believe in equal rights for all, not just themselves, need to take back the standing of feminism and have it again be something respectable and good. FFL is going a long way to correct some of the wrongs done in feminism's name, and for that they deserve our respect and support. As Serrin Foster, president of FFL, states, "Abortion is a reflection that we have not met the needs of women. Women deserve better than abortion."

I can't put it any better than that."

546 posted on 07/12/2003 8:29:58 PM PDT by Refinersfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
Let's go over this again. We didn't have "bad intelligence" about Niger. We couldn't verify what Britain had, and for their own intelligence reasons (read Jack Straw's comments in the other article) they did not give us their sources. Britain stands behind its statement.

Now, what President Bush said was that British intelligence tells us that Iraq sought uranium from Niger.

That is true. That is what Britain said. The CIA didn't have independent sources. How is this a screw-up?

The only thing they did was approve a sentence for which they had no independent verification. And the ONLY person who is contradicting this is Wilson, who somehow kept his opinion to himself for several months after the SOU speech.

Now, I am no George Tenet fan, but I fail to see what value will be gained by firing him for a judgement error by an underling, and it seems to me that you are paying way too much attention to the press who is spinning this story without facts.

547 posted on 07/12/2003 8:30:30 PM PDT by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 537 | View Replies]

To: huck von finn
From that link

"The U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency had raised those questions two weeks before the State of the Union address, saying Hussein claimed nonnuclear intentions for the tubes. In March, the IAEA said it found Hussein's claim credible, and could all but rule out the use of the tubes in a nuclear program."

Let me get this straight .. They asked Saddam what the tubes for for AND THEY BELIEVED HIM???

And .. I REALLY wish they would stop quoting annoymous sources

according to senior administration officials.

a former Bush administration official said

548 posted on 07/12/2003 8:30:30 PM PDT by Mo1 (Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 513 | View Replies]

To: Refinersfire
If I can't talk about cooking yellow cakes than you shouldn't be talking about abortion. (although I am anti-abortion bigtime)
549 posted on 07/12/2003 8:33:19 PM PDT by Lauratealeaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 546 | View Replies]

To: Pan_Yans Wife
This is going to calm down, but before it does, we get to see McCauliff and Hathaway make FOOLS of themselves, and they are the Clinton's lapdogs. This can't go on much longer, they are loosing their credibility, fast.

First .. what credibility did Clinton lapdogs have?

Sencond .. what makes you thing they realize this

550 posted on 07/12/2003 8:33:36 PM PDT by Mo1 (Please help Free Republic and Donate Now !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Maybe you aren't reading the same Cathryn Crawford I am.

Once your brain matures you and I will be reading the same Cathryn Crawford.

I think there's galactic differences between CAT and BABS.

Barbara Striesand is a euphemism for B.S., my observation of CAT's writing ability and choice of subject matter.

Just because one has "boobs and balls" doesn't make one correct.

If the kooks want to stir up the what Tenet knew and didn't tell GWB or GWB ignored Tenet, it won't amount to a hill of beans. One mistake in intel does not a scandal make.

Until Tony Blair comes out and says, "Yes we have no evidence of Saddam attempting to purchase nuke materials," CC's whole discussion thread is moot. Because as discussed numerous times on this thread, Mr. Blair still maintains he has evidence of Saddam trying to purchase these materials.

Has it never crossed your mind that the one and only bogus report (perhaps fabricated to give fodder to those just like you and CC) just might be the one Tenet is referring to.

Sorry, y'all will have to keep looking.

551 posted on 07/12/2003 8:35:23 PM PDT by BigWaveBetty (Beat me, whip me, make me vote for Ron Paul or Harry Browne or Alan Keyes or the nut du jour!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 429 | View Replies]

To: DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet
Scaring YOU about MY welfare?

Thanks. Very touching!

But hey, I've faced death several times.

The civil war that almost broke out wholesale at the time of Tienanmen was a scary time.

And China can be hyper sensitive just over petty PRIDE issues--claiming state secrets when it's just a leader's petty pride that got bruised.

But hey--if God allows and directs, I'd still go back knowing they could deduce fairly easily who I am from all my FR pontificating when I wasn't too thoughtful about the details I was sharing about my person or life. But the deeds are done on that score. God will have to protect me or I'll get to Heaven earlier than otherwise.

As St Paul said--to Live is Christ, to die is gain.

It's not as though this sin soaked world was getting better on it's own!

Times are a changing and I'm happy to take the first elevator UP!
552 posted on 07/12/2003 8:35:58 PM PDT by Quix (LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: Quix
Isn't it awful how the Chinese turn off the electricity all the time and everyone has to sleep in the dark and can't watch television?
553 posted on 07/12/2003 8:38:06 PM PDT by Lauratealeaf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 552 | View Replies]

To: Mo1
I didn't say they were credible. The issue I see is that once the facts all get shaken out, the Democrats are going to look bad for going after this so hard.

The Democrats can't be calling for Tenet's head, can they? A Clinton appointee? They can't stand up behind Wilson's scenario, without answering why Wilson was quiet for months, before contradicting what was in the SOTU speech.
They can't fault Tenet for not standing up and taking responsibility. They cannot run all of their myriad of attack ads, with Tenet taking the responsibility.

The are going to hit a brick wall, soon.
554 posted on 07/12/2003 8:38:20 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 550 | View Replies]

To: Lauratealeaf; onyx; PhiKapMom; Cathryn Crawford
While I can see your point of view. Mine was, that I don't worry if Mom won't waste her time on me, as I find Ms. Crawford's time of better value... :-)
555 posted on 07/12/2003 8:40:27 PM PDT by Refinersfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 549 | View Replies]

To: arasina
Fresh meat for the fight:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/945150/posts
556 posted on 07/12/2003 8:42:31 PM PDT by hoosiermama (Prayers for all)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 522 | View Replies]

To: Lauratealeaf
I give you permission to talk about yellow cake, abortion, China, anything that skewers the Democrats.

Reminds me of the annoying posts, generally at the beginning of the thread where there is usually a joke inserted. Damn, those are annoying.
557 posted on 07/12/2003 8:43:09 PM PDT by Pan_Yans Wife (Lurking since 2000.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 549 | View Replies]

To: Lauratealeaf
I suppose things are a lot better in most places now.

But when I was there, millions had a lot more to worry about than that.
558 posted on 07/12/2003 8:43:16 PM PDT by Quix (LIVE THREAD NOW STARTED. UFO special Tues eve & share opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 553 | View Replies]

To: BigWaveBetty
"Tony Blair"

When did Tony become a point man for being right.. the last I looked, he was invovled with Clinton, in his there-way politics my-way BS... And now he supports Bush, so I have to believe all is well, just because he says so... Sorry I don't buy that crock of horsesh**.. you know that strips and never changin thingy...
559 posted on 07/12/2003 8:45:56 PM PDT by Refinersfire
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 551 | View Replies]

To: Dan from Michigan
The buck stops with the lying leftie journalists, Dan. That's the only reason we're discussing this at all, IMO. They put out the little trial balloon, using a method observed to be effective during Hillary Clinton's work on the Nixon impeachment.
560 posted on 07/12/2003 8:47:15 PM PDT by arasina (I'm not sure if I really care for indecisive people. Maybe I do; maybe not.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 521-540541-560561-580 ... 941 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson