WMD COMMISSION REPORT: Bush did not lie.

[Bodacious]

Because of all the hate for America being posted on these boards, primarily stemming from the hatred of Bush, I decided I would destroy the pedestal on which these hatemongers stand to spew their bile.

This exerpt is from The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction.

These are errors--serious errors. But these errors stem from poor tradecraft and poor management. The Commission found no evidence of political pressure to influence the Intelligence Community's pre-war assessments of Iraq's weapons programs. As we discuss in detail in the body of our report, 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.

The report can be found here:

http://www.wmd.gov/about.html

If you download the PDF the quote is on pages 50-51 of the report, 66-67 of the PDF. Check it out so you can't say I am quoting out of context or something.

 

[short recoil]

I'll say "wmd.GOV" but nvm, whatever.....i don't care too much.

 

[Dynasty]

in all honesty i couldnt care either...its just when he makes stupid decisions that gets to me

 

[JellyWorld]

so bush is incompetent, not untruthful?

 

[The Mullinator]

so bush is incompetent, not untruthful?

I have only read that one quote. However it shows the intelligence community to have been the incompetent ones and Bush having made decisions based on the information they provided. There is only so much any president can do when they are being fed false information.

 

[CptStern]

I dont agree, the bush admin stated this before 9/11 ..how did they completely reverse their stance in less than a few months?


"In Cairo, on February 24 2001, Powell said: "He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.""


Powell even boasted that it was the US policy of "containment" that had effectively disarmed the Iraqi dictator - again the very opposite of what Blair said time and again. On May 15 2001, Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

 

[Dynasty]

well they were apparently imformed of 9/11 before it happened, and security wasnt even increased...i mean who doesnt take action when something as serious as this could happen regardless of the lack of proof???

also, the pentagon WASNT hit by a plane (unless the american airliners can travel around 10 metres above the ground, fly across a motorway over the speed of sound and blow through 5 blocks of the pentagon creating a small hole at the end...with NO evidence of airliner remains, not even jet fuel). and also ALL the video tapes of security cameras in the area were immediately taken by the FBI and have never been shown to this date...

it goes to show how much bush lies to his own 'great country'...

so the statement 'the enemy never stops thinking of ways to hurt our country...and neither do we' just seems that much more truthful doesnt it..?

 

[The Mullinator]

well they were apparently imformed of 9/11 before it happened, and security wasnt even increased...i mean who doesnt take action when something as serious as this could happen regardless of the lack of proof???

also, the pentagon WASNT hit by a plane (unless the american airliners can travel around 10 metres above the ground, fly across a motorway over the speed of sound and blow through 5 blocks of the pentagon creating a small hole at the end...with NO evidence of airliner remains, not even jet fuel). and also ALL the video tapes of security cameras in the area were immediately taken by the FBI and have never been shown to this date...

it goes to show how much bush lies to his own 'great country'...

so the statement 'the enemy never stops thinking of ways to hurt our country...and neither do we' just seems that much more truthful doesnt it..?

Considering they probably recieved and continue to recieve a constant barrage of threats from various sources talking about specific terrorist threats and potential attacks that never happen I suspect it can be forgiven to a degree. They probably heard of plenty of 9/11 style attacks before 9/11 happened and that probably had just as much credible information, yet never occured.

As for the plane hitting the pentagon how do you explain eye witness accounts from people on the free-way who say they actually saw the airliner hit?

 

[CptStern]

well they were apparently imformed of 9/11 before it happened, and security wasnt even increased...i mean who doesnt take action when something as serious as this could happen regardless of the lack of proof???

also, the pentagon WASNT hit by a plane (unless the american airliners can travel around 10 metres above the ground, fly across a motorway over the speed of sound and blow through 5 blocks of the pentagon creating a small hole at the end...with NO evidence of airliner remains, not even jet fuel). and also ALL the video tapes of security cameras in the area were immediately taken by the FBI and have never been shown to this date...

it goes to show how much bush lies to his own 'great country'...

so the statement 'the enemy never stops thinking of ways to hurt our country...and neither do we' just seems that much more truthful doesnt it..?

try to stick to facts instead of conspiracy theories. I'm all for criticsing US foreign policy but I wont do so using unsubstantiated claims

 

[Calanen]

well they were apparently imformed of 9/11 before it happened, and security wasnt even increased...i mean who doesnt take action when something as serious as this could happen regardless of the lack of proof???

also, the pentagon WASNT hit by a plane (unless the american airliners can travel around 10 metres above the ground, fly across a motorway over the speed of sound and blow through 5 blocks of the pentagon creating a small hole at the end...with NO evidence of airliner remains, not even jet fuel). and also ALL the video tapes of security cameras in the area were immediately taken by the FBI and have never been shown to this date...

it goes to show how much bush lies to his own 'great country'...

so the statement 'the enemy never stops thinking of ways to hurt our country...and neither do we' just seems that much more truthful doesnt it..?

