President Bush insists that Iran is fueling insurgents in Iraq, does intelligence back him up?

[maddezmom]

Feb. 7, 2007 - The Bush administration's inflated pre-war claims about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction may have permanently damaged its credibility when it comes to matters of intelligence. One example: growing public skepticism over the president's dire warnings about Iran's role in aiding Iraqi insurgents.

"Nobody trusts anything," said one intelligence official, describing how the public and Congress react to administration claims about Tehran’s interference in Iraq. Whenever administration officials raise the subject of Iran's nuclear program and its supposed hand in the violence in Iraq, said the official, people immediately ask: "What are they distorting?"

Over the past few months, the administration has escalated its assertions about Iranian involvement in stoking violence in Iraq, pointing to purported hard evidence that Shiite insurgents have used technology—and possibly hardware—made in Iran to launch particularly deadly roadside bomb attacks on U.S. troops in Iraq.

~snip~

But there are also considerable grounds for skepticism about such assertions. Other U.S. and British officials say that intelligence information about Iranian moves in Iran is less clear cut. A U.K. official familiar with the views of M.I.6, Britain's foreign-intelligence service, said the British—whose troops in southern Iraq are as close to front-line encounters with possible Iranian agents as U.S. forces—cannot confirm that Iran has instructed its operatives to attack U.S. troops. "I have not heard that at all," the British official said. A U.S. official familiar with the flow of American intelligence reporting on Iranian activity in Iraq added that he, too, had seen nothing to substantiate the idea that the Iranian government has literally targeted U.S. troops for death. (Like most intelligence sources, they would not speak on the record about sensitive issues.)

lots more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17033813/site/newsweek/page/2/

[LynnTheDem]

1. Nope.

Has intelligence of any sort ever backed george w. bush up?

Nope.

[John Q. Citizen]

2. The survey says.....

Build it and they will come.

[Kagemusha]

3. All depends what the hell you call an insurgent

and there's no doubt that Iran's pals could hurt the US a lot more than they have so far, and that Iran's prepared for a rainy day on this score.

But that's only if the US decides to kick the hornet's nest.

[Solly Mack]

4. and I'm supposed to believe a war criminal because????

WMD?
Iraq/911 pairing?
Saddam is an imminent threat?
Those infamous 16 words?
"We don't torture"?
so on and so forth...

[classysassy]

5. Dear Mr President(unelected fraud)

why are you in the middle east,is it the oil,protect Israel,or maybe some other sinister reason.? We are not wanted,not needed and our present is causing world wide condemnation of our country.You and vice prez snarl,should resign for the good of the planet.