Colin Powell still experiencing hallucinations

[taranaki]

Powell on WMD existence: 'This game is still unfolding'
Author: Political pressure influenced intelligence before war
Friday, January 9, 2004 Posted: 0013 GMT ( 8:13 AM HKT)



Powell said the Saddam Hussein regime "was a danger we had to worry about."


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Secretary of State Colin Powell Thursday defended the Bush administration's position that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction programs and defended his speech on the matter to the United Nations last February.

"This game is still unfolding," he told reporters.

He was responding to a study that found Iraq had ended its programs by the mid-1990s and did not pose an immediate threat to the United States before the 2003 war. Powell said he had not read the report but read news reports about it.

The study, released Thursday, was conducted by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a nonpartisan, respected group that opposed the war in Iraq.

The United States used the threat of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction as a justification for launching the war against the regime of Saddam Hussein, according to the report.

The report follows a nine-month search in Iraq for WMD -- nuclear, biological and chemical -- the key reason the administration cited in its decision to invade Iraq.

"We looked at the intelligence assessment process, and we've come to the conclusion that it is broken," author Joseph Cirincione said Thursday on CNN's "American Morning."

"It is very likely that intelligence officials were pressured by senior administration officials to conform their threat assessments to pre-existing policies."

But Powell noted that Iraq used chemical weapons in the Iraq-Iran war and on the Kurds in the 1980s and had the chance to come clean about its programs to the international community through the '90s.

"It's a fact," he said.

He said there was a "solid case" from U.N. inspectors and other officials that the Saddam Hussein regime "was a danger we had to worry about."

"In terms of intention, you always had it," he said. "And anybody who thinks that Saddam Hussein last year was just, you know, waiting to give all of this up even though he was given the opportunity to do so, he didn't do it.

"What he was waiting to do is see if he could break the will of the international community, get rid of any potential for future inspections and get back to his intentions, which were to have weapons of mass destruction."

Powell said Saddam Hussein "kept the infrastructure, the programs intact."


Weapons inspectors conduct an examination in Iraq.
"Where the debate is, is why haven't we found huge stockpiles and why haven't we found large caches of these weapons? Let's let the Iraqi Survey Group complete its work."

The secretary of state also said that his presentation to the United Nations last year made it clear that "we had seen some links and connections" between Iraq and terror groups "over time."

"I have not seen smoking gun concrete evidence about the connection, but I think the possibility of some connections did exist and was prudent to consider them at the time that we did."

But the report says that the "dramatic shift between prior intelligence assessments and the October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), together with the creation of an independent intelligence entity at the Pentagon and other steps, suggest that the intelligence community began to be unduly influenced by policymakers' views sometime in 2002."

More than 1,000 U.S. inspectors have worked daily since before the war began in March, searching the country and interviewing scientists and other Iraqi officials, according to Cirincione.

"We found nothing," Cirincione said. "There are no large stockpiles of weapons. There hasn't actually been a find of a single weapon, a single weapons agent, nothing like the programs that the administration believe existed."

The Carnegie report based its conclusions on information gleaned from declassified U.S. intelligence documents about Iraq from U.N. weapons inspectors and the International Atomic Energy Agency, the nuclear watchdog agency for the United Nations. The endowment also said the study used statements from the Bush administration and corroborated reports from the news media.

The report also accuses the Bush administration of misrepresenting the threat from Iraqi WMD by "treating nuclear, chemical and biological weapons as a single 'WMD threat'" instead of characterizing the threats from the three types separately. It says the Bush administration also insisted "without evidence -- yet treating as a given truth -- that Saddam Hussein would give whatever WMD he possessed to terrorists."

Cirincione said the study "is the first comprehensive review of everything we knew or thought we knew about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and it turns out that some of the things we thought were working -- our threat assessments -- we're deeply flawed."

"We exaggerated the threat. We worst-cased it and then acted as if that worst case was the most likely case."

However, Cirincione also said other systems put in place to prohibit Saddam Hussein from developing weapons of mass destruction were working better than experts thought at the time.

Iraq's "programs were crippled by years of [U.N.] inspections and U.S. military strikes," he said, "and the sanctions that prevented them from getting anything going at all."

Cirincione said one reason for the apparent lack of progress in the Iraqi weapons programs was because Iraqi scientists were "telling Saddam that they were further along than they actually were."

"Apparently that was picked up by some of the Iraqi defectors who came to the U.S. telling stories of elaborate advanced weapons programs," he said.

"So the defectors were fooled, Saddam was fooled, but as it turns out Saddam himself had made the decision -- as far as we can tell -- in the mid-'90s to shut down these programs."