Man you really need professional help.

1) How as the USA informed about 9/11 before it occured?

Give me one credible source that is not a conspiracy theorist rant on some looneys webpage.

2) The Pentagon was hit by a plane. To suggest otherwise is nonsense even if there are a 1000 webpages with conspiracy rants on them.

In fact a guy that my firm did business with was on the plane. The Metrocall Chief Operating Officer - Steven "Jake" Jacoby, 43, of Alexandria, Va.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2001/09/12/victim-capsule-flight77.htm

So he was in on the scam? Drove himself to the Pentagon, blew himself up and pretended he was on the plane? Or is he in hiding somewhere along with everyone else on the plane that apparently according to you did not fly into the Pentagon.

 

[Calanen]

Heres an eyewitness account of the plane hitting the Pentagon:

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0109/11/bn.32.html

http://criticalthrash.com/terror/identification.html

All of these eyewitnesses, from all different walks of life and background, all collaborated together to lie about a plane hitting the Pentagon, and them watching it? Thats pretty hard to believe.

 

[clarky003]

yes , the facts. Although it would be nice if oneday they could answer some very important questions, like wtf was that on the garden lawn tape (the only tape retrieved) at the pentagon... it didnt have the profile or size of an airliner, despite some peoples recollection of the event.

But I think the blessing here might have been that the airplane hit before it hit the building, it hit the ground

- .. there was no impact damage to the lawn.

and the ubsubstantiated claims from people with prior knowledge of the attacks .. that did coincide with odd behaviour in the upper ranks of government... the question's that should be asked... will they ever be asked? or are they too afraid of what the questions and public investigation's may lead to. Addressing details that are still unconfirmed at the time that sparked all this off.. is more important than a crusade for democracey in foreign land, It could uncover a conspirtial mess, it could uncover nothing atall.. it could be as plain as they tell it... but something should be done to find out externally atleast.

 

[CptStern]

ok can we just stick to the topic at hand and stop beating this "pentagon conspiracy" to death? Seriously, we're detracting from the real issues by concentrating on unsubstantiated claims ..facts not conjecture

 

[firemachine69]

*agreed*

The hell is up with bringing up the Pentagon into this?

 

[ComradeBadger]

ok can we just stick to the topic at hand and stop beating this "pentagon conspiracy" to death? Seriously, we're detracting from the real issues by concentrating on unsubstantiated claims ..facts not conjecture

Agreed.

Interesting article

CptStern, that quote is from 2001... fast-forward, and the intelligence find something that made them change their mind - if they suddenly think he's a threat..

 

[Bodacious]

To further ensure that this thread stays on topic, can you tell me who said the following?

And, a question for all you anti-war types and Bush haters, is the following, at least partially, a lie?

In 1991, Saddam Hussein invaded and occupied Kuwait, losing the support of the United States. The first President Bush assembled a global coalition, including many Arab states, and threw Saddam out after forty-three days of bombing and a hundred hours of ground operations. The U.S.-led coalition then withdrew, leaving the Kurds and the Shiites, who had risen against Saddam Hussein at our urging, to Saddam’s revenge.
As a condition for ending the conflict, the United Nations imposed a number of requirements on Iraq, among them disarmament of all weapons of mass destruction, stocks used to make such weapons, and laboratories necessary to do the work. Saddam Hussein agreed, and an inspection system was set up to ensure compliance. And though he repeatedly lied, delayed, and obstructed the inspections work, the inspectors found and destroyed far more weapons of mass destruction capability than were destroyed in the Gulf War, including thousands of chemical weapons, large volumes of chemical and biological stocks, a number of missiles and warheads, a major lab equipped to produce anthrax and other bio-weapons, as well as substantial nuclear facilities.
In 1998, Saddam Hussein pressured the United Nations to lift the sanctions by threatening to stop all cooperation with the inspectors. In an attempt to resolve the situation, the UN, unwisely in my view, agreed to put limits on inspections of designated “sovereign sites” including the so-called presidential palaces, which in reality were huge compounds well suited to hold weapons labs, stocks, and records which Saddam Hussein was required by UN resolution to turn over. When Saddam blocked the inspection process, the inspectors left. As a result, President Clinton, with the British and others, ordered an intensive four-day air assault, Operation Desert Fox, on known and suspected weapons of mass destruction sites and other military targets.
In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad.
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 Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.

