NYT: Skewed Intelligence Data in March to War in Iraq

[Bread and Circus]

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/03/international/middleeast/03tube.html?hp


Skewed Intelligence Data in March to War in Iraq
By DAVID BARSTOW, WILLIAM J. BROAD
and JEFF GERTH

Published: October 3, 2004

This article was reported by David Barstow, William J. Broad and Jeff Gerth, and was written by Mr. Barstow.

In 2002, at a crucial juncture on the path to war, senior members of the Bush administration gave a series of speeches and interviews in which they asserted that Saddam Hussein was rebuilding his nuclear weapons program. In a speech to veterans that August, Vice President Dick Cheney said Mr. Hussein could have an atomic bomb "fairly soon." President Bush, addressing the United Nations the next month, said there was "little doubt" about Mr. Hussein's appetite for nuclear arms.

The United States intelligence community had not yet concluded that Iraq was rebuilding its nuclear weapons program. But as the vice president told a group of Wyoming Republicans that September, the United States had "irrefutable evidence" - thousands of tubes made of high-strength aluminum, tubes that the Bush administration said were destined for clandestine Iraqi uranium centrifuges, before some were seized at the behest of the United States.....

---

The next night, during his State of the Union address, President Bush cited I.A.E.A. findings from years past that confirmed that Mr. Hussein had had an "advanced'' nuclear weapons program in the 1990's. He did not mention the agency's finding from the day before.

He did, though, repeat the claim that Mr. Hussein was trying to buy tubes "suitable for nuclear weapons production.'' Mr. Bush also cited British intelligence that Mr. Hussein had recently sought "significant quantities'' of uranium from Africa - a reference in 16 words that the White House later said should have been stricken, though the British government now insists the information was credible.

"Saddam Hussein,'' Mr. Bush said that night, "has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide. The dictator of Iraq is not disarming.''

A senior administration official involved in vetting the address said Mr. Bush did not cite the I.A.E.A. conclusion of Jan. 27 because the White House believed the agency was analyzing old Iraqi tubes, not the newer ones seized in Jordan. But a senior official at the agency and a senior American intelligence official each said the international group's analysis covered both types of tubes....

---

It's a long article - 16 pages. Seems to support the notion that the administration knew that the infomation presented in the SOTU address and to the UN was not credible.

[livetohike]

1. Too bad this was published after the debate

Also, it should be a top story on the nightly news. Our lying commander-in-chief.

[dennis4868]

10. Too bad this was published after the war!

Bush Lied to start a war, thousands are dead = no impeachment

Clinton Lied about sex, NOBODY died = impeachment

UP IS DOWN, DOWN IS UP!

[Green Lantern]

2. I suspect

that Powell will be confirming much of this after his resignation goes in-too bad he won't do it before the election.

[shockingelk]

3. no new info I see

Everything important in it is in the Senate Committee report.

But it's good that the Times is running this. Get the info out in digestible form.

[hippiechick]

4. Something for undecided's to chew on over the weekend ...

AFTER seeing Kerry decimate Bush on the Iraq-9/11 connections in the debate.

It also reinforces Kerry's position that he voted for IWR because he 'believed the President' and the evidence that the Administration presented. It's also to his favor that once the 'bogus intelligence' was revealed, he has changed his position on the war.

This could be a 'deal sealer' for alot of undecided's.

I like it.


:hippie:

[shockingelk]

5. I've thought Kerry should apologize

Apologize for repeating misinformation, regarless of whether he had reason to believe it or not.

That would place Jr in a difficult no-win situation: apologize himself and loose his "what I did was right" talking point, or not apologize and appear less honest than Kerry.

[frank frankly]

6. bingo

this will get airplay for a day or two. just in time for the VP Debate!!!

go John Edwards!!!

[dennis4868]

11. Kerry let me down here....

he has never since the primaries try to hold Bush accountable for the lies that led us to war, specifically the WMDs!

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Moderator]

8. Kick

:kick:

[Sparks_SC]

9. Kerry should say...

that he voted to give * the authority to use force based on FAULTY intelligence that was skewed to look worse than it actually was...that's called a LIE.

[struggle4progress]

13. and again

:kick:

[grasswire]

12. so when will Judith Miller be fired?

Do they give a date for that?

[DeepModem Mom]

14. A major piece -- question is, will it get to the TV news screen...

and get the attention it deserves?

[leftchick]

15. kick

:kick:

[UpInArms]

16. glad to see this in print

although it is long past due, it is good to have it out there in the public debate - yes, I wish that they would hang Judith Miller out to dry -

I also wish that they would make a bigger deal of the fact that Cheney had taken over all the "terrorism" authority prior to 9/11.

Kerry should state clearly that, as have many people in this country, he put trust in what *Co said and he was personally misled by this mal-administration and their agenda. That the secrecy and control of the issues by this mal-administration is harming our country and *Co is unable to lead this country in any way.

[FormerOstrich]

17. I am very glad they are reporting this....

However, I am afraid it is too long and detailed to really hit home with many.

What is very frustrating about this is WE (I mean at DU) knew before the vote ever took place. We knew before the SOTU speech.

and there in lies the problem for Kerry. I back Kerry 110%. However, we did know...... IMHO, Kerry should keep sort of quiet on the subject or he should tell us straight up why. He claims he will tell the public the truth in matters and this would be a good place to start. I think this is the heart of why he is perceived to flip/flop is he dances around this.

Maybe not everyone feels this way but I'd rather hear him give a plausible reason and move on than to let it hang. It's his weak spot and if we know that so does Rove.

[johnfunk]

18. Looks like the New York Times had their own October Surprise in mind!

Read the whole article -- then drop the Kerry campaign an e-mail. It's time for them to start using our "L" word: Unka Dick, Unka Rummy and Condollizzard Rice are LIARS -- and Bush was either such a stupid rube that he bought it, or a liar himself. Whichever way you cut it, he never belonged in office in the first place.

[leftchick]

19. um... has this been mentioned on any Sunday shows?

didn't think so.

[onehandle]

20. What is this? Why Finally now?

Is the Times trying to make up for it's failure in reporting the truth two years ago? I think they've figured out we're about to have a new President.