The Carnegie report isn't "a gotcha study" seeking to blame officials, Cirincione said. "We're trying to prevent it from happening in the future," he said.

"We recommend the formation of a senior blue ribbon commission to examine this in an independent, nonpartisan way and make recommendations for how to insulate intelligence assessors from political pressures," Cirincione said.

"We don't know what happened in the offices of the administration, but there's a lot of evidence that points to" intelligence assessors being pressured by their bosses.

[taranaki]

Originally Posted by taranaki

Powell said Saddam Hussein "kept the infrastructure, the programs intact."

"Where the debate is, is why haven't we found huge stockpiles and why haven't we found large caches of these weapons? Let's let the Iraqi Survey Group complete its work."

Now I'm really confused.This just to hand from the NY Times...


U.S. Withdraws a Team of Weapons Hunters From Iraq
By DOUGLAS JEHL

Published: January 8, 2004


ASHINGTON, Jan. 7 — The Bush administration has quietly withdrawn from Iraq a 400-member military team whose job was to scour the country for military equipment, according to senior government officials.

The step was described by some military officials as a sign that the administration might have lowered its sights and no longer expected to uncover the caches of chemical and biological weapons that the White House cited as a principal reason for going to war last March.

A separate military team that specializes in disposing of chemical and biological weapons remains part of the 1,400-member Iraq Survey Group, which has been searching Iraq for more that seven months at a cost of hundreds of millions of dollars. But that team is "still waiting for something to dispose of," said a survey group member.

Some of the government officials said the most important evidence from the weapons hunt might be contained in a vast collection of seized Iraqi documents being stored in a secret military warehouse in Qatar. Only a small fraction have been translated.

A report published Wednesday in The Washington Post cited a previously undisclosed document that suggested that Iraq might have destroyed its biological weapons as early as 1991. The report said investigators had otherwise found no evidence to support American beliefs that Iraq had maintained illicit weapons dating from the Persian Gulf war of 1991 or that it had advanced programs to build new ones.

The report also documented a pattern of deceit that was found in every field of special weaponry. It said that according to Iraqi designers and foreign investigators, program managers exaggerated the results they could achieve, or even promised results they knew they could not accomplish — all in an effort to appease Saddam Hussein. In some cases, though, they simply did it to advance their careers, the report said, or preserve jobs or even conduct intrigues against their rivals.

Senior intelligence officials acknowledged in recent days that the weapons hunters still had not found weapons or active programs, but in interviews, they said the search must continue to ensure that no hidden Iraqi weapons surfaced in a future attack.

"We worry about what may have happened to those weapons," Stuart Cohen, the vice chairman of the National Intelligence Council, said in an interview broadcast late Tuesday on the ABC News program "Nightline." "Theories abound as to what may have happened."

The search for Iraqi weapons remains "the primary focus" of the survey group, a senior Defense Department official said. But he acknowledged that most of the dozens of new linguists and intelligence analysts to join the team had recently been given assignments related to combating the Iraqi insurgency rather than to the weapons search.

David Kay, the head of the survey group, made it known last month that he might leave his post. Government officials said Wednesday that he had not reached a decision but that both he and his top deputy, Maj. Gen. Keith Dayton of the Defense Intelligence Agency, were in Washington, in part to discuss what direction the hunt should take.

"I am sure that if they had found important evidence, we would know about it," said Representative Jane Harman of California, the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee, who has said the administration exaggerated the Iraqi threat.

Bill Harlow, the top spokesman for the Central Intelligence Agency, said Wednesday that "the team needs to compete its work, and no one should jump to any conclusions before it has an opportunity to examine all of the circumstances."

American intelligence officials who described the seized documents said they hoped the documents might eventually help to unravel the mystery of whether Iraqi weapons remained hidden or whether they were destroyed long before what the Bush administration initially portrayed as a mission "to disarm Iraq."

............................Why doesn't anyone tell the Secratary of State for Defence that his boss screwed up bigtime,and that he'd better make sure that the press continue to toe the official line?

[susan94civic]

It looks like most of WMD is on papers and no hardware.

[Cbass]

It looks like the WMD's were a lie used by Clinton and Bush as a pretext to weaken and eventually invade Iraq.

[justacruiser]

"It looks like the WMD's were a lie used by Clinton and Bush as a pretext to weaken and eventually invade Iraq."

My god... have the liberal mind fields cleared!?! I doubt Clinton would have invaded, too much of a pussy... or getting too much pussy... something like that.

[MR2-AW11]

I've really watched absolutely everything in regards to world issues/events since sept 11. I don't miss an article, I don't miss a forum thread, I don't miss a discussion, I don't miss a news report (even if I disagree with it I still see it).