 

[CptStern]

yes but it makes no sense:

Powell:

"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

"Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

Rice from the same source:

"Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

bush was ambigious pre-9/11

"He's been a menace forever, and we will do -- he needs to open his country up for inspection, so we can see whether or not he's developing weapons of mass destruction." - George Bush May 2001


but immediately after 9/11 the bush administration was saying that saddam definately had wmd

"He has weapons of mass destruction. The lesser risk is in pre-emption. We've got to stop wishing away the problem." - Richard Perl Nov 2001

 

[Bodacious]

Things change, new, alibet wrong, information was discovered about Saddam's WMD and that is why Rice and powell flip flopped.

Your question is what happened betweened then and the start of the invasion, correct?

Well, consider the possiblities.

1. Things change, new, alibet wrong, information was discovered about Saddam's WMD and that is why Rice and powell flip flopped.

2. It is all a vast right wing conspiracy to make haliburton rich and for bush to avenge his father's mistakes all the while giving the US an excuse to kill more arabs than they ever could before.

You decide which is more realistic, something changed or a crackpot conspiracy theroy. Occam's razor.

 

[gh0st]

how did they completely reverse their stance in less than a few months?

I dont understand -- John Kerry completely reversed his stance in less than a few DAYS and many times more than once.

 

[firemachine69]

One of the sole reasons Bush gets more of my support then Kerry...

 

[CptStern]

Things change, new, alibet wrong, information was discovered about Saddam's WMD and that is why Rice and powell flip flopped.

oh come on, how gullible do you expect me to be? where's the source that says Powell and Rice had misinformation ...it looks to me that bush had the "misinformation" not powell or rice

Your question is what happened betweened then and the start of the invasion, correct?

Well, consider the possiblities.

1. Things change, new, alibet wrong, information was discovered about Saddam's WMD and that is why Rice and powell flip flopped.

2. It is all a vast right wing conspiracy to make haliburton rich and for bush to avenge his father's mistakes all the while giving the US an excuse to kill more arabs than they ever could before.

utter waste of space nonsense

....in 3 short months the whole bush admin flipped on their intelligence? where are your sources on the new information that made powell reverse his earlier statements? ...did saddam's cronies work overtime to build an arsenal in 3 short months?

You decide which is more realistic, something changed or a crackpot conspiracy theroy. Occam's razor.

yes but occam's razor works against you ...the simplest explanation is: they lied. what else did you expect them to say? "oh we made a mistake, we're sorry so many people died because we didnt do our homework" it's called damage control bodacious


oh and you people who go on and on about kerry flipflopping ..I dont care in the least, I"M NOT PARTISAN.

 

[Bodacious]

yes but occam's razor works against you ...the simplest explanation is: they lied. what else did you expect them to say? "oh we made a mistake, we're sorry so many people died because we didnt do our homework" it's called damage control bodacious

Because they didn't lie, The WMD report proves this. We know they didn't lie, so the two possibilities I listed above are the only plausable ones. Tinfoil hat brigade or common sense, reason, and dash of reality?

 

[CptStern]

Because they didn't lie, The WMD report proves this. We know they didn't lie, so the two possibilities I listed above are the only plausable ones. Tinfoil hat brigade or common sense, reason, and dash or reality?

then why the huge factual error? 3 months before the propaganda started?

"Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

 

[Bodacious]

See post #18, I won't argue in circles.

 

[GiaOmerta]

It's all in the Bible.
Babylon shall rise again.

REPENT!

 

[ComradeBadger]

CptStern - they may have found something that made them THINK that what they had found BEFORE was wrong

Is that possible?

 

[CptStern]

sure it is, but dont you think after all the heat they got for finding nothing they would have made it public by now?

 

[GiaOmerta]

Sure, but if you say several *insert decissive weapon name* are unaccounted for. It's better to say they never existed.

 

[Tr0n]

]You decide which is more realistic, something changed or a crackpot conspiracy theroy. Occam's razor.

Ain't occam's razor a theory also?

It's bullshit just like the conspiracy theories.

Oh and every politician lies people....thats what they call politics.

