SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (466241)9/28/2003 9:28:40 PM
From: John Chen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
Victor,re:"Jimmy Carter.. 17% mortgage".. Your children
will say: 'my parents were paying 500K+ for a piece of
shit...' .. it only cost us a 100k for this beautiful
dream house. same good deal.



To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (466241)9/28/2003 9:30:41 PM
From: BlackDog777  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
"In fact, the Russians disrespected Carter so much they invaded Afghanistan under his watch, as they knew he would sit by and do nothing, and that is just what Carter did. Nothing."

Oh he did something...he screwed about 150 hard-working US athletes from participating in a life-long dream of the Olympic games!



To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (466241)9/28/2003 9:44:03 PM
From: stockman_scott  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769670
 
House Probers Conclude Iraq War Data Was Weak

By Dana Priest
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, September 28, 2003; Page A01

Leaders of the House intelligence committee have criticized the U.S. intelligence community for using largely outdated, "circumstantial" and "fragmentary" information with "too many uncertainties" to conclude that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al Qaeda.

Top members of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which spent four months combing through 19 volumes of classified material used by the Bush administration to make its case for the war on Iraq, found "significant deficiencies" in the community's ability to collect fresh intelligence on Iraq, and said it had to rely on "past assessments" dating to when U.N. inspectors left Iraq in 1998 and on "some new 'piecemeal' intelligence," both of which "were not challenged as a routine matter."

"The absence of proof that chemical and biological weapons and their related development programs had been destroyed was considered proof that they continued to exist," the two committee members said in a letter Thursday to CIA Director George J. Tenet. The Washington Post obtained a copy this weekend.

The letter constitutes a significant criticism of the U.S. intelligence community from a source that does not take such matters lightly. The committee, like all congressional panels, is controlled by Republicans, and its chairman, Rep. Porter J. Goss (R-Fla.), is a former CIA agent and a longtime supporter of Tenet and the intelligence agencies. Goss and the committee's ranking Democrat, Rep. Jane Harman (Calif.), signed the letter. Neither was available for comment yesterday. The full committee has not voted on the letter's conclusions.

The CIA, through spokesman Bill Harlow, disputed the conclusions and accused the panel of not conducting "a detailed inquiry on this study."

"The notion that our community does not challenge standing judgments is absurd."

"To attempt to make such a determination so quickly and without all the facts is premature and wrong," Harlow said. "Iraq was an intractable and difficult subject. The tradecraft of intelligence rarely has the luxury of having black-and-white facts. The judgments reached, and the tradecraft used, were honest and professional -- based on many years of effort and experience."

The committee's letter said the buildup to the war in Iraq amounted to "a case study" of the CIA's and other agencies' inability to gather credible intelligence from informants in Iraq or to employ technologies to detect weapons programs.

"Lack of specific intelligence on regime plans and intentions, WMD, and Iraq's support to terrorist groups appears to have hampered the IC's [intelligence community's] ability to provide a better assessment to policymakers from 1998 through 2003," the letter said.

The administration based its argument for going to war on the dangers allegedly posed by Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs and its supposed ties to al Qaeda. The Goss-Harman letter may give ammunition to critics who say the administration overstated the threat posed by then-Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.

The committee became concerned about the underlying intelligence on Iraq when U.S. forces failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and when President Bush admitted he should not have used discredited intelligence in January's State of the Union speech to suggest that Iraq had sought to buy uranium from an African nation.

The committee reviewed the underlying information used by U.S. intelligence agencies to write a classified October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq. The NIE was the most comprehensive assessment of Iraq available to lawmakers before the war, and many based their approval of Bush's war resolution on it.

The letter acknowledges one sharp difference between the two committee leaders. Harman, the letter indicated, believes the NIE judgments "were deficient with regard to the analysis and presentation." Goss believes the judgments were not deficient and were properly couched to reflect the incomplete nature of the intelligence. A congressional source said Goss "does not believe that [the intelligence] community's judgments were inaccurate."

As to Iraq's ties to terrorists, the committee scrutinized three volumes of data and found "substantial gaps" in credible information from human sources that would have allowed U.S. intelligence agencies "to give policymakers a clear understanding of the nature of the relationship." Instead, the agencies had a "low threshold" or "no threshold" on using information the intelligence community obtained on Iraq's alleged ties to al Qaeda.

"As a result, intelligence reports that might have been screened out by a more rigorous vetting process made their way to the analysts' desks, providing ample room for vagary to intrude," the letter states. The agencies did not clarify which of their reports "were from sources that were credible and which were from sources that would otherwise be dismissed in the absence of any other corroborating intelligence."

Goss and Harman were particularly critical of the underlying intelligence used to conclude that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program.

"Our examination has identified the relatively fragile nature of this information," the letter states. It notes internal intelligence agency disputes about whether Iraq attempted to buy high-strength aluminum tubes that could be used in nuclear weapons manufacture, and points out the dual-use nature of equipment in other attempted purchases cited in the NIE.

Moreover, Goss and Harman dispelled the assertion, made frequently by administration officials, that they possess more concrete information about Iraq's nuclear intention but are unable to disclose it because it remains classified. "We have not found any information in the assessments that are still classified that was any more definitive," the two wrote Tenet.

On this point, the letter said the committee "had reviewed extensively the allegations that there was a disconnect between public statements by administration officials and the underlying intelligence."

The letter continued: "We do believe . . . that if public officials cite intelligence incorrectly, the IC [intelligence community] has a responsibility to go back to that policymaker and make clear that the public statement mischaracterized the available intelligence." It does not say whether Tenet fulfilled that responsibility.

© 2003 The Washington Post Company



To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (466241)9/28/2003 11:34:14 PM
From: Cogito  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
>>In fact, the Russians disrespected Carter so much they invaded Afghanistan under his watch, as they knew he would sit by and do nothing, and that is just what Carter did. Nothing.<<

Victor -

I guess by "nothing" you mean he didn't do anything militarily. Seems you conservatives believe that if a president does anything that doesn't involve explosives it doesn't count.

What should Carter have done? Should he have sent 250,000 troops to Afghanistan to push back the Soviets? Remember that the Soviet Union had a large nuclear arsenal. Seems that responding to their aggression cautiously, as opposed to setting of World War III, made sense.

I notice Bush is treading very lightly with North Korea, and they only have a few nukes at most.

Bush likes to swagger a lot, but he's meek as a mouse if his opponent has The Bomb.

Bush is going to be the first president since Hoover to preside over an economy that yields a net loss of jobs during his term of office. In California, the Governor is being recalled because the state went from having a huge surplus to a 38 billion dollar deficit in three years. The federal government has also gone from a surplus to a deficit. So what's the difference?

Well, for one thing, the most recent California state budget goes a long way toward closing the budget gap. But the federal budget gap just keeps on widening.

Carter may not have been the best president ever, but he didn't lie to us. Bush is going to be recalled in '04, and he richly deserves it.

- Allen



To: Victor Lazlo who wrote (466241)9/29/2003 1:14:51 AM
From: Skywatcher  Respond to of 769670
 
That OLD arguement just doesn't hold OIL.....it was the oil embargo that got the ball rolling....and guess what?
The OIL CARTEL is STILL DICTATING what the hell goes on.....all these years and we're still on the oil syringe.
It's really pathetic. And with the oil boyz in the white house....it will continue to the detriment of this nation and the world. It's the basic reason we're in Iraq anyway....the reasons given are fake.
They're incredible hubris is now going to be their downfall
Bush Administration Is Focus of Inquiry
By Mike Allen and Dana Priest
Washington Post

Sunday 28 September 2003

CIA Agent's Identity Was Leaked to Media

At CIA Director George J. Tenet's request, the Justice Department is looking into an allegation that
administration officials leaked the name of an undercover CIA officer to a journalist, government sources
said yesterday.

The operative's identity was published in July after her husband, former U.S. ambassador Joseph C.
Wilson IV, publicly challenged President Bush's claim that Iraq had tried to buy "yellowcake" uranium
ore from Africa for possible use in nuclear weapons. Bush later backed away from the claim.

The intentional disclosure of a covert operative's identity is a violation of federal law.

The officer's name was disclosed on July 14 in a syndicated column by Robert D. Novak, who said
his sources were two senior administration officials.

Yesterday, a senior administration official said that before Novak's column ran, two top White House
officials called at least six Washington journalists and disclosed the identity and occupation of
Wilson's wife. Wilson had just revealed that the CIA had sent him to Niger last year to look into the
uranium claim and that he had found no evidence to back up the charge. Wilson's account touched off
a political fracas over Bush's use of intelligence as he made the case for attacking Iraq.


"Clearly, it was meant purely and simply for revenge," the senior official said of the alleged leak.

Sources familiar with the conversations said the leakers were seeking to undercut Wilson's
credibility. They alleged that Wilson, who was not a CIA employee, was selected for the Niger mission
partly because his wife had recommended him. Wilson said in an interview yesterday that a reporter
had told him that the leaker said, "The real issue is Wilson and his wife."

A source said reporters quoted a leaker as describing Wilson's wife as "fair game."

The official would not name the leakers for the record and would not name the journalists. The official
said there was no indication that Bush knew about the calls.

It is rare for one Bush administration official to turn on another. Asked about the motive for
describing the leaks, the senior official said the leaks were "wrong and a huge miscalculation, because
they were irrelevant and did nothing to diminish Wilson's credibility."

Wilson, while refusing to confirm his wife's occupation, has suggested publicly that he believes
Bush's senior adviser, Karl C. Rove, broke her cover. Wilson said Aug. 21 at a public forum in suburban
Seattle that it is of keen interest to him "to see whether or not we can get Karl Rove frog-marched out
of the White House in handcuffs."

White House press secretary Scott McClellan said yesterday that he knows of no leaks about
Wilson's wife. "That is not the way this White House operates, and no one would be authorized to do
such a thing," McClellan said. "I don't have any information beyond an anonymous source in a media
report to suggest there is anything to this. If someone has information of this nature, then he or she
should report it to the Department of Justice." MY GOD>>>>THE GHOST OF ARI!!!!!!!!

McClellan, who Rove had speak for him, said of Wilson's comments: "It is a ridiculous suggestion,
and it is simply not true." McClellan was asked about Wilson's charge at a White House briefing Sept.
16 and said the accusation is "totally ridiculous."

Administration officials said Tenet sent a memo to the Justice Department raising a series of
questions about whether a leaker had broken federal law by disclosing the identity of an undercover
officer. The CIA request was reported Friday night by MSNBC.com. Administration sources familiar
with the matter said the Justice Department is determining whether a formal investigation is warranted.

An intelligence official said Tenet "doesn't like leaks."

The CIA request could reopen the rift between the White House and the intelligence community that
emerged this summer when Bush and his senior aides blamed Tenet for the inclusion of the
now-discredited uranium claim -- the so-called "16 words" -- in the State of the Union address in
January.

Tenet issued a statement taking responsibility for the CIA's approval of the address before it was
delivered, but made clear the CIA had earlier warned the White House not to use the allegations about
uranium ore. After an ensuing rush of leaks over White House handling of intelligence, Bush's aides
said they believed in retrospect it had been a political mistake to blame Tenet.

The Intelligence Protection Act, passed in 1982, imposes maximum penalties of 10 years in prison
and $50,000 in fines for unauthorized disclosure by government employees with access to classified
information.

Members of the administration, especially Vice President Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald H.
Rumsfeld, have been harshly critical of unauthorized leakers, and White House spokesmen are often
dismissive of questions about news reports based on unnamed sources. The FBI is investigating
senators for possibly leaking intercept information about Osama bin Laden.

The only recipient of a leak about the identity of Wilson's wife who went public with it was Novak, the
conservative columnist, who wrote in The Washington Post and other newspapers that Wilson's wife,
Valerie Plame, "is an agency operative on weapons of mass destruction." He added, "Two senior
administration officials told me that Wilson's wife suggested sending him to Niger."

When Novak told a CIA spokesman he was going to write a column about Wilson's wife, the
spokesman urged him not to print her name "for security reasons," according to one CIA official.
Intelligence officials said they believed Novak understood there were reasons other than Plame's
personal security not to use her name, even though the CIA has declined to confirm whether she was
undercover.


Novak said in an interview last night that the request came at the end of a conversation about
Wilson's trip to Niger and his wife's role in it. "They said it's doubtful she'll ever again have a foreign
assignment," he said. "They said if her name was printed, it might be difficult if she was traveling
abroad, and they said they would prefer I didn't use her name. It was a very weak request. If it was put
on a stronger basis, I would have considered it."

After the column ran, the CIA began a damage assessment of whether any foreign contacts Plame
had made over the years could be in danger. The assessment continues, sources said.

The CIA occasionally asks news organizations to withhold the names of undercover agents, and
news organizations usually comply. An intelligence official told The Post yesterday that no further harm
would come from repeating Plame's name.

Wilson was acting U.S. ambassador to Iraq during the run-up to the Persian Gulf War of 1991. He
was in the diplomatic service from 1976 until 1998, and was the Clinton administration's senior director
of African affairs on the National Security Council. He is now an international business consultant.
Wilson said the mission to Niger was unpaid except for expenses.

Wilson said he believes an inquiry from Cheney's office launched his eight-day mission to Niger in
February 2002 to check the uranium claim, which turned out to be based at least partly on forged
documents. "The way it was briefed to me was that the office of the vice president had expressed an
interest in a report covering uranium purchases by Iraq from Niger," Wilson said in a telephone interview
yesterday.

He said that if Novak's account is accurate, the leak was part of "a deliberate attempt on the part of
the White House to intimidate others and make them think twice about coming forward."

Sources said that some of the other journalists who received the leak did not use the information
because they were uncomfortable with unmasking an undercover agent or because they did not
consider the information relevant to Wilson's report about Niger.


Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.), who has been pushing the FBI to investigate the disclosure
since July, said yesterday that it "not only put an agent's life in danger, but many of that agent's
sources and contacts."
CC