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 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 941 next last
To: Mind-numbed Robot
To say that Bush, as top man, is responsible for all the government does is also unrealistic.

What good is a President if he cannot take responsibility, for if he cannot take responsibility, how can he take credit?

Notice that I didn't say Bush, in this specific instance. I kept it general - for all you who are watching and salivating over the idea that I'm bashing Bush.

61 posted on 07/12/2003 1:32:03 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Why did you put up this thread when there are plenty of threads running on here starting with the Thompson bogus source with a lot of good information and discussion?

Why are you posting on this thread if you think it is so unimportant?

62 posted on 07/12/2003 1:32:11 PM PDT by Sparta (Tagline removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RJCogburn; Jim Noble
I agree. We know that there were WMDs and we need to know where they went to. Hopefully, that idiot Saddam really did destroy them thinking that his French, German, and Russian allies would protect him with the inspections and make us look bad. But I'm concerned that they're somewhere not in the hands of friendlies and we're paying the price of working with the UN.
63 posted on 07/12/2003 1:32:30 PM PDT by Chi-townChief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Scenic Sounds; Cathryn Crawford
CIA to WH: "The draft SotU says Hussein tried to buy uranium from Niger, the Brits have reported that but we've been unable to confirm it."

WH to CIA: "OK, so what if we say in the SotU that the British have reported that Hussein tried to buy uranium form Niger."

CIA to WH: "Well, that would be accurate. We just can't confirm it's true. It may turn out to be completely false."

WH to CIA: "OK, but will you sign of on the SotU if it says that the British are the ones reporting it?"

CIA to WH: "Yes."
64 posted on 07/12/2003 1:32:49 PM PDT by optimistically_conservative (Can't prove a negative? You're not stupid. Prove it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
The Clintons seeded the CIA, State Department, and every other government agency with Leftist/Socialist career civil servants, appointees, Senior Executive Service, etc. It will take at least a generation to clean it out — if the Democrats are kept out of power. That's the job of the voters.
65 posted on 07/12/2003 1:32:58 PM PDT by Consort
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
This is a vanity going after Director Tenet and that should have been disclosed -- funny how you anti-Bush folks think it is okay!

And BTW, yes she should disclose she is a member of the press when she makes the comment "press smells blood" because she is part of that press corps!
66 posted on 07/12/2003 1:33:36 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
How this forgery originated and who passed it on to the President cannot be ignored. There is a history. Clinton bombed an Aspirin factory because of faulty intelligence. To my knowledge no heads were rolled by Clinton. Why?

Bush may or may not have know it was a forgery. If he didn't know, he was victimized by some 'dupe the stupe' operation done by, as Rice calls them 'the bowels of government'. If we did know, someone must have him by the balls.

This is no longer about Saddam and the war. Unimpeded passing forged documents to the President and getting him to use them is no way to run the country. Bush is in charge or he isn't. Use some ex-lax on those bowels.

67 posted on 07/12/2003 1:34:56 PM PDT by ex-snook (American jobs need BALANCED TRADE. We buy from you, you buy from us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
you might want to disclose on that thread that you are a columinist for the Washington Dispatch!

Are you saying freepers are so dumb that they can't click on someone's profile page?

68 posted on 07/12/2003 1:35:10 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
To say that Bush, as top man, is responsible for all the government does is also unrealistic.

What good is a President if he cannot take responsibility, for if he cannot take responsibility, how can he take credit?

Cathryn, I have high hopes for you but if you can't see the vacuousness of that argument I am getting discouraged.

69 posted on 07/12/2003 1:37:50 PM PDT by Mind-numbed Robot (Not all things that need to be done need to be done by the government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
I'm glad you have stopped shouting

I sure didn't know she was a member of the press.

But of course you did....you found it right there for anyone to see who is interested.

BTW, the tactic of changing subjects from the matter at hand to who the messenger is reminds me of....?

70 posted on 07/12/2003 1:38:07 PM PDT by RJCogburn ("too thin, Rooster, too thin".....Lucky Ned Pepper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
You don't put up "the press smells blood" when you are member of that very press corps without disclosing that fact on the vanity.

Everyone that writes editorials is a member of the press? That's news to me.

71 posted on 07/12/2003 1:38:54 PM PDT by Sir Gawain (My other tagline is a Porsche)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom

Found this to be interesting and think some others may too -- from your homepage: I am a contributor and columnist for The Washington Dispatch.

Good job Inspector PhiKapMom.