 

[Direwolf]

The entire reason that the report exists is because the intelligence community had major problems. I'd figure that one of those problems could be the rapid changes in what their intelligence says, from everything to troop numbers to chemical weapons stores.
And unless Colin Powell or Condelezza Rice were out in Iraq snooping for weapons, I'm not going to blame them for bad info. At least until I see some proof that the bad intelligence is directly their fault.

 

[staticprimer]

I think that because the Bush administration was itching to pin something on Saddam to justify invasion, intelligence that would normally would have been under heavy scrutiny was accepted very readily. In other words, it was the fault of both the intelligence community and the government.

 

[Bodacious]

I think that because the Bush administration was itching to pin something on Saddam to justify invasion, intelligence that would normally would have been under heavy scrutiny was accepted very readily. In other words, it was the fault of both the intelligence community and the government.

But the WMD report in my initial post disproves what you just said.

 

[staticprimer]

Not at all. What I am saying is that the intelligence community gave their report to the administration, free from external pressure. Then, the Bush administration made the decision to go to war, influenced heavily by their pre-existant desire to do so. They didn't care if the information was accurate or not, as long as it was convincing, that way they could have the war justified and at the same time could maintain plausable deniability if things went wrong.

 

[Bodacious]

Not at all. What I am saying is that the intelligence community gave their report to the administration, free from external pressure. Then, the Bush administration made the decision to go to war, influenced heavily by their pre-existant desire to do so. They didn't care if the information was accurate or not, as long as it was convincing, that way they could have the war justified and at the same time could maintain plausable deniability if things went wrong.

I understand now. Thank you for clarifying.

 

[Hapless]

Well, I think it was Elvis, Jim Morrison and Janis Joplin. They all moved to South Africa and formed their own movement. Kurt Cobain is down there with them. Damn supposedly dead musicians.

 

[Direwolf]

Actually, Jim Morrison is still tied up watching out for Wayne and Garth.

 

[Calanen]

The question of weapons of mass destruction is a hard one to fathom. Certainly the US believed that Saddam was ready to use them in Iraq, otherwise it would not have risked its troops wearing MOP4 gear in 100 degree heat. Saddam had chemical weapons that he used on the Kurds. He had chemical weapons that he fired with reckless abandon on the Iranians.

What happened in the interim period? Its hard to know. It would have been very easy to move quantities of WMDs to other friendly states like Syria - as this site theorises about:

http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

Certainly there was precedent for this sort of action before. Saddam sent his airforce, or most of his airforce into Iran. He never got it back though,unfortunately.....

So for Saddam to load a few trucks full of his latest chemical weapons and send them into Lebanon or Syria would be easily accomplished. And all of the messing about with inspectors, stopping them from seeing certain factories, moving things and hiding things was done for some reason of concealment. What it was who can now say. It is however a rare dictator that spontaneously sees the light and disarms, while at the same time refusing weapons inspectors permission to see things, when it would have been in his interests to show them.

That said - there have been minor finds of WMDs - Iran/Iraq war error shells rigged as IEDs. Mobile laboratories and uranium was about. Certainly he could ramp up production to whatever he wanted to do reasonably quicklly. And he had proved he could - he used chemical weapons on the Kurds and the Iranians.

Some people also, aren't that bright:

Officials believe that the looters inhaled large quantities of the uranium and might have ingested some after converting the barrels for use as water and cooking oil storage containers, according to the report. One nearby resident who was involved in the looting was reported to have said that he tasted the uranium oxide concentrate because it looked pretty (Tsuyoshi Nojima, Asahi Shimbun, May 8).

http://www.nti.org/d_newswire/issues/thisweek/2003_5_14_womd.html

 

[el Chi]

Because of all the hate for America being posted on these boards, primarily stemming from the hatred of Bush, I decided I would destroy the pedestal on which these hatemongers stand to spew their bile.

Because you yourself categorically never:
1. Stand up on your high-horse.
2. Arrogantly rant bollocks from your soap-box whilst being reluctant, to say the least, to consider the possibility of anyone else holding valid opionions should they not match your own.
3. Spew bile because of the above two points.
4. Hatemonger and start arguments for the very sake of it.

Your unfailing, consistent hypocrisy is very tiring.

 

[Apos]

Because they didn't lie, The WMD report proves this.

Wow: Bush's own personally established commision exonerated him?! What are the odds of that happening?

 

[Apos]

I dont understand -- John Kerry completely reversed his stance in less than a few DAYS and many times more than once.

Robot... must... fathifully, repeat, what robot hears.... bleep bloop blop.