I watched Colin Powl's speeches and Bush's speeches and Blair's speeches so don't give me bullshit

I find it quite personal, because I have a knowledge of Arabs and Muslims beyond bush's tiny little brain.. and I respect those people by being amongst them once and knowing all the good of them,their struggle, etc... But to make a long rant short...;

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3387941.stm

Now where was I Oh yes, so now they have no choice but to even admit they lied so instead they'll try and make their lie a 'moral lie (ROFLMAO)' by going at the zillionth excuse of hey at least we got sadam to hey sadam had to go to hey Sadam was an evil we had to get rid of long ago!

Also notice how sadam was stfu by making him a prisoner of war (AKA "you have the right to remain silent" which now he is).

Regardless, the lies go on and the halucinations are not halucinations but lies and evil... and halucinations heh..

[MR2-AW11]

Aw no republican flaming

[justacruiser]

Eh, why bother, it wont change the way you think no matter how much stuff people who think different dredge up, so why wast time and effort? Plus, everyones heard so much anti Bush and anti-America, it's getting old and doesn't boil the blood as much as it did before.

[taranaki]

Anti-Bush and anti-America are not the same thing,no matter how much the neo-nazis among his fans would have us believe.Do you have any comments on the obvious discrepancies between Powell's speeches and the truth,or are you just going to roll out your same tired old crap yet again?

[Cbass]

Originally Posted by justacruiser

"It looks like the WMD's were a lie used by Clinton and Bush as a pretext to weaken and eventually invade Iraq."

My god... have the liberal mind fields cleared!?! I doubt Clinton would have invaded, too much of a pussy... or getting too much pussy... something like that.

It was during Clintons tenure as president that the most Iraqis died, from the crippling sanctions that were engineered so that they could never be lifted. It was under Clinton that there daily bombings of Iraq, of the power and water infrastructures that actually led to the deaths. Those people did not starve to death, they died of diseases from lack of clean water, and medical facilities to treat them, from cancer brought on by the countless tons of "depleted" uranium, which is still highly carcinogenic...

Come on, Hussein had to prove he didn't have WMD's, which was an impossible feat. Obviously he destroyed his stockpiles and stopped his programs, because with 1800 people looking for WMD's in Iraq, not a single weapon has turned up, despite the "fact" that Bush and Blair knew exactly where they were. Now they hav been sent home, ergo they have stopped look, because they know they will not find anything.

Don't try to pretend they could be hidden in the desert, they have ground penetrating radar that can find any chunk of metal bigger than a brick.

As for anti-Bush and anti-Americanism, if you want to live in a make believe world and think that the rest of the world hates you because they're blatantly anti-American, for whatever reasons you have dreamed up, then go ahead. It doesn't change the reality, which is that it doesn't make you profoundly biased against something to criticize it. The health care system in my country is underfunded, does this make me anti-health care? No, that's ridiculous.

There are quite a bit of anti-American sentiment out there, that is for sure. Maybe if you would think for a minute about how Bush's policies might seem to someone who is NOT a republican supporter, you could understand why...

[MR2-AW11]

Well spoken. And on the note of WMD, the only way the US will ever find WMD is by planting them there... but then again what does it take to do such a feat? Well.. the components can be traced back to their origin.. so buy off market from USSR left overs, and voila.. then blame Syria or Iran again (without proof or anything as with Iraq).

Bah, people had enough of the lies.. I am surprised there are still people who believe in the lies however :/ I never did from the start thank God.. cause I am not easily fooled thank God.. but.. anyways, the 'anti-american' labeling is so old fashioned.. plz lol

[justacruiser]

"Anti-Bush and anti-America are not the same thing"

Didn't say they were did I? You spout both.

"Come on, Hussein had to prove he didn't have WMD's, which was an impossible feat. Obviously he destroyed his stockpiles and stopped his programs, because with 1800 people looking for WMD's in Iraq, not a single weapon has turned up, despite the "fact" that Bush and Blair knew exactly where they were. Now they hav been sent home, ergo they have stopped look, because they know they will not find anything."

What was that Taranaki said about, "or are you just going to roll out your same tired old crap yet again?"

"As for anti-Bush and anti-Americanism, if you want to live in a make believe world and think that the rest of the world hates you because they're blatantly anti-American, for whatever reasons you have dreamed up, then go ahead."

I'll let you answer yourself:

"There are quite a bit of anti-American sentiment out there, that is for sure."

There always has been, it's been getting worse by the year too no matter what president is in office, some just beget more than others.

"Maybe if you would think for a minute about how Bush's policies might seem to someone who is NOT a republican supporter, you could understand why..."

Like I said, it's been getting worse for years. I think it's probably more our corporations spreading their influence and our media spreading as well, not necessarily our presidents, that turn the rest of the world against us bit by bit. With the EU now gaining in economic size and power and China gaining as well, it'll probably get worse in the coming decades when the international competition really heats up.

"And on the note of WMD, the only way the US will ever find WMD is by planting them there"

I'm actually surprised it hasn't happened yet. If they were smart they would have had that planned as a contingency before we even went in, just in case. Only use nuclear material though, not a full weapon, a bit less traceable that way. There are plenty of old Silos around the US that are storing old plutonium from dismantled weapons. Take enough to make a weapon with, plant it in a cave somewhere with some other foriegn weaponry and designs, maybe some machining equipment, and voila. We already have most of the upper management of the Baath party, just wait until we have them all, for silence you understand, then have a 'random' patrol stumble across the cave, or even better, let it be a British patrol that was 'randomly' assigned that way... much more believable. Either Bush is taking his medicine for any exaggerations or lies, or he's not very good at planning deceptions.

[syr74]

As for the existence or the lack thereof of WMD's in Iraq, this subject still makes me laugh. Do I believe Hussein had WMD in Iraq prior top invasion? Hell yes. Do I now and before the war believe it was a good idea to use that as a premise to invade Iraq. Hell no. I supported ther invasion of Iraq and the deposing of Hussein. But, I never thought the "presence of WMD" premise for invasion was really necessary or even a good idea.

Hussein was constantly in violation of mare than enough conditions for a continued armistice that it simply was not necessary to use the WMD issue. Not to mention, even if WMD's were present, if it was in small numbers it would be just to damn easy for the regime to get rid of them.

I believed then, and now, that Hussein's regime indeed had biological and chemical agents, and the related equipment, in small amounts useful to reconstitute a program quickly. That said, I remember watching the early days before the ground war as the Syrian/Iraqi border stayed wide open for days with more than ample opportunity for Hussein to smuggle out anything he chose. There is also the fact that many of these agenst can be disposed of by means that basically totally destroy them.

Even trains and truck convoys left Iraq headed for Russia and Germany in the days prior to the war, and early in the war. Who is to say that corporations in these nations who aided Iraq weren't just as interested in covering their own tracks? I will point out that these trains and truck convoys leaving Iraq is a known fact.....just what in the hell do people think they were doing? Especially considering that these are the nations, along with the French, whose corporations we know assisted Hussein. Damned coincidence huh?

Just one instance is a Russian convoy heading for the Iraqi border that refused orders by US troops to stop. US troops fired warning shots but chose not to destroy the convoy even as it continued to flee. Hmmm, there is no doubt that American forces could have blown a simple truck convoy straight to hell.......and the convoy knowing this decided to risk death and ran anyway? What did they have on them that was so damning that they were willing to risk their lives for it? Yeah, I can make some guesses. And no, not all of them are WMD.

There were just too many variables that presented a problem with finding the WMD's after the fact. Their current lack of presence within Iraq does not bother me, because I have felt since before the war began that there was more than enough reason to depose Hussein. And, as you can tell from my previous statements I do not believe that the fact that WMD's are not there now means they are not there then.

I definately think Bush was poorly advises to push WMD's as the catalyst for war. But, people who piss and moan about his deposing crack me up. He was a two bit thug and a dictator who should have gotten an ass-whipping loooong ago. And before someone says "what about Iran" or another country. Yes, there are other "authorites" within the region that could use a good ass-whipping themselves. And, don't think that the day isn't coming either.

[igor@af]

But, the Iraqi people as a whole are glad he is gone....and that is what matters most.

Really? How do you know?

[syr74]

Originally Posted by igor@af

But, the Iraqi people as a whole are glad he is gone....and that is what matters most.

Really? How do you know?

I take this from several different sources. First, from two good Iraqi friends I have. (One of whom is a former professor and who was in Bagdhad when we were bombing that city in the first Gulf War btw.) Both have lived within Iraq recently enough to have fresh and valid opinions, and both have family and friends there still.

Second, from a sea of Marine Corps and Army friends I have, all of whom seem to have no idea how the media can find a bad "story" and yet ignore countless "success" stories. (Most all of my Marine friends have returned home or on to other duties. Several friends and family in the Army are still there.) To a man they all say that nothing we see in the media is anything like indicative of what is going on within Iraq. As my two Iraqi friends wholeheartedly agree with my military buddies either they are all liars or fools....or their is something different going on than what we see.

This is not a survey of the entire population, but it is more than good enough for me. And, I think pretty much everyone willing to see the truth knows that what the mainstream media has been pumping out is pure, biased, shock value bullshit. All of the previously mentioned people are folks I respect a great deal, and people of honor and integrity....and most are learned too. Their word is more than good enough for me. Believe CNN if you want to.