Do you want Freepers to provide you comments for your next article so you can use to bash President Bush and/or CIA Director Tenet! I think before you put up another thread asking for opinions, you might want to disclose on that thread that you are a columinist for the Washington Dispatch! It is one thing to make comments on threads but another to put up a vanity saying the press smells blood when you are a member of the press.

I don't think she needs our help to write her columns. She does a good enough job writing her own damn columns.

72 posted on 07/12/2003 1:39:01 PM PDT by Sparta (Tagline removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Mind-numbed Robot
Cathryn, I have high hopes for you but if you can't see the vacuousness of that argument I am getting discouraged.

I see what you mean, but I was trying to dig a little deeper into the reasoning of that poster.

73 posted on 07/12/2003 1:39:11 PM PDT by Cathryn Crawford
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 69 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
funny how you anti-Bush folks think it is okay!

I don't like Bush, but some of you gals are in serious bunker mode and at times it's honestly distubing. Everything is us against "them", and everyone who doesn't play ball at every turn is "them". Because this chick didn't "disclose" that she writes for the media at the top of the article, you barge in and try to make her one of "them".

You gals don't even upset me anymore because a. you're for the most part nice most of the time and b. you're too loopy to view as a threatening.

Seriously.

74 posted on 07/12/2003 1:39:19 PM PDT by AAABEST
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: optimistically_conservative
You're not funny
75 posted on 07/12/2003 1:39:55 PM PDT by Sparta (Tagline removed by moderator)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: AAABEST
You are right! We don't know what we are talking about because we are women and support the President!

Sorry to have bothered you!
76 posted on 07/12/2003 1:40:39 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (Bush Cheney '04 - VICTORY IN '04 -- $4 for '04 - www.GeorgeWBush.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Why don't you do a little research and write a coulmn on why two former staff members(Joseph C. Wilson and Greg Thielmann) of Al Gore and Congressman John Culver D-Iowa decided this was the week to come forward with charges of lying by the Bush Admin. And you could ask why the ads the Democrats are showing were produced by a firm with ties to the DNC.
77 posted on 07/12/2003 1:40:49 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Dog
column
78 posted on 07/12/2003 1:41:07 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Let's be honest. The flap over Niger-Saddam-uranium is a red herring. It's given Democrats their first chance to attack the leadership of Commander In Chief Bush, their first chance to attack the integrity of President Bush. Man oh man, they are positively drooling with delight...a Terry McAuliffe wet dream.

The Nation editor, Katrina vanden Heuvel, is the only one who spews out the real plan: Convince the American people President Bush intentionally lied to them. On Hardball vanden Heuvel said; President Bush intentionally deceived the American people into supporting war. And she said; American soldiers are dying because of that deception.

Mainstream Democrats aren't that outrageous, but of course, that's the subliminal message they hope voters will take away from this lengthy dissection of one sentence in President Bush's State of the Union speech. A sentence that meant nothing at the time, and means even less 6 months later.

But thank goodness, Americans aren't stupid. If they remember the State of the Union speech at all, they remember President Bush courageously speaking to the world, to our enemies, and to hostile Democrat Senators who were thwarting him at every turn.

President Bush laundry listed the reasons why we had to take out Saddam Hussein. We might not have known whether Saddam got his uranium from Africa or Russia, but no one doubted Saddam Hussein intended to make nuclear weapons to use against us. No one doubted it then or now. That nuclear materials have been found hidden in a Baghdad rose garden proves the intent. Specific details of how Saddam planned to amass his Weapons of Mass Destruction wouldn't be bothering Democrats if Bill Clinton were president and he had made that speech.

Americans recognize this attack on one sentence, for what it is. An unwarranted, over-zealous, partisan attack on the president. When mainstream Democrat presidential contenders show their true colors, and openly join the vanden Heuvel chorus, President Bush's re-election will be secured.

79 posted on 07/12/2003 1:41:24 PM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cathryn Crawford
Bush takes responsibility for Tenet's agency's error, Tenet takes the hit, the statement had NO impact on the stated purposes of Iraqi regime change and this all goes away in short order.

To avoid the appearance of impropriety, Bush relieves Tenet of his duties and puts in a more competent person.

It all smacks of 'cover-up', but almost all of the cards are on the table now. There could be an Ace lurking though.
80 posted on 07/12/2003 1:41:29 PM PDT by ApesForEvolution ("The only way evil triumphs is if good men do nothing" E. Burke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-6061-8081-100 ... 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