Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
White House 'lied about Saddam threat'
A former US intelligence official who served under the Bush administration in the build-up to the Iraq war accused the White House yesterday of lying about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein.
The claims came as the Bush administration was fighting to shore up its credibility among a series of anonymous government leaks over its distortion of US intelligence to manufacture a case against Saddam.
This was the first time an administration official has put his name to specific claims. The whistleblower, Gregory Thielmann, served as a director in the state department's bureau of intelligence until his retirement in September, and had access to the classified reports which formed the basis for the US case against Saddam, spelled out by President Bush and his aides.
Mr Thielmannn said yesterday: "I believe the Bush administration did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the military threat posed by Iraq."
He conceded that part of the problem lay with US intelligence, but added: "Most of it lies with the way senior officials misused the information they were provided."
As Democrats demanded a congressional enquiry, the administration sharply changed tack. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, told the Senate the US had not gone to war against Iraq because of fresh evidence of weapons of mass destruction but because Washington saw what evidence there was prior to 2001 "in a dramatic new light" after September 11.
At a press conference yesterday, Mr Thielmann said that, as of March 2003, when the US began military operations, "Iraq posed no imminent threat to either its neighbours or to the United States".
In one example, Mr Thielmann said a fierce debate inside the White House about the purpose of aluminium tubes bought by Baghdad had been "cloaked in ambiguity".
While some CIA analysts thought they could be used for gas centrifuges to enrich uranium, the best experts at the energy department disagreed. But the national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, said publicly that they could only be used for centrifuges.
Mr Thielmann also said there was no significant pattern of cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida. He added: "This administration has had a faith-based intelligence attitude ... 'We know the answers - give us the intelligence to support those answers'."
Responding to claims of deliberate distortions, Mr Bush accused his critics of "trying to rewrite history" and insisted "there is no doubt in my mind" that Saddam "was a threat to world peace".
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003.
This was the first time an administration official has put his name to specific claims. The whistleblower, Gregory Thielmann, served as a director in the state department's bureau of intelligence until his retirement in September, and had access to the classified reports which formed the basis for the US case against Saddam, spelled out by President Bush and his aides.
Mr Thielmannn said yesterday: "I believe the Bush administration did not provide an accurate picture to the American people of the military threat posed by Iraq."
He conceded that part of the problem lay with US intelligence, but added: "Most of it lies with the way senior officials misused the information they were provided."
As Democrats demanded a congressional enquiry, the administration sharply changed tack. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, told the Senate the US had not gone to war against Iraq because of fresh evidence of weapons of mass destruction but because Washington saw what evidence there was prior to 2001 "in a dramatic new light" after September 11.
At a press conference yesterday, Mr Thielmann said that, as of March 2003, when the US began military operations, "Iraq posed no imminent threat to either its neighbours or to the United States".
In one example, Mr Thielmann said a fierce debate inside the White House about the purpose of aluminium tubes bought by Baghdad had been "cloaked in ambiguity".
While some CIA analysts thought they could be used for gas centrifuges to enrich uranium, the best experts at the energy department disagreed. But the national security advisor, Condoleezza Rice, said publicly that they could only be used for centrifuges.
Mr Thielmann also said there was no significant pattern of cooperation between Iraq and al-Qaida. He added: "This administration has had a faith-based intelligence attitude ... 'We know the answers - give us the intelligence to support those answers'."
Responding to claims of deliberate distortions, Mr Bush accused his critics of "trying to rewrite history" and insisted "there is no doubt in my mind" that Saddam "was a threat to world peace".
Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2003.
For more information:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,276...
Add Your Comments
Comments
(Hide Comments)
What, Bush lied and you didn't know!? Dumb zionist slaves ...
ARE YOU ANGRY YET?
You should be! You've been lied to. Your tax money has been taken from you and spent under false pretenses. Your children have been sent off to kill and be killed in an illegal war launched without Congressional approval. You who fought in the war and think you came back home healthy, well, you've been lied to as well. Your health is all downhill from here (ask any Vet from Desert Storm), and your children will have a higher incidence of birth defects because that depleted uranium isn't as harmless as you were told it was. And those VA medical benefits you were promised? That was a lie too. Are you angry yet?
And those of you who sold your better judgment for a free hot-dog and a flag at a Clear Channel sponsored pro-Bush rally, well, you were lied to as well, and worse, made to look totally stupid before the rest of the world. The media which walked right past peace demonstrations to video tape the Clear Channel party plastered your face across the TV sets of the planet, waving your flag and shouting "Sig WMD! Sig WMD" and singing "Dubya Dubya Uber Alles" or something to that effect. And here you stand now, with egg on your collective faces, finally facing up to what your more intelligent neighbors knew all along; There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bush made a total fool of you. The whole world is laughing at you. Those lacking the courage to admit they were wrong will no doubt descend into the ranks of fanatical "true believers", ready to drink the Kool-Aid for his highnessness der Dubyer. For the rest of you brave enough to admit you were fooled, are you angry yet?
And for you Congressional types reading this web site (and I know that many of you do), Bush made total jackasses out of you as well. Under the Constitution, which you are sworn to uphold, only Congress can declare war. Changing the name to "police action" or "battle" does not get you off of the hook. When our army marches into another nation to take it over, that's a war by any meaningful definition of the word. So, you passed a bill that authorized the President to send in the military to Iraq, but ONLY if the President could prove that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction in defiance of UN Resolution 1441. The President said he had proof, and you did not check him on it. And now that the world knows that the President did not actually have any such proof, the world knows that the US Congress failed in their job. You were had, used, swindled, conned, etc. Bush bypassed you. He got his illegal war right past you. The President has made the entire Congress look like weak and impotent idiots and fools before the rest of the world for not exercising due diligence over a serious matter like war. Are you angry yet?
Our media has tried to teach us all that hate and anger are bad. Anger must be "managed". Hate of any and all kinds must be suppressed. Well, I am here to tell you that certain hates and angers are not only justified, they are essential. I hate drug dealers, don't you? I hate liars, don't you? You're a sucker if you don't. I hate spies who use deception to trick our nation into doing things it ought not to be doing. Hate and anger helped drive the British out of the colonies 1776. Hate and anger fueled the victory of WW2, which is why Bush, with his lies, tried to trick us all (or at least the gullible ones) into hating and being angry at a designated target for invasion.
I am very angry. #$%^#%$ anger management, I am pissed off! And if you carry any of the blood of those who made this nation what it is today you have to be angry too. You should be angry. You must be angry. Because right now there is a battle about to start over whether this nation will continue to be ruled by those who lie, or whether the liars will be kicked out. Whether we will have honest government or not. Whether we will be slaves to liars, or free citizens with honorable and respectful and fair government.
Be angry. Be very angry. Hate liars. Focus your anger on them. Drive them from office and from the media. There is no other choice but permanent servitude.
Souce: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/angryyet.html
ARE YOU ANGRY YET?
You should be! You've been lied to. Your tax money has been taken from you and spent under false pretenses. Your children have been sent off to kill and be killed in an illegal war launched without Congressional approval. You who fought in the war and think you came back home healthy, well, you've been lied to as well. Your health is all downhill from here (ask any Vet from Desert Storm), and your children will have a higher incidence of birth defects because that depleted uranium isn't as harmless as you were told it was. And those VA medical benefits you were promised? That was a lie too. Are you angry yet?
And those of you who sold your better judgment for a free hot-dog and a flag at a Clear Channel sponsored pro-Bush rally, well, you were lied to as well, and worse, made to look totally stupid before the rest of the world. The media which walked right past peace demonstrations to video tape the Clear Channel party plastered your face across the TV sets of the planet, waving your flag and shouting "Sig WMD! Sig WMD" and singing "Dubya Dubya Uber Alles" or something to that effect. And here you stand now, with egg on your collective faces, finally facing up to what your more intelligent neighbors knew all along; There were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Bush made a total fool of you. The whole world is laughing at you. Those lacking the courage to admit they were wrong will no doubt descend into the ranks of fanatical "true believers", ready to drink the Kool-Aid for his highnessness der Dubyer. For the rest of you brave enough to admit you were fooled, are you angry yet?
And for you Congressional types reading this web site (and I know that many of you do), Bush made total jackasses out of you as well. Under the Constitution, which you are sworn to uphold, only Congress can declare war. Changing the name to "police action" or "battle" does not get you off of the hook. When our army marches into another nation to take it over, that's a war by any meaningful definition of the word. So, you passed a bill that authorized the President to send in the military to Iraq, but ONLY if the President could prove that Saddam was hiding weapons of mass destruction in defiance of UN Resolution 1441. The President said he had proof, and you did not check him on it. And now that the world knows that the President did not actually have any such proof, the world knows that the US Congress failed in their job. You were had, used, swindled, conned, etc. Bush bypassed you. He got his illegal war right past you. The President has made the entire Congress look like weak and impotent idiots and fools before the rest of the world for not exercising due diligence over a serious matter like war. Are you angry yet?
Our media has tried to teach us all that hate and anger are bad. Anger must be "managed". Hate of any and all kinds must be suppressed. Well, I am here to tell you that certain hates and angers are not only justified, they are essential. I hate drug dealers, don't you? I hate liars, don't you? You're a sucker if you don't. I hate spies who use deception to trick our nation into doing things it ought not to be doing. Hate and anger helped drive the British out of the colonies 1776. Hate and anger fueled the victory of WW2, which is why Bush, with his lies, tried to trick us all (or at least the gullible ones) into hating and being angry at a designated target for invasion.
I am very angry. #$%^#%$ anger management, I am pissed off! And if you carry any of the blood of those who made this nation what it is today you have to be angry too. You should be angry. You must be angry. Because right now there is a battle about to start over whether this nation will continue to be ruled by those who lie, or whether the liars will be kicked out. Whether we will have honest government or not. Whether we will be slaves to liars, or free citizens with honorable and respectful and fair government.
Be angry. Be very angry. Hate liars. Focus your anger on them. Drive them from office and from the media. There is no other choice but permanent servitude.
Souce: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/angryyet.html
USC Title 18, Section 2331, (a new category) - "domestic terrorism" - has been created and means activities that:
"involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."
Bush lied about Saddam's WMD capabilities (criminal fraud) to intimidate and coerce the public and congress to get his oil war in Iraq. Bush is, by definition of his own Patriot Act, a terrorist.
"involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State; appear to be intended to intimidate or coerce a civilian population, to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion, or to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping, and occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States."
Bush lied about Saddam's WMD capabilities (criminal fraud) to intimidate and coerce the public and congress to get his oil war in Iraq. Bush is, by definition of his own Patriot Act, a terrorist.
You're wrong. No prosecutor in the world would be able to show criminal fraud in this case, because:
- Bush likely did not intentionally make untrue statements.
- No victim relied upon the information and acted on it.
- No victim, having done so, suffered a loss of property or money.
Before you try, save me the crap about the whole world, galaxy or universe relying and suffering etc, at the hands of the bushies. It'd never hold up in court - but of course, you are in California, so maybe...
- Bush likely did not intentionally make untrue statements.
- No victim relied upon the information and acted on it.
- No victim, having done so, suffered a loss of property or money.
Before you try, save me the crap about the whole world, galaxy or universe relying and suffering etc, at the hands of the bushies. It'd never hold up in court - but of course, you are in California, so maybe...
I'm sorry, but this is not news...
Just the fact that you are here - on this web site means that this isn't 'new' to you either.
The 'Real' problem lies in the fact that we, as U.S. Citizens have failed our country. Yes the Shrub Cabal are liars and the majority of us here on indymedia knew it before anyone else did - but who did we tell?
Did any one of us write to our 'publicly available media' or did we sit here and discuss?
The FoxCNNABCNBCCBS media to include the Newspapers and ClearChannel have stopped reporting, and are now only taking dictation. Is their 'reward' for their silence the new FCC deregulation.
Someone once told me one receives the children they deserve. The word 'children' can be substitued for dog, government or nearly anything.
Yes the pResident and his crew lied and continues to lie. But the question is what are we (the people) gonna do about it.
The first place to start is with our Congress (House and Senate) If your Representative doesn't - fire their ass! Possible methods - recall, by petition, or file charges for their violation of their oath of office (at least 98 Senators are guilty of this charge alone). Once this has been accomplished - the Congress can repeat the same for the Judiciary and Executive.
There is a way!
Just the fact that you are here - on this web site means that this isn't 'new' to you either.
The 'Real' problem lies in the fact that we, as U.S. Citizens have failed our country. Yes the Shrub Cabal are liars and the majority of us here on indymedia knew it before anyone else did - but who did we tell?
Did any one of us write to our 'publicly available media' or did we sit here and discuss?
The FoxCNNABCNBCCBS media to include the Newspapers and ClearChannel have stopped reporting, and are now only taking dictation. Is their 'reward' for their silence the new FCC deregulation.
Someone once told me one receives the children they deserve. The word 'children' can be substitued for dog, government or nearly anything.
Yes the pResident and his crew lied and continues to lie. But the question is what are we (the people) gonna do about it.
The first place to start is with our Congress (House and Senate) If your Representative doesn't - fire their ass! Possible methods - recall, by petition, or file charges for their violation of their oath of office (at least 98 Senators are guilty of this charge alone). Once this has been accomplished - the Congress can repeat the same for the Judiciary and Executive.
There is a way!
" - No victim relied upon the information and acted on it."
Tell that to the 200+ dead American troops, and the 1000+ that have been wounded and crippled.
"- No victim, having done so, suffered a loss of property or money. "
The victims are the Iraqi people and the American people, having suffered the loss of life, property, and billions of dollars for an oil war sold by Bush's terrorist allegations.
Tell that to the 200+ dead American troops, and the 1000+ that have been wounded and crippled.
"- No victim, having done so, suffered a loss of property or money. "
The victims are the Iraqi people and the American people, having suffered the loss of life, property, and billions of dollars for an oil war sold by Bush's terrorist allegations.
an oil war sold by Bush's bla,bla,bla,bla,bla,bla,.........
this argument didn't hold any water the first time it was tried, and now that it has been tried 10,000 times more.....guess what..it still is not true.
with this thought process you must work for the post office!
this argument didn't hold any water the first time it was tried, and now that it has been tried 10,000 times more.....guess what..it still is not true.
with this thought process you must work for the post office!
Only an idiot beleives that either Iraq war was for oil.
The arab nations got rich on oil that the United States found for them. In a self-sacrificing move, private companies that spent their own money were forced by the American government to relent to supernationalist Islamic terror groups. Instead of gratitude, the arab nations pay us with a constant flow of murder and terror, with your support, I see.
Iraq posed a great threat to American and central Asian life. NOBODY HAS KILLED MORE MUSLIMS THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN! A fact I'm sure you'll blame on both Bush presidents.
The arab nations got rich on oil that the United States found for them. In a self-sacrificing move, private companies that spent their own money were forced by the American government to relent to supernationalist Islamic terror groups. Instead of gratitude, the arab nations pay us with a constant flow of murder and terror, with your support, I see.
Iraq posed a great threat to American and central Asian life. NOBODY HAS KILLED MORE MUSLIMS THAN SADDAM HUSSEIN! A fact I'm sure you'll blame on both Bush presidents.
does your legal expertise consist of cutting and pasting U.S. Code? Your analysis sucks.
The victims must be the people who relied and acted on the information. The soldiers were ordered - they didn't go voluntarily based on Bush's information.
Quit wasting our time with your ridiculously flawed efforts at proving bush committed criminal fraud and is a terrorist. You're more guilty of it than is he, by putting this nonsense up here for people who might believe it.
The victims must be the people who relied and acted on the information. The soldiers were ordered - they didn't go voluntarily based on Bush's information.
Quit wasting our time with your ridiculously flawed efforts at proving bush committed criminal fraud and is a terrorist. You're more guilty of it than is he, by putting this nonsense up here for people who might believe it.
We love you! Would you like an "O'Reilly Factor" windbreaker?
press play - requires audio
Netanyahu says Iraq-Israel oil line not pipe-dream
By Steven Scheer
LONDON, June 20 (Reuters) - Israeli Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he expects an oil pipeline from Iraq to Israel to be reopened in the near future after being closed when Israel became a state in 1948.
"It won't be long when you will see Iraqi oil flowing to Haifa," the port city in Northern Israel, Netanyahu told a group of British investors, declining to give a timetable.
Reuters
He has no problems with sending American troops to die for lies and oil.
Like Bush said "Bring it on! We can absorb the losses. (My kids aren't in Iraq. I don't give a damn about yours.)"
Hey Ad Hominem,
I'm for risking a few American lives to save many more. I'm also for spending the $ necessary to make sure our boys have the best equipment.
Are you a pacifist?
I'm for risking a few American lives to save many more. I'm also for spending the $ necessary to make sure our boys have the best equipment.
Are you a pacifist?
I support Kucinich and Dean to rid of Bush in '04.
BTW. Whose American sons and daughters you're risking and which Iraqi are you helping? Where's the plan to re-build Iraq?
Where's the plan to help the rest of world? Unilateral pre-emtive foreign policy. "After we bomb and turn everything into dust, that's how Bush achieve world peace. No one's left to hear the tree falls."
BTW. Whose American sons and daughters you're risking and which Iraqi are you helping? Where's the plan to re-build Iraq?
Where's the plan to help the rest of world? Unilateral pre-emtive foreign policy. "After we bomb and turn everything into dust, that's how Bush achieve world peace. No one's left to hear the tree falls."
If you're not a pacifist, I'd love to hear what criteria you think dean or kucinich should use when determining the use of force. (it's a lot easier to say bush was wrong, but if either of these guys is going to stand up and say that they'd never use force without U.N. approval, they won't win a single state in 2004).
As for that unilateralism which you accuse bush of using, let's look at it in the context of the U.N. The U.N. had three choices when faced with the pending american action in Iraq.
1. Authorization - they did this, to en extent with the 17 resolutions against Iraq.
2. Do nothing (don't authorize) - some would say they did this.
3. Condemn - if we trully acted unilaterally, where was the U.N. resolution condemning the action?
As for that unilateralism which you accuse bush of using, let's look at it in the context of the U.N. The U.N. had three choices when faced with the pending american action in Iraq.
1. Authorization - they did this, to en extent with the 17 resolutions against Iraq.
2. Do nothing (don't authorize) - some would say they did this.
3. Condemn - if we trully acted unilaterally, where was the U.N. resolution condemning the action?
With the U.S and Britain both having veto power in the security council, it wasn't likely that the condemnation would come from the there. Severeal countries did express condemnation on thier own, many others were merely "disappointed".
With the U.S and Britain both having veto power in the security council, it wasn't likely that the condemnation would come from the there. Severeal countries did express condemnation on thier own, many others were merely "disappointed".
Join the search for "weapons of mass destruction" now.
copy this: "weapons of mass destruction"
go to: http://www.google.com
Paste: "weapons of mass destruction" in the search window.
now press the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button
...happy hunting!
copy this: "weapons of mass destruction"
go to: http://www.google.com
Paste: "weapons of mass destruction" in the search window.
now press the "I'm Feeling Lucky" button
...happy hunting!
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$110.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network