Quote:
Originally posted by John D Harris:
Just out of Idle couriousity wellard, which part of the following statement, from the report you on the left are clinging to for dear life, is hard to understand?
"The committee found no evidence that the intelligence community's mischaracterization or exaggeration of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction capabilities was the result of political pressure," Senate Intelligence Committee chairman Pat Roberts said.
Please explain why Sen. John Edwards a member of the Senate Intel. Comm. made the statement in Feb. 2002 "that Iraq is an eminate threat". Or why he voted for the war? He as a member of the Senate intel comm gets to see the same CIA intel that President Bush sees, he reached the same conclusion. As did Senator John Kerry, who voted for the war after seeing the intel, Senator John Kerry went so far as to say "if you don't believ Iraq has Womd's don't vote for me!" I wonder how many of the Dems/left/liberals are willing to stand up for their convictions and not vote for Senator Kerry? After all he doesn't want the vote of anyone that doesn't believe that Iraq had WoMDs. Let's hear the cry and shout from the left about the Democratic Senators on the Senate Intel. Comm that voted for the war, based on the same intel! Remember the line the left is clinging to is "we wouldn't have passed the vote for the war with 75 votes if we had known" Well here is the chance to stand up for