Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Neocon who wrote (105762)	7/16/2003 9:40:09 AM
From: epicure	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

C.I.A. Chief to Face Panel on Dubious Iraq Data By JAMES RISEN and DAVID E. SANGER WASHINGTON, July 15 — George J. Tenet, the director of central intelligence, is expected to testify before a Senate panel on Wednesday about the reliability of intelligence indicating Iraq tried to obtain uranium, as administration officials raised new concerns about information his agency gave the White House on the matter last fall. On Oct. 1, the nation's intelligence agencies circulated to senior administration officials and to Congress a classified "National Intelligence Estimate" that described how Iraq might have been seeking uranium in Niger, Somalia and Congo. That reference has become the center of a controversy. According to White House and some intelligence officials, four days after the report was issued and was in the hands of a number of lawmakers, Mr. Tenet called a Bush aide and asked that any reference to allegations that Iraq had sought to obtain 500 metric tons of uranium yellowcake in Niger be removed from a speech President Bush was to give in Cincinnati. That is a central question Mr. Tenet appears likely to face in the closed session with the Senate select committee on intelligence on Wednesday. The warning, administration officials said, came in several phone calls to the deputy national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley. Mr. Tenet told Mr. Hadley that the C.I.A. was not sure about the credibility of the information. The White House, asked tonight whether Mr. Hadley had read the National Intelligence Estimate before Mr. Tenet warned him that the section on Niger might be unreliable, declined to comment. But one administration official said that it appeared that Mr. Hadley had not read the report before he spoke with Mr. Tenet, or finished reviewing the Cincinnati speech. While that call was disclosed last weekend, White House officials were asking today why the information about uranium from Niger had been published in the intelligence estimate at all. The White House has said repeatedly over the past eight days that the estimate was one of the reports that they relied upon as evidence that Iraq had a global program to get an atomic weapon in the president's State of the Union speech. "This report was supposed to be the gold standard of our intelligence about Iraq," said one senior administration official. Asked why the agency backed away from it days after it was circulated, the official replied, "Who knows?" C.I.A. officials explain the discrepancy by saying that classified intelligence reports sometimes include information that does not necessarily rise to the level of certainty required of a public address by the president. The report contained a footnote that made clear that there were doubts at the State Department about the uranium evidence. "It's one thing to have information in a classified document with caveats and footnotes, and another to have the president flatly assert something," an intelligence official said. Intelligence officials have also said that the intelligence estimate, which provided an overview assessment of the status of Iraq's programs to develop weapons of mass destruction, was put together hastily and only at the request of Senate Democrats, who wanted to see the report before they voted on a war resolution. The document was assembled in just three weeks, "record time" said one official, who added that it included imprecise language on the Niger uranium reports. C.I.A. officials now acknowledge that the estimate should have included more complete caveats about the quality of the information. The C.I.A.'s inspector general has begun an investigation of the C.I.A.'s handling of the Niger information, officials said. When Mr. Tenet arrives on Capitol Hill on Wednesday, he may encounter suspicion from conservative Republicans who charge he has undermined the president and from liberal Democrats who say his warnings underscore the degree to which the White House sought to twist information to fit its arguments. Democrats sought today to keep the pressure on President Bush, saying the issue extended beyond the statement over the uranium, which Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, a Democrat, said had been "calculated to create a false impression." "Even more troubling," he added, "is the fact that the uranium statement appears to be but one of a number of questionable statements and exaggerations by the intelligence community and administration officials that were issued in the buildup to the war." Mr. Levin has pressed for a more open inquiry into the use of American intelligence leading up to the war. Looting at Iraqi Nuclear Site UNITED NATIONS, July 15 — Looting at the Tuwaitha nuclear power complex in Iraq was less damaging than initially feared, the International Atomic Energy Agency reported to the United Nations Security Council in a letter dated July 14. The I.A.E.A. inspected the complex last month and reported that about 10 kilograms of "uranium compounds" remained unaccounted for, adding, "The quantity and type of uranium compounds dispersed are not sensitive from a proliferation point of view." The letter did not address what use might be made of the missing material.

To: Neocon who wrote (105762)	7/17/2003 12:56:56 AM
From: Bilow	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Hi Neocon; Still no quote from Blix saying that he "thought" that Iraq had WMDs? Glad to see that you're searching high and low for such a quote. Re your sad misquote: "He says of the Iraqis: "They cheated, they retreated, they changed figures, they denied access, etc. Why was that if they didn't have anything really to conceal?..."" What a liar. your "..." leaves off the meat of Blix's quote: "I have speculations, one could be pride," he said." There you have it, you loser. Instead of finding Blix saying that he thought that the Iraqis had WMDs, you've found a quote from Blix giving an alternative explanation. Jesus weeps! If this isn't the perfect example of winnowing the data to eliminate the stuff that disagrees with you. Re: "Blix thought that Saddam was inherently dangerous ..." Your point? Re: "... and speaks approvingly of his ouster." This is not the same as saying that Blix was in favor of a war to oust Saddam. If Saddam had been struck by lightning, Blix (and most of the world) would have spoke approvingly of that, too. *As usual, you take every bit of evidence in favor of what you want to believe and blithely ignore everything else.* Here's what Blix said about the timing of the war (as opposed to Saddam's "ouster"), from the same source you're quoting: "Blix said his inspectors should have been given more time." You failed to quote this zinger: "Nevertheless, he was critical of intelligence his teams received from the United States and other countries before the war began, saying the information was "not very good ... and that shook me a bit."" Look. It's clear now that you've searched high and low and still haven't found a single quote from Blix where he expresses the opinion that Iraq was hiding WMDs. I suspect that you truly believe that such a quote exists. You're so full of yourself, so sure of your logic, that you can't imagine how any thinking person could have an opinion different from yours. So you're sure that yes, you must have seen that Blix quote somewhere. Go face reality. Blix never said that Iraq probably had WMDs. For that matter, it turned out that Iraq didn't have any WMDs. They, along with the nonexistent Blix quote, was all in your defective head. -- Carl