Hi, Big Sister....

In the April 2006 National Intelligence Estimate, the US intelligence agencies concluded that our war in Iraq is making the threat of terrorism against the US worse. The war is not protecting America, it is endangering America.

I can get the references for you if you want them.

Oceans

Oceans5555,

The same intelligence agencies that said Iraq has WMDs? So you think they were wrong about WMDs, but now they hit the nail of the head, huh? You can't have it both ways, the intelligence agencies are made of people and people make mistakes.

No NIE ever said there were WMDs in Iraq, Spider. Please go back and check them out.

Oceans,

Finding an NIE assessment that refutes your statement only took moments.

http://www.fas.org/irp/cia/product/iraq-wmd.html
--------------------------------------------------------------
We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade. (See INR alternative view at the end of these Key Judgments.)
--------------------------------------------------------------

That's from 2002, just a year before we invaded Iraq. Next time do a quick check for yourself, so that you don't get egg on your face.

Yes, Spider, I should have specified post-invasion NIE. You can find the background on the one you cite in David Isikoff's or Tom Ricks books. There you willsee that the NIE you cite was 'spun' by Scooter Libby/Cheney with Doug Feith's help.

It will certainly stand as the nadir of political interference with the intelligence process. As you can imagine, George Tenet (in his new book) also has some choice comments about that NIE.

You will notice that this pre-invasion NIE is where the canard about the Niger yellow-cake was slipped in by Feith. "A foreign government service reported that as of early 2001, Niger planned to send several tons of "pure uranium" (probably yellowcake) to Iraq. As of early 2001, Niger and Iraq reportedly were still working out arrangements for this deal, which could be for up to 500 tons of yellowcake. We do not know the status of this arrangement."

It was known at the time that this was disinformation, though it was not quite clear who had originated. (We now do know where it came from). The CIA, which has the lead in putting the NIE together knew it was fanciful, but Feith, backed by Cheney and Libby, in a memorable showdown demanded that it be put in the NIE.

Thanks for bringing this up. The FAs documents collection is a good one.

In any case, the April 2006 NIE is the one I was citing for Sister. Since the claims that Iraq had current WMD were shown to be disinformation (and we now also know where that came from -- Chalabi to Woolsey to Feith and on up) the US intelligence community has pulled itself together and is now producing pretty good estimates. But they still rankle over how the politicians manipulated their findings.

Spider, I don't see these conversations as macho mud slinging or occassions for rudeness. The goal is not to score points, but to learn. Putting people down is a trivial act and, in my opinion, beneath you. I don't waste my time with folks who want to 'win' more than they want to learn. There are a lot of people here you can learn from if you want to do so. If you don't want to learn from me, that is absolutely fine with me, and will save my time. It is your choice. But let's be clear about it, ok?

Oceans

Oceans,

If you read here: http://www.foia.cia.gov/search.asp?pageNumber=2&freqReqRecord=undefined&refinedText=undefined&freqSearchText=undefined&txtSearch=NIE&exactPhrase=undefined&allWords=undefined&anyWords=undefined&withoutWords=undefined&documentNumber=undefined&startCreatedMonth=&startCreatedDay=&startCreatedYear=&endCreatedMonth=&endCreatedDay=&endCreatedYear=0&startReleasedMonth=&startReleasedDay=&startReleasedYear=&endReleasedMonth=&endReleasedDay=&endReleasedYear=0&sortOrder=DESC

You will see that the NIE from 1999 and 1994 indicated that Saddam was working on WMDs. The NIE from 2002 was nothing surprising, given past NIEs. I know that in 1998, Bill Clinton gave a speech about the dangers of the Iraqi WMD program. This line of thought that the intelligence communities belief in an Iraqi WMD program started with **** Cheney and Scooter Libbey is without any basis.

And of course there was no post invasion NIE talking about Iraqi WMDs. They weren't considered a hostile government anymore and we couldn't find the WMDs, casting doubt onto the whole subject. But it's not important if the NIE had anything about Iraqi WMDs post invasion, because at that point, the invasion had already taken place.

Spider,
You mind as well give up with Oceans, he is a contradiction in himself. He is the one with the closed mind and unwilling to accept anything outside of his belief that the US and Israel are evil.
If you carefully read his posts, just like his last he already at final judgement on topics that many dispute.
His latest post in here is a prime example, he now is refering to post invasion reports, after the fact.
Of which that report is still debated amongst those in the know.
Wasn't it Russia the other day that voted against the UN ending the inquiry into Iraq's WMD, because they, the Russians, say it the findings are inconclusive? What do you mean in conclusive? Oceans says it is a known fact that Iraq did not have WMDs.
There is still a good chance that WMDs were moved from Iraq to Lebanon and are sitting in the Bekka Valley. A highly armed terrorist haven and considered one of the most armed and protected areas of the world. It also is an upstream tunnel into Israel, thus any release of WMDs would flood Israel with death. Additionally Syria has yet to be cleared of having accepted anything from Saddam.
If anyone remembers, Iranian supported insurgents held onto Falluja quite tightly, strange enough Falluja was one of the factories of Saddams WMDs during the 80s.
There are many more unanswered possibilies that have an ounce of feasibility than what Oceans would like.
Oceans has to show how much he knows by constantly throwing out qualifiers such as, I have a briefing to go to, I am preparing a briefing... I teach this... etc...It is a sure sign that he is not as qualified as he tries to portray. And on top of it he teaches this, a sure sign of nothing... Academia is one of the most left liberal organization in the world and constantly teaches their opinion instead of fact when it comes to issues such as this.
Spider, I do enjoy reading your comments, as I do most on here.

Hi, Spider, thanks for the courtesy in your reply.

Under Clinton the NIEs discussed the possibility that Iraq might 'reconstitute' its WMD programs, or start up nuclear programs. The conclusion was that the evidence was not determinative, and that the Bush senior and Clinton policies of sanctions and containment were the best way to handle Iraq. (Personally, I did not agree, but their were not unreasonable positions to take.)

Under Bush jr and prior to Sept 11, there was a major effort by the neocons to assert that Iraq was escalating its WMD 'programs'. With Sept 11, their efforts blossomed, in the atmosphere of panic that enveloped the government. Disinformation was created about the purported WMD program that exceeded by far the earlier Bush/Clinton concerns.

We now have a lot of information on WHO created this disinformation, how it was introduced into the government's deliberations on Iraq, and how it was used to override legityimate intelligence coming out of several agencies of the US intelligence community.

Examples of baseless disinformation, or worse, disinformation that is based on forgeries, include: the aluminum pipes, Niger yellowcake, Saddam-Sept 11 connections, the Prague meeting, the mobile bioweapons trucks, the nuclear program, the Chalabi claims, etc. Many of the very neocons who promenaded this disinformaiton (except Mylroie) have now acknowledged the falsity of this disinformation.

I have posted a lot about this in other threads which you can find easily enough. Wolfowitz, Ledeen, Feith, Bolton, Abrams, Franklin, Libby, Mylroie, Wurmser (both husband and wife), etc. were in senior positions in the government and were the main actors in this deception. This is not a complete list -- if you start to look into this I can give you more leads.

I can comment separately if you like on the roles that Bush and Cheney played. I assume you are looking at all the info that has come out about this in the last couple of weeks.

Better yet are several books that have come out in th elast couple of years that explore this, often in detail. I can give you the references to these books if you like. I think you may be interested in what they have to say.

Regards,
Oceans

Oceans5555,

"Under Clinton the NIEs discussed the possibility that Iraq might 'reconstitute' its WMD programs, or start up nuclear programs"

No, it doesn't. I read the link before I posted it. You are wrong. Sorry. I'm done with this conversation, you refuse to accept the truth unless it agrees with your already assumed position.

Okay-dokey!

Your to old to run around saying, okie-dokie!!

And which in your humble estimation is the age where one has to stop saying that??????????

no older than 60...LMAO
surely, oceans is too old!!
hey andrea

Okie-dokey, you are forgiven

Hi everybody

<<<<<<Has no age restrictions! It's all okie dokie!

Hi Harry

the eyejacking continues!!!

I'm gone

what do you mean!!

Three of the eight being held were doctors. Interesting that they would be involved in planning of terrorist attacks. Those that were slamming Army Doc should really take this information into consideration...