Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

(This is the forums archive - If you want to get back to the main site simply click the banner above and you will be taken to our homepage.)

Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums is the Ultimate Online Resource for Owners and Enthusiasts of American Luxury Cars. Feel free to browse through our archive - but make sure you make it back to our main site - Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums

Cadillac XLR : Cadillac CTS : Cadillac : 2005 Cadillac STS : Cadillac Forums : 2000 Lincoln LS : Lincoln Mark VIII : Lincoln Mark VII : Car Wax
Lincoln Town Car : Lincoln Air Suspension : Lincoln Continental : Lemon Law : Do It Yourself Car Repair : Lincoln vs Cadillac Forums : Mesothelioma

Back to the Archive Main Page

Pages: 1

"Proof Bush Fixed The Facts"

(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: 97silverlsc

Proof Bush Fixed The Facts
By Ray McGovern
TomPaine.com

Wednesday 04 May 2005

"Intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy."

Never in our wildest dreams did we think we would see those words in black and white - and beneath a SECRET stamp, no less. For three years now, we in Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) have been saying that the CIA and its British counterpart, MI-6, were ordered by their countries' leaders to "fix facts" to "justify" an unprovoked war on Iraq. More often than not, we have been greeted with stares of incredulity.

It has been a hard learning - that folks tend to believe what they want to believe. As long as our evidence, however abundant and persuasive, remained circumstantial, it could not compel belief. It simply is much easier on the psyche to assent to the White House spin machine blaming the Iraq fiasco on bad intelligence than to entertain the notion that we were sold a bill of goods.

Well, you can forget circumstantial. Thanks to an unauthorized disclosure by a courageous whistleblower, the evidence now leaps from official documents - this time authentic, not forged. Whether prompted by the open appeal of the international Truth-Telling Coalition or not, some brave soul has made the most explosive "patriotic leak" of the war by giving London's Sunday Times the official minutes of a briefing by Richard Dearlove, then head of Britain's CIA equivalent, MI-6. Fresh back in London from consultations in Washington, Dearlove briefed Prime Minister Blair and his top national security officials on July 23, 2002, on the Bush administration's plans to make war on Iraq.

Blair does not dispute the authenticity of the document, which immortalizes a discussion that is chillingly amoral. Apparently no one felt free to ask the obvious questions. Or, worse still, the obvious questions did not occur.

Juggernaut Before The Horse

In emotionless English, Dearlove tells Blair and the others that President Bush has decided to remove Saddam Hussein by launching a war that is to be "justified by the conjunction of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction." Period. What about the intelligence? Dearlove adds matter-of-factly, "The intelligence and facts are being fixed around the policy."

At this point, Foreign Secretary Jack Straw confirms that Bush has decided on war, but notes that stitching together justification would be a challenge, since "the case was thin." Straw noted that Saddam was not threatening his neighbors and his WMD capability was less than that of Libya, North Korea or Iran.

In the following months, "the case" would be buttressed by a well-honed U.S.-U.K. intelligence-turned-propaganda-machine. The argument would be made "solid" enough to win endorsement from Congress and Parliament by conjuring up:

* Aluminum artillery tubes misdiagnosed as nuclear related;
* Forgeries alleging Iraqi attempts to obtain uranium in Africa;
* Tall tales from a drunken defector about mobile biological weapons laboratories;
* Bogus warnings that Iraqi forces could fire WMD-tipped missiles within 45 minutes of an order to do so;
* Dodgy dossiers fabricated in London; and
* A U.S. National Intelligence Estimate thrown in for good measure.

All this, as Dearlove notes dryly, despite the fact that "there was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action." Another nugget from Dearlove's briefing is his bloodless comment that one of the U.S. military options under discussion involved "a continuous air campaign, initiated by an Iraqi casus belli" - the clear implication being that planners of the air campaign would also see to it that an appropriate casus belli was orchestrated.

The discussion at 10 Downing St. on July 23, 2002 calls to mind the first meeting of George W. Bush's National Security Council (NSC) on Jan. 30, 2001, at which the president made it clear that toppling Saddam Hussein sat atop his to-do list, according to then-Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neil, who was there. O'Neil was taken aback that there was no discussion of why it was necessary to "take out" Saddam. Rather, after CIA Director George Tenet showed a grainy photo of a building in Iraq that he said might be involved in producing chemical or biological agents, the discussion proceeded immediately to which Iraqi targets might be best to bomb. Again, neither O'Neil nor the other participants asked the obvious questions. Another NSC meeting two days later included planning for dividing up Iraq's oil wealth.

Obedience School

As for the briefing of Blair, the minutes provide further grist for those who describe the U.K. prime minister as Bush's "poodle." The tone of the conversation bespeaks a foregone conclusion that Blair will wag his tail cheerfully and obey the learned commands. At one point he ventures the thought that, "If the political context were right, people would support regime change." This, after Attorney General Peter Goldsmith has already warned that the desire for regime change "was not a legal base for military action," - a point Goldsmith made again just 12 days before the attack on Iraq until he was persuaded by a phalanx of Bush administration lawyers to change his mind 10 days later.

The meeting concludes with a directive to "work on the assumption that the UK would take part in any military action."

I cannot quite fathom why I find the account of this meeting so jarring. Surely it is what one might expect, given all else we know. Yet seeing it in bloodless black and white somehow gives it more impact. And the implications are no less jarring.

One of Dearlove's primary interlocutors in Washington was his American counterpart, CIA director George Tenet. (And there is no closer relationship between two intelligence services than the privileged one between the CIA and MI-6.) Tenet, of course, knew at least as much as Dearlove, but nonetheless played the role of accomplice in serving up to Bush the kind of "slam-dunk intelligence" that he knew would be welcome. If there is one unpardonable sin in intelligence work, it is that kind of politicization. But Tenet decided to be a "team player" and set the tone.

Politicization: Big Time

Actually, politicization is far too mild a word for what happened. The intelligence was not simply mistaken; it was manufactured, with the president of the United States awarding foreman George Tenet the Medal of Freedom for his role in helping supervise the deceit. The British documents make clear that this was not a mere case of "leaning forward" in analyzing the intelligence, but rather mass deception - an order of magnitude more serious. No other conclusion is now possible.

Small wonder, then, to learn from CIA insiders like former case officer Lindsay Moran that Tenet's malleable managers told their minions, "Let's face it. The president wants us to go to war, and our job is to give him a reason to do it."

Small wonder that, when the only U.S. analyst who met with the alcoholic Iraqi defector appropriately codenamed "Curveball" raised strong doubt about Curveball's reliability before then-Secretary of State Colin Powell used the fabrication about "mobile biological weapons trailers" before the United Nations, the analyst got this e-mail reply from his CIA supervisor:

"Let's keep in mind the fact that this war's going to happen regardless of what Curveball said or didn't say, and the powers that be probably aren't terribly interested in whether Curveball knows what he's talking about."

When Tenet's successor, Porter Goss, took over as director late last year, he immediately wrote a memo to all employees explaining the "rules of the road" - first and foremost, "We support the administration and its policies." So much for objective intelligence insulated from policy pressure.

Tenet and Goss, creatures of the intensely politicized environment of Congress, brought with them a radically new ethos - one much more akin to that of Blair's courtiers than to that of earlier CIA directors who had the courage to speak truth to power.

Seldom does one have documentary evidence that intelligence chiefs chose to cooperate in both fabricating and "sexing up" (as the British press puts it) intelligence to justify a prior decision for war. There is no word to describe the reaction of honest intelligence professionals to the corruption of our profession on a matter of such consequence. "Outrage" does not come close.

Hope In Unauthorized Disclosures

Those of us who care about unprovoked wars owe the patriot who gave this latest British government document to The Sunday Times a debt of gratitude. Unauthorized disclosures are gathering steam. They need to increase quickly on this side of the Atlantic as well - the more so, inasmuch as Congress-controlled by the president's party-cannot be counted on to discharge its constitutional prerogative for oversight.

In its formal appeal of Sept. 9, 2004 to current U.S. government officials, the Truth-Telling Coalition said this:

We know how misplaced loyalty to bosses, agencies, and careers can obscure the higher allegiance all government officials owe the Constitution, the sovereign public, and the young men and women put in harm's way. We urge you to act on those higher loyalties...Truth-telling is a patriotic and effective way to serve the nation. The time for speaking out is now.

If persons with access to wrongly concealed facts and analyses bring them to light, the chances become less that a president could launch another unprovoked war - against, say, Iran.

Ray McGovern served 27 years as a CIA analyst and is now on the Steering Group of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity. He works for Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour.

Posted by: mespock

Oh boy can't wait to see Bryan Rebuttal! LOL

Posted by: FreeFaller

President Bush up for reelection in 2005...result=reelected

Prime Minister Blair up for reelection in 2005...result=reelected

Looks like you squeaky wheels are getting a little too used to the oil...where's my hammer.

Let's break this down into the simplest form...story time!

The Police (America) thinking that your home is a Meth Lab (in possesion of WMD's) raids your house (Iraq). Upon entering your home then notice there is no meth nor any sign of drugs (WMD's again) in your possession. However, they do manage to show up in time to stop a crazed group of maniacs (Saddam and sons) from killing all five of you and your family (hundreds of thousands of Iraqi's killed by their own country). Now would you blame the police and villainize them? You probably would...you probably hate all cops too. I wouldn't, I would thank my lucky stars...even if they popped grandma on the way in (non-com casualties of war). Hell...those crazy bastards (S&S) probably would have killed us all...

Actually I should take back the thing about you probably hating cops...that's an unbased assumption on my part and I apologize. Now I don't know if I made my point here...hell, I don't care. I just wanted to rant for awhile...

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

Oh boy can't wait to see Bryan Rebuttal! LOL

Revenge is a dish best served cold.

Let's just say that Saddam got to enjoy a frozen dessert.

Posted by: barry2952

So you admit that the only reason that we went back in is to avenge his daddy's honor. Now he has soiled himself.

Posted by: dropped74

I am not a hundred percent but I am pretty sure that there was more intelligence confirming WMD in Iraq then just the US and Britain. I do believe Russia provided intelligience as well, but I like I said I could be wrong!

Posted by: barry2952

None of that matters. Bush lied and 100,000 Iraqis died, all to protect his daddy's honor.

P.S. You notice Bryan's response? Pretty quiet and deflecting the issue as usual. This has been posted all over the web and there is no denial from the White House. Time to think about impeachment.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry2952

P.S. You notice Bryan's response?

Been busy man. I'll get to it this weekend. 1st one must seek out the truth for the truth shall set you free.

Posted by: barry2952

And if you find out this article is true will you still have the high regard for GWB?

He lied to you too, Bryan!

Posted by: MonsterMark

I promise to at least to fair in my analysis.

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry2952

And if you find out this article is true will you still have the high regard for GWB?

He lied to you too, Bryan!

Posted by: dropped74

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry2952

None of that matters. Bush lied and 100,000 Iraqis died, all to protect his daddy's honor.

P.S. You notice Bryan's response? Pretty quiet and deflecting the issue as usual. This has been posted all over the web and there is no denial from the White House. Time to think about impeachment.

How does that not matter. This guys whole report is stating that We lied and it not all of the facts have been stated. To me that matters a tremendous amount. Because there is a difference between lying and being mistaken.

Posted by: barry2952

Lame. You truly believe that Bush told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Oh yeah, when he "chatted" with Congress he refused to take that oath.

Posted by: RRocket

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I promise to at least to fair in my analysis.

Yeah, whatever Bryan. I couldn't even get you to admit that Bush had ever lied about ANYTHING in his life...politically or otherwise....Fair my ass...

Posted by: barry2952

It's those Bush goggles he wears. Keeps you from seeing the truth when it's right before your eyes.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by RRocket

Yeah, whatever Bryan. I couldn't even get you to admit that Bush had ever lied about ANYTHING in his life...politically or otherwise....Fair my ass...

Ya, when did this happen? I'm sure its on the LVC site so it should be pretty easy for you to prove that I said Bush never lied about ANYTHING in his life.

SO I have looked around. Not much out there on this subject. Point me towards some pin-headed lefty sites so I can see what all the brewhaha is about.

And btw, I'm a huge fan of Tony Blair and I wish he was our President. I love to watch the guy. Cool as a cucumber.

Saddam is gone, He'll be executed fairly soon (not soon enough for me) but as long as the Iraqi people get their revenge, I'll be patient. Time to move on.

More bad news on Jobs and the Economy
From the USA Today

Employers created a surprising 274,000 jobs in April and added more workers in each of the two preceding months than first thought, the Labor Department said Friday in a report that may ease fears about economic growth.
The April jobs total far outstripped economists' expectations for 170,000 new jobs. Further underlining the surge, the government said 93,000 more jobs were created in February and March than it previously reported — 146,000 in March instead of 110,000 and a whopping 300,000 in February instead of 243,000.

Posted by: ONEBADMK8

Bush is a MOUNTAIN of Dung!

Posted by: barry2952

I love it Bryan. "Time to move on". Typical of all your responses when you find out Bush

ed-up.

Not a mountain, just a pile.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry2952

I love it Bryan. "Time to move on". Typical of all your responses when you find out Bush ed-up.

Show me how Bush f-ed up first of all. And the comment to 'move on' was because you guys can't get over anything. We fought the war. We won, Saddam is gone. US casualties are 1/30th that of Vietnam and we fought the 4 largest army in the world, not the 50th like in Vietnam. Why don't you spend your energy coming up with solutions for Social Security and MediScare and getting the government out of our back pockets? Those seem like much more worthy projects in which to invest your handwringing.

Btw, next up. Iran and Syria. 1-2 punch. Take 'em down. We need to own more sand. There might be a shortage of glass in the future.

Posted by: 97silverlsc

Here's a link to a copy of the memo:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...593607,00.html

We won? Tell that to the families of the troops that continue to die there.

Posted by: barry2952

I suppose the "liberals" made that one up too. Ahh, the smell of imeachment is in the air.

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by 97silverlsc

Here's a link to a copy of the memo:http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article...593607,00.html

We won? Tell that to the families of the troops that continue to die there.

More Americans die every day at the hand of their brethren here in the US than die overseas at the hand of our enemy.

It is sad to see the loss of one Amercian life. Lost protecting the rights and freedoms all of us enjoy. But it would be even sadder to be facing millions of caskets should these fine young men and women fail in OUR quest to rid the world of evildoers and the people that want nothing more and will stop at nothing to do us harm.

Posted by: bufordtpisser

Any of you that believe that there is going to be an impeachment is very sadly mistaken.

Posted by: FreeFaller

I just love when liberals use the deaths of my brothers in arms to push their political agenda. Supporting the troops does not mean belittling the reason they sacrifice their lives so you can feel better about a fight you're not even in. Do me a favor and keep the Soldiers, Sailors, Marines, Airman and Coasguardsmen out of your left wing rhetoric...either that or just admit to being the anti-military hippy that truly resides under the false sense of support so prominantly displayed with that yellow ribbon magnet on the truck of your car. This message even applies to the conservatives...don't use the sacrifice of our sons and daughters as a stepping stone in your political argument.

Support the troops...but leave the politics at home. Because when they die, their tombstone does not read "Republican or Democrat".

Posted by: MonsterMark

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeFaller

Support the troops...but leave the politics at home. Because when they die, their tombstone does not read "Republican or Democrat".

I have to disagree with your last statement although I agree in the principle of it. Without the outward support of our troops and military these same troops would be left out to dry by the leftist elitists in this country. And it is a fact that the majority of support for our troops come from the Republican party. Wish it were not true but that is the way it is. And I would go on to say that the ideals of the military and freedom seekers everywhere lies more closely in tune with the goals of the Republican, not Democratic party. Like the saying goes... Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Posted by: mespock

Quote:

Originally Posted by MonsterMark

I would go on to say that the ideals of the military and freedom seekers everywhere lies more closely in tune with the goals of the Republican, not Democratic party. Like the saying goes... Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

Boy do they have you fooled

Posted by: dertyclown

the real saddam
http://www.liquidgeneration.com/popt...amfromiraq.asp

Posted by: dertyclown

1. Iraq’s government openly praised the September 11th attacks on America

In the aftermath of the attacks on America that killed thousands of innocents from 80 countries, Saddam Hussein said, “America is reaping the thorns planted by its rulers in the world.”
2. Iraq shelters and supports terrorist organizations

Iraq shelters and supports terrorist organizations that direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments.
Al Qaeda terrorists escaped from Afghanistan and are known to be in Iraq.
In 1993, Iraq attempted to assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former U.S. President.
3.Saddam Hussein has an appetite for nuclear weapons

In 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War.
Were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993.
Iraq still employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians and retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon
Iraq has made several attempts to buy high-strength aluminum tubes used to enrich uranium for a nuclear weapon.
4. Saddam likely possesses biological and chemical weapons

United Nations' inspections revealed that Iraq likely maintains stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing chemical weapons.
On at least 10 occasions, Saddam Hussein’s military forces have attacked Iranian and Kurdish targets with combinations of mustard gas and nerve agents through the use of aerial bombs, 122-millimeter rockets, and conventional artillery shells.
Iraq has admitted to producing tens of thousands of liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks.
U.N. inspectors believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological weapons.
Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
5. Saddam’s repression of the Iraqi people

In the late 1980’s Saddam Hussein launched a large-scale chemical weapons attack against Iraq’s Kurdish population killing thousands.
Former UN Human Rights Special Rapporteur Max Van der Stoel’s report in April 1998 stated that Iraq had executed at least 1,500 people during the previous year for political reasons.
Tens of thousands of political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and rape.
Wives are tortured in front of their husbands, children in the presence of their parents.
Saddam blames the suffering of Iraq's people on the U.N., even as he uses his oil wealth to build lavish palaces for himself, and buy arms for his country.
6. Saddam’s Abuse of Children

Child labor persists and there are instances of forced labor.
There are widespread reports that food and medicine that could have been made available to the general public, including children, have been stockpiled in warehouses or diverted for the personal use of some government officials.
Saddam has held military training camps for children between 10 and 15 years of age.
7. Violence against women

Human rights organizations and opposition groups received reports of women who suffered from severe psychological trauma after being raped by Iraqi personnel while in custody.
Amnesty International reported that, in October 2000, the Iraqi Government executed dozens of women accused of prostitution.
8. Iraq has not returned prisoners

In 1991, the U.N. Security Council demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise.
Last year the Secretary General's high-level coordinator for this issue reported that Kuwait, Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and Omani nationals remain unaccounted for -- more than 600 people.
One American pilot is among them.
9. Saddam possesses prohibited missiles

Iraq possesses a force of Scud-type missiles with ranges beyond the 150 kilometers permitted by the U.N.
Work at testing and production facilities shows that Iraq is building more long-range missiles that it can use to inflict mass death throughout the region.
10. Weapons inspectors have been shut out of Iraq for four years

It's been almost four years since the last U.N. inspectors set foot in Iraq, four years for the Iraqi regime to plan, build, and test behind the cloak of secrecy.
The first time we may be completely certain Saddam Hussein has a nuclear weapon is when, God forbids, he uses one.

Posted by: Kbob

Quote:

Originally Posted by mespock

Boy do they have you fooled

Where's Barry with one of his snappy insults when you need him?

Posted by: barry2952

I think Rich responed adequately. No need to respond.

Dertyclown,

You really should credit your source.

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Here's where your republican party is leading all of our wonderful military personell, down the rosy path to death, with no end in sight.

As I predicted, we've crested 1600 US military casualties, LONG before the date I had picked sometime ago, that if met, I'd start cutting GW some slack. Guess that ain't gonna happen.

Remember that "Letters from Fajluha" thread? The letter from the soldier, that no longer sounds like a "I'm over here in harm's way fighting to support my leader's decisions no matter what they are" type letter that we've been hearing for so long, and instead is a "I'm over here in harm's way helping to protect my fellow soldier so that hopefully he'll reciprocate and we both can get the he!! out of here alive" letter. Like it or not, change is in the air. Can't you just FEEL IT??

Posted by: JohnnyBz00LS

Hey dertyclown, NEWSFLASH!! IRAQ HAD NO WMDs!!

Posted by: TownCar97

War is hell! But Saddam is the Devil!

Posted by: Kbob

Quote:

Originally Posted by barry2952

I think Rich responed adequately. No need to respond.

Dertyclown,

You really should credit your source.

I don't. So I'll respond to Rich with a cut and paste of one of your responses to Bryan:

"Another lame response."

Posted by: FreeFaller

Quote:

Originally Posted by JohnnyBz00LS

Hey dertyclown, NEWSFLASH!! IRAQ HAD NO WMDs!!

Correction: No WMD's were found in Iraq. That doesn't mean that there were no WMD's.

Hell, there wasn't any liquor in Ted Kennedy's car back in 69 up in Chappaquiddick but I'm thinkin he was lit of his butt.

Posted by: dropped74

Quote:

Originally Posted by FreeFaller

NICE