Intelligence failure or deception?
President Bush appointed a conservative former judge and a moderate former Democratic senator Friday to head a special commission to "figure out why" inspectors haven't found the weapons that intelligence experts said Saddam Hussein was hiding in Iraq. Bush told the panel to report back to him by the end of March 2005, well after the November elections and two years after U.S. troops invaded Iraq.
On the other hand, Wesley Clark, a Democratic candidate for president, said Bush was using the panel to affix blame to the intelligence community instead of to policy-makers, including himself, who used the information to make decisions.
There are many evidence that the issue was not intelligence failure, but deception; deception of Americans. According to Scott Ritter, former US weapon inspector, "The Bush administration, relied on rumor, speculation, exaggeration and falsification to mislead the American people and their elected representatives into supporting a war that is rapidly turning into a quagmire" . Also, in September 2002; many months before invasion of Iraq, Pentagon's intelligence service reported no reliable evidence of Iraqi weapons . Furthermore, days before entering Iraq during an official briefing, Australian troops were told Iraq threat was limited,. So, Intelligence failure is nothing but crap to put the blame not on the policy makers, but on the intelligence agencies.
Well now, let's look at some of those who are supposed to come up with the report by March 2005; months after the US presidential elections: Sen. John McCain will be on the panel. In selecting McCain, there is no doubt that US president has been as "honest and ethical" as ever. After all, Sen.. McCain is not in conflict of interest in this issue. The poor guy has just returned to New Hampshire to Stump for Bush after he was called to action by master-liar and US vice president Dick Cheney. The other top guy who is supposed to find out about the "truth" is Laurence Silberman.
And in London, British PM; Tony Blair is not having a much better time than his low intelligent master; George Bush in Washington. After Blair claimed that he did not know key facts about Iraqi weapons on the eve of sending British troops into battle, UK's Ex-Defence Secretary blasts Blair for being dis-honest. Also, UK's current Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon yesterday played down suggestions that Prime Minister Tony Blair was not fully informed about the details of key intelligence reports in the lead-up to war in Iraq.
To any reasonable person with a bit of functioning brain, it is obvious that all that happened have been attempts to deceive the American and British publics to gain support for war with Iraq. This attempt was unsuccessful in the UK as vast majority of the Brits opposed this war, but it was a complete success in the US. What about now? Would the Americans admit that they have been lied to? Or their "patriotism" will not let them to admit that?
On the other hand, Wesley Clark, a Democratic candidate for president, said Bush was using the panel to affix blame to the intelligence community instead of to policy-makers, including himself, who used the information to make decisions.
There are many evidence that the issue was not intelligence failure, but deception; deception of Americans. According to Scott Ritter, former US weapon inspector, "The Bush administration, relied on rumor, speculation, exaggeration and falsification to mislead the American people and their elected representatives into supporting a war that is rapidly turning into a quagmire" . Also, in September 2002; many months before invasion of Iraq, Pentagon's intelligence service reported no reliable evidence of Iraqi weapons . Furthermore, days before entering Iraq during an official briefing, Australian troops were told Iraq threat was limited,. So, Intelligence failure is nothing but crap to put the blame not on the policy makers, but on the intelligence agencies.
Well now, let's look at some of those who are supposed to come up with the report by March 2005; months after the US presidential elections: Sen. John McCain will be on the panel. In selecting McCain, there is no doubt that US president has been as "honest and ethical" as ever. After all, Sen.. McCain is not in conflict of interest in this issue. The poor guy has just returned to New Hampshire to Stump for Bush after he was called to action by master-liar and US vice president Dick Cheney. The other top guy who is supposed to find out about the "truth" is Laurence Silberman.
And in London, British PM; Tony Blair is not having a much better time than his low intelligent master; George Bush in Washington. After Blair claimed that he did not know key facts about Iraqi weapons on the eve of sending British troops into battle, UK's Ex-Defence Secretary blasts Blair for being dis-honest. Also, UK's current Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon yesterday played down suggestions that Prime Minister Tony Blair was not fully informed about the details of key intelligence reports in the lead-up to war in Iraq.
To any reasonable person with a bit of functioning brain, it is obvious that all that happened have been attempts to deceive the American and British publics to gain support for war with Iraq. This attempt was unsuccessful in the UK as vast majority of the Brits opposed this war, but it was a complete success in the US. What about now? Would the Americans admit that they have been lied to? Or their "patriotism" will not let them to admit that?
posted by Faramin | 1:12 a.m.
<< Home