PDA

View Full Version : Groundhog Day.....again



Qtec
12-05-2007, 10:45 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Q Mr. President, thank you. Iíd like to follow on that. When you talked about Iraq, you and others in the administration talked about a mushroom cloud; then there were no WMD in Iraq. When it came to Iran, you said in October, on October 17th, you warned about the prospect of World War III, when months before you made that statement, this intelligence about them suspending their weapons program back in Ď03 had already come to light to this administration. So canít you be accused of hyping this threat? And donít you worry that that undermines U.S. credibility?

THE PRESIDENT: David, <font color="blue"> I donít want to contradict an August reporter such as yourself, but I was made aware of the NIE last week. In August, I think it was Mike McConnell came in and said, we have some new information. He didnít tell me what the information was;</font color> he did tell me it was going to take a while to analyze. Why would you take time to analyze new information? One, you want to make sure itís not disinformation. You want to make sure the piece of intelligence you have is real. And secondly, they want to make sure they understand the intelligence they gathered: If they think itís real, then what does it mean? And it wasnít until last week that I was briefed on the NIE that is now public.

Not that it mattered to him, but Bush and Cheney and any number of warmongers go around spewing venom and trying to get the public behind another military strike while heís waiting for the new intelligence to be verified? OK, I know thereís a neocon always needing a war fixóand probably has dark suspicions about the NIE report, but this

And hereís what Stephen Hadley said yesterday.

Q Steve, when was the first time the President was given the inkling of something? Iím not clear on this. Was this months ago, when the first information started to become available to intelligence agencies?

MR. HADLEY: You ought to go back to the intelligence community. We will get you an answer on that. Thereís two questions: one, when did they first get the information? ó you ought to ask that to them ó two, when was the President notified that there was new information available? Weíll try and get you a precise answer. As I say, it was, in my recollection, is in the last few months. Whether that is October ó August, September, weíll try and get you an answer to that.

Iím a big ďTexas Hold emĒ fan and Josh Marshall caught a ďtellĒ that indicates he knew before a week ago.

If you go back to his October 17th press conference, the one where he spoke of ĎWorld War IIIí he changes his wording. Itís no longer the need to prevent the Iranians from getting the bomb. Now itís the necessity of ďpreventing them from hav[ing] the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon.Ē

Thatís the tell.

That change is no accident. He wants claims that will survive the eventual revelation of this new intelligence ó while also continuing to hype the imminence of the Iranian nuclear threat that his spy chiefs are telling him likely does not exist.

Theyíve shifted their rules of engagement again to attacking a country for knowledge alone. <hr /></blockquote>


GW caught in a lie?

[ QUOTE ]
Mike McConnell came in and said, we have some new information. He didnít tell me what the information was; <hr /></blockquote>
,,,,,,,,,,,,,and GW didn't even ask!!!!!!!!..............B...........S. Watch the video and tell me he isn't lying.

The Govt have been trying to delay this report for as long as possible- now we know why.


Now they want to shift the goalposts, ignore the intel and start another unnecessary war.

web page (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/04/george-bush-says-he-got-the-new-nie-report-last-week-oh-really/#more-24041)



[ QUOTE ]
It was a year ago this month that Seymour Hersh wrote in the New Yorker that the White House (ie: Cheney) was pushing back against the release of a National Intelligence Estimate on Iran that had failed to find any evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program. Once again I guess you could say Sy is the polar opposite of Ďthe boy who cried wolfí.í



Wolf Blitzer had him on to discuss it and what to make of the new NIE and the recent claims by the President that he was just informed about itís contents a week ago.

Hersh: Whatís interesting here is the Presidentís position. As you know today in his news conference he said he only learned about this the other week.

Blitzer: He said he only got the word from Mike McConnell, the National Intelligence Director, last week that there was in fact now a new the National Intelligence Estimate, although last Aug he was told there is some new information - we havenít vetted it - itís not yet confirmed - there may be some new information. He only says that he learned about the new NIE last week.

Hersh: Look, itís a lose-lose for them. Either he did know what was going on at the highest levels - the fight Iím talking about began last year. I was writing about something in November and also you mentioned earlier. They were aware of a big dispute inside the community that is between the White House and the community about this. Now, maybe he didnít know what was going on at the Vice Presidential level about something that serious. If so, I mean, we pay him to know these things and not to make statements based on information that turns out not to be accurate, or else he is misrepresenting what he knows. I donít think there is any question this is going to pose a serious credibility problem. I assume people are going to be asking more and more questions about what did he know, when. Ö<hr /></blockquote>

web page (http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/05/sy-hersh-we-pay-bush-to-know-these-things-what-did-he-know-when/)

.and the 'Liberal' press lets the story die.

Q.......sounds familiar.

wolfdancer
12-05-2007, 05:43 PM
In August, I think it was Mike McConnell came in and said, we have some new information. He didnít tell me what the information was; he did tell me it was going to take a while to analyze. Why would you take time to analyze new information? One, you want to make sure itís not disinformation. You want to make sure the piece of intelligence you have is real. And secondly, they want to make sure they understand the intelligence they gathered: If they think itís real, then what does it mean?

So, he was the last one to be told, I guess...."We got some new info Dub, but we can't tell you about it???"
Too bad they didn't use that analytical approach on the WMD in Iraq debacle, instead of taking the word of one questionable defector.
Do you think china will raise the limit on our war credit card, for our Iran invasion?

Qtec
12-07-2007, 07:17 AM
web page (http://edition.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/12/05/bush.iran/index.html)

The plot thickens.
[ QUOTE ]
Bush told in August that Iran nuke program 'may be suspended'

* Story Highlights
* Intelligence chief told president Iran might have stopped work on nuclear weapons
* Adm. Mike McConnell told Bush more time needed to verify situation
* Government report released Tuesday says Iran stopped nuke work in 2003

From Ed Henry
CNN White House correspondent

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush was told in August that Iran's nuclear weapons program "may be suspended," the White House said Wednesday, which seemingly contradicts the account of the meeting given by Bush Tuesday.

Adm. Mike McConnell, the director of national intelligence, told Bush the new information might cause intelligence officials to change their assessment of the Iranian program, but said analysts needed to review the new data before making a final judgment, White House press secretary Dana Perino said late Wednesday.

"Director McConnell said that the new information might cause the intelligence community to change its assessment of Iran's covert nuclear program, but the intelligence community was not prepared to draw any conclusions at that point in time, and it wouldn't be right to speculate until they had time to examine and analyze the new data," Perino said in a statement issued by the White House.

The new account from Perino seems to contradict the president's version of his August conversation with McConnell and raised new questions about why Bush continued to warn the American public about a threat from Iran two months after being told a new assessment was in the works.

But Perino said there was no conflict between her statement and Bush's Tuesday account of the meeting, when he said McConnell "didn't tell me what the information was."

"The president wasn't given the specific details" of the revised intelligence estimate, which was released Monday, Perino said. Nor did Bush mislead Americans in October, when he warned of a third world war triggered by Iran's development of nuclear technology, she said.

"The president didn't say we're going to cause World War III," Perino said. "He was saying he wanted to avoid World War III."

In October, the president told reporters, "If you're interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be preventing [Iran] from having the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon." The apparent gap between what U.S. intelligence officials knew in August and Bush's later warnings drew sharp criticism from Sen. Joseph Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and a Democratic presidential candidate, who called Bush's explanation unbelievable.

"I refuse to believe that," Biden said Tuesday. "If that's true, he has the most incompetent staff in modern American history, and he's one of the most incompetent presidents in modern American history." <hr /></blockquote>

Twice now GW has cried wolf.
I don't trust Iran either- certainly not this Iranian Pres- but this hyping of the situation by GW [and getting caught in a lie] only reduces the US credibility.

Q

Drop1
12-07-2007, 02:31 PM
Iran plans to deploy a hot air balloon to drop the bombs. If you don't believe me,ask Bush.