Mr. Bush, how are the following NOT ‘fixing the intelligence and facts'?

[Brotherjohn]

A series of questions for Mr. Bush. ADD YOUR OWN! It's fun!:

"You kept insisting in the run-up to war that Saddam had acquired aluminum tubes for uranium enrichment. Yet the IAEA had inspected the actual tubes and concluded that they were NOT for this purpose. A number of other independent experts, including your own best experts in the DOE, agreed with them. Yet you kept insisting that they were for WMD production. Furthermore, your National Security Adviser stated that this was their 'only’ possible use, despite the fact that your own National Intelligence estimate on the subject clearly stated that this was NOT their ‘only’ possible use. Mr. Bush, how do you explain that as anything BUT ‘fixing the intelligence and facts’ to support your case for war with Iraq?”

"After months of the documents being withheld from them by the CIA, the IAEA was finally given the documents citing Iraq's alleged uranium deal with Niger days before the war. Within hours, they were able to prove them to be unequivocal forgeries (using Google, among other tools). Your government had access to these documents for months, and we also know that the CIA sent a representative to Africa who returned with the very same conclusion (that the deal was bogus) months before the war. We also know that the White House was repeatedly warned by no less that the Director of the CIA NOT to use this claim. Yet you and others in your administration continued to claim throughout late 2002 and early 2003 that Iraq had tried to obtain uranium from Africa (even in your 2003 State of the Union address). Mr. Bush, how do you explain that as anything BUT ‘fixing the intelligence and facts’ to support your case for war with Iraq?”

"Both your Vice President and your Secretary of State are on record citing Saddam's son-in-law (Hussein Kamel) as saying that Iraq had large stockpiles of WMDs. Yet in that very same testimony, Hussein Kamel stated that all of these stockpiles were destroyed in 1991. Both Powell and Cheney used part of his testimony to allege that Iraq had WMDs, yet omitted another part of the very same testimony that said these weapons no longer existed. Mr. Bush, how do you explain that as anything BUT ‘fixing the intelligence and facts’ to support your case for war with Iraq?”

Before you simply answer that you ‘did not believe any of this other evidence’, please produce reasons why this evidence was in any way unreliable or untrustworthy, and explain why you completely ignored and discounted ANY evidence that did not support the conclusion that Iraq had WMDs. Mr. Bush, please explain why THAT, in and of itself, is not ‘fixing the intelligence and facts’ to support your case for war with Iraq.”

ADD YOUR OWN! Let’s see how many definitive cases of “fixing the intelligence and facts” we can come up with!

- Office of Special Plans…
- The many unequivocal statements that Iraq HAS nuclear weapons, despite the IAEA finding and reporting otherwise…
- Etc., etc., etc…

[Kikosexy2]

1. Like we...

do here in California...the public needs to start showing up, unexpectedly, at Bush functions with signs calling for impeachment, war crimes, and showing the truth about the DSM and flaunt all his lies at his face. I love it when we do that to Gov. Groperfuerhrer and the same should be done to him.

[EVDebs]

4. Here Here ! Schwantzisbigger is getting creamed every time he shows his

face ! Bush should face demonstrations wherever he goes too.

[opusprime]

2. Great Consolidation BJ...

"There is no doubt, that Saddam had..has and continues to develop weapons of mass destruction"

- VP Dick Cheney

[bvar22]

3. These could be of use:

Why did ALL of these National Security Experts SUDDENLY CHANGE their position 180 degrees on the threat posed by Iraq?
Did they have their intelligence fixxed??!!


..."seven months before 9/11, George Tenet testified before Congress that Iraq posed no immediate threat to the United States."

"in a Feb. 12, 2001 interview with the Fox News Channel Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld said: “Iraq is probably not a nuclear threat at the present time.”

"...intelligence reports released by the CIA and more than 100 interviews top officials in the Bush administration, such as Secretary of State Colin Powell, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, gave to various Senate and Congressional committees and media outlets prior to 9-11 show that the U.S. never believed Saddam Hussein to be an imminent threat other than to his own people."

http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0306/S00211.htm


and this:

" And frankly they (the UN Sanctions) have worked. He (Saddam) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors." Colin Powell Feb 24, 2001

"But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt." ---Condoleezza Rice on CNN July 29, 2001

http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm