David Kay: 'the biggest intelligence fiasco of my lifetime." »
Posted by: DiffeeOnline 5 months, 2 weeks agoThe real shock was that the CIA had never spoken to him directly. To this day, I still don't understand. How can you hang the most dramatic part of a case for war on an individual no American agent has ever directly debriefed? I realized right away, we needed to follow up in Baghdad on whatever leads we had concerning 'Curveball.'
Read Full Story at spiegel.de
Join the Discussion 
+ Add Comment
Comments So Far: 37
-
-
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.1 Reply
-
0%
pc255 months, 2 weeks ago
I guess you mean George "slam dunk" Tenet appointed to head the CIA by Bill Clinton
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/worldhaveyoursay/200...
a matter of public record. Tenet; "Iraqi WMDs are a SLAM DUNK Mr. President." Putin; "Iraq is going to attack America on its own soil Mr. President." And we were supposed to rely on the UN inspectors like Happy Hans Blix and his Keystone Kops to get at the truth while Saddam Hussein toyed endlessly and mercilessly with him.
Reply-
0%
pc255 months, 2 weeks ago
http://news.aol.com/elections-blog/2007/08/21/n...
New Report: Clinton Era CIA a Failure
The report directly refutes the impression given by the prior administration during the 9/11 Commission Hearings about the competence of the CIA and the intelligence community in general during the Clinton years. Notably, the report refers to years of mistake after mistake -- and from the dates used in the summary it's clear that the OIG was not talking about problems that started after President Bush took office in 2001.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
DiffeeOnline5 months, 2 weeks ago
If you keep "A" and "B" apart, then you can't get to the real conclusion "C". It's a way, politically, to spin something in a way and make 2 2=5 --- WAR!!!
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.
-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
The real shock was that the CIA had never spoken to him directly. To this day, I still don't understand. How can you hang the most dramatic part of a case for war on an individual no American agent has ever directly debriefed?
Reply -
-
JohnQPublicComment removed: User banned.
-
-
0%
truthiness5 months, 2 weeks ago
we went to war on unconfirmed intelligence.
Worst case scenario, they did it on purpose, which is a crime of intent
Best case scenario, they didn't know what they were talking about, which is a crime of negligence.
and the only one's to pay for it are American soldiers and innocent Iraqi's
Reply -
0%
Endoscopy5 months, 2 weeks ago
ROFLMAO
What a crock. We now know that Saddam Husein was creating the "fact" that he had WMD to keep Iran at bay. He wanted Iran to believe he had them and everybody else fell for it as well. This story ignores the FACT that every major intelligence agency believed that there were WMD that he was hiding. Every government believed this as well. One person would not cause that to happen. Intelligence agencies work by gathering data from a lot of different points and trying to evaluate them and go by a consensus of opinion. They gather a lot of contradictory information and try to evaluate how good each piece is. They are really making a best guess much of the time.
Reply-
0%
Goppy5 months, 2 weeks ago
THANK YOU - THANK YOU - THANK YOU!!
Finally, we got one of our ditto haids chimin in with support for the un-supportable!
Youare awesome Endo!
I mean, there was plenty of evidence that the reasons for war were un-warranted. And there was even more evidence that the rush to war trampled over reason and logic.
But hey! Thats what happens when ideeologie trumps rational leadership!
And I for one salute your effort to support our craaazie Neo-Con ideeologie of hedgemony over rational leadership!!
Reply-
0%
quackpot5 months, 2 weeks ago
EVERY congressperson who voted for entering Iraq should be forced to retake a history course before continuing service.
After being swindled into entering the Mexican-American war one should have though better of the Iraq story.
After being swindled into entering the Spanish-American war one should have though better of the Iraq story.
After being swindled into escalating the VietNam-American war one should have though better of the Iraq story.
Congress, as well as the Bush administration sold America short on this deal
Reply
-
0%
walden35 months, 2 weeks ago
And what of the weapons inspectors who found no evidence of Saddam reconstituting the programs after 91? Why Bush yanked them out of Iraq so they wouldn't get in the way of his lies.
"Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A...
"Contradicting the main argument for a war that has cost more than 1,000 U.S. lives, the top U.S. arms inspector reported Wednesday that he had found no evidence that Iraq produced weapons of mass destruction after 1991. He also concluded that Saddam Hussein's weapons capability weakened, not grew, during a dozen years of U.N. sanctions before the U.S. invasion last year."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6190720/
Reply -
AtheismIsRealityComment removed: User banned.2 Replies
-
0%
quackpot5 months, 2 weeks ago
FLASE FALSE FALSE
Endoscopy, what you say is just NOT TRUE, and you continual stating of the misinformation does not make it true. The U.N. weapons inspectors that were in Iraq immediately prior to the U.S. Invasion had cast serious doubt on the WMD story. Rather than allow the inspections to continue, which would have endangered Bush's planned invasion, Bush refused to allow the inspections to continue.
Reply -
0%
Candida5 months, 2 weeks ago
Endoscopy: "This story ignores the FACT that every major intelligence agency believed that there were WMD that he was hiding. Every government believed this as well."
Apparently not Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice. Listen carefully to what they had to say about Iraq in 2001.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHnSPsZshyM
If every government believed it, then why were the Security Council members not willing to vote for the invasion?
Reply -
0%
TGrass30015 months, 2 weeks ago
Can you point to any other countries intelligence that was NOT spoon feed disinformation from the U.S. or the U.K. intelligence agencies? And if you say the Israeli intelligence forces "coincidentally" found the same information I have some beach front property in Florida I would like to sell you.
Reply-
0%
Lurch5 months, 2 weeks ago
Remember Blair`s `top secret` intelligence that proved Saddam had WMD, that he couldn`t release to the public?
Turned out to be a plagiarized report from a college student, who wrote it in 1991 to boot.
And tens of thousands have died while exponentially more are permanently damaged by this unnecessary war.
Reply
-
-
-
0%
mackiemesser5 months, 2 weeks ago
A harsh indictment of German and US Intelligence to rush to judgment. You would think that we would have confirmed data that the WMD did in fact exist before we would have started armed hostilities. That we didn't makes one wonder if the intelligence was 'used' as justification for a pre planned war.
Reply-
0%
Will13135 months, 2 weeks ago
makes one wonder if the intelligence was 'used' as justification for a pre planned war.
----
you STILL have any doubts.. WOW..
Reply -
0%
Candida5 months, 2 weeks ago
mackiemesser: "A harsh indictment of German and US Intelligence to rush to judgment."
Before you condemn the Germans too harshly, remember that they were against the invasion. I would say that it's incumbent on those who plan to invade another country to check out their own intelligence and not rely on others. If I remember correctly, the Germans even warned the US that they had doubts about the truthfulness of Curveball.
Reply
-
-
0%
walden35 months, 2 weeks ago
"SPIEGEL: How did CIA leadership react to your findings?
Kay: With resistance and denial. It was an absolute refusal to face reality. I just kept on hearing, 'don't stop now. Keep working. You must be wrong. You will find it. Keep looking."
Of course they were resistant. The decision to go to war was made, most like even before 9/11, and the intelligence was stovepiped to fit that decision.
It's funny how the American Republican press would never report on a story like this. Stuff like this is untouchable in the US. Just like the election frauds and the Downing Street Memo.
Reply -
0%
donald515 months, 2 weeks ago
What do you expect from a President who asked for links to Sadam the day after 911 and a Vice President who visited the CIA more than any other VP in history... then made sure that Rummy could provide alternative intel via the Pentagon!
Also, Condi refused to have the CIA guy who had already debunked the aluminum tube arguement even participate in the cabinet briefs! Then to trash El Barradei for further debunking Sadam's WMD. The US Marine inspector, Ritter, also said Dumya and Cheney were liars before the war!
All the Bushies are war criminals... and should be turned over to the World Courts like Clinton did with Milosevic!
Reply
Submitted By:
DiffeeOnline
Social media, politics, technology, news, marketing, and the environment. These are my passions. These are the things that I spend more time with than anything ...
Also submitted:
- 1.0 - U.S. drones kill 13 in missile attack in Pakistan
- 4.7 - 9 Global Devastation Hotspots, Before and After
- 1.0 - Us Weekly Attack Costs them Subscribers "Left AND Right"
- 1.0 - Samsung to offer TV recycling
Related Articles:
Why not submit a story?
Also Propping This Article
Groups Watching This
No groups are watching this story. Why not share it with your group?
