IMPEACH

  • Wanna Join? New users you can now register lightning fast using your Facebook or Twitter accounts.
May 13, 2002
49,944
47,801
113
44
Seattle
www.socialistworld.net
#1
Bush Knew Iraq Info Was False

CBS) Senior administration officials tell CBS News the President’s mistaken claim that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa was included in his State of the Union address -- despite objections from the CIA.

Before the speech was delivered, the portions dealing with Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction were checked with the CIA for accuracy, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.

CIA officials warned members of the President’s National Security Council staff the intelligence was not good enough to make the flat statement Iraq tried to buy uranium from Africa.

The White House officials responded that a paper issued by the British government contained the unequivocal assertion: “Iraq has ... sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.” As long as the statement was attributed to British Intelligence, the White House officials argued, it would be factually accurate. The CIA officials dropped their objections and that’s how it was delivered.

“The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa,” Mr. Bush said.

The statement was technically correct, since it accurately reflected the British paper. But the bottom line is the White House knowingly included in a presidential address information its own CIA had explicitly warned might not be true.

Today at a press conference during the President’s trip to Africa, Secretary of State Colin Powell portrayed it as an honest mistake.

“There was no effort or attempt on the part of the president or anyone else in the administration to mislead or to deceive the American people,” said Powell.

But eight days after the State of the Union, when Powell addressed the U.N., he deliberately left out any reference to Iraqi attempts to buy uranium from Africa.

“I didn’t use the uranium at that point because I didn’t think that was sufficiently strong as evidence to present before the world,” Powell said.

That is exactly what CIA officials told the White House before the State of the Union. The top CIA official, Director George Tenet, was not involved in those discussions and apparently never warned the President he was on thin ice.

Secretary Powell said today he read the State of the Union speech before it was delivered and understood it had been seen and cleared by the intelligence community. But intelligence officials say the director of the CIA never saw the final draft.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/25/iraq/main560449.shtml
 
Jul 24, 2002
4,878
5
0
47
www.soundclick.com
#2
You want to get an honest opinion that's not biased towards the right or left?

I wonder what the families of dead US soldiers have to say about this....

Peeps should ask these families how they feel about the Bush administration....
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#3
there was more than 1 source about the uranium from Niger. and in Bush speech he said that that was "british intelligence", and there were more sources that said the same in the brittish government that they just didnt want to make public.

wasn't the british government trying to go after Blair over there like they are trying to go after Bush here.

last time i checked i believe the government cleared Blair a couple days ago of that uranium mess after more proof was presesnted
 
May 8, 2002
4,729
0
0
48
#4
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/7/10/104919

Thursday, July 10, 2003 10:39 a.m. EDT
U.S. Press Mum on Blair Nuke Bombshell

America's establishment press has remained silent on bombshell claims from British Prime Minister Tony Blair this week that his government's intelligence showing that Iraq tried to obtain nuclear fuel from Niger is 100 percent accurate.

On Wednesday, British newspapers were filled with quotes from Blair, who insisted that he had independent sources for British claims of an Iraqi-Niger nuke connection, material separate and apart from evidence questioned by a former Clinton administration diplomat in the New York Times on Friday.

"In the 1980s, Iraq purchased somewhere in the region of 200 or more tons of uranium from Niger," the British prime minister told Parliament, according to London's Financial Times.

"The evidence that we had that the Iraqi government had gone back to try to purchase further amounts of uranium from Niger did not come from so-called 'forged' documents. They came from separate intelligence," Blair insisted, according to the BBC.

Still, despite wide coverage in Britain of Blair's vigorous defense of the Niger nuke intelligence, American news editors have embargoed the story - giving critics of the Bush administration an important boost. A Lexis-Nexis search Thursday morning failed to turn up a single reference in U.S. newspapers to Blair's comments on the matter.

News that Blair, who is widely respected in America by both Democrats and Republicans, is standing by the intelligence finding undermines claims by Bush opponents that he deliberately "lied" when he included a brief reference to the British intelligence dossier in his State of the Union address.

"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa," Bush said in the January speech. The single-sentence statement has now become the basis for calls for Bush's impeachment by at least one Democratic Party presidential candidate, the Rev. Al Sharpton. (See: "Sharpton: Impeach Bush if He Lied!")

In what could turn out to be a significant political blunder, the Bush White House attempted to distance itself from the British intelligence report on Tuesday, after Clinton administration diplomat Joseph Wilson told the New York Times on Friday that his investigation indicated claims that Iraq sought nuclear fuel from Niger were "probably" false.

Despite the assessment's partisan pedigree, the Bush White House reacted swiftly, announcing Monday, "Knowing all that we know now, the reference to Iraq's attempt to acquire uranium from Africa should not have been included in the State of the Union speech."

The hasty admission left 10 Downing Street bewildered.

"I don't know where the Americans got their information from. Our information comes from good, reliable sources – not British sources, which is why we were never at liberty to pass anything to the Americans," a British official, who declined to be named, told Reuters. Iraq's "intent to obtain uranium from Africa ... is valid and accurate," he added.

Not only did the ill-timed White House admission set off a firestorm of protest in the U.S., British newspapers have seized upon the remark as an indication that Bush has broken with Blair on an issue that the prime minister has staked his credibility on.

"The White House last night disowned British intelligence reports on Iraq's weapons program, leaving Tony Blair high and dry," London's Daily Mail complained, calling the move an "enormous embarrassment [for] Downing Street."

Saying the White House had provoked a "transatlantic rift," London's Daily Telegraph led off its coverage by reporting, "The White House has delivered a fresh blow to Tony Blair's justification for war against Iraq by disowning Britain's claim that Saddam Hussein sought to buy uranium from Africa to produce nuclear weapons."

The Bush administration's apparent decision not to consult with Blair before going public with its own doubts over British intelligence seemed inexplicable, especially considering that the British leader has been the president's staunchest ally as criticism mounted over the Iraq war.

On Wednesday, Bush spokesman Ari Fleischer did little to challenge the notion that the White House was prepared to throw Blair to the wolves on the issue, telling reporters only that there was "other reporting" that substantiated the Iraq-Niger nuke connection.

In its coverage of the controversy on Thursday, the New York Times used Fleischer's vagueness as an excuse to ignore the British reports altogether, noting only that he "did not specify what [the other reporting] was."
 
Jun 17, 2004
849
2
0
#10
@Mclean: MAXNEWS needs to fire their editor or something.... dude has an 8th grade education.
I didnt read past the first paragraph because I felt like I needed a red pen or something:
"America's establishment press has remained silent on bombshell claims from British Prime Minister Tony Blair this week that his government's intelligence showing that Iraq tried to obtain nuclear fuel from Niger is 100 percent accurate."
 
Sep 28, 2002
1,124
4
0
#11
Seriously Mcdickhead go away no one likes you and all your posts are just filler material for people to clown on. Your lame as fuck and should kill your parents for commiting an unexcusable genetic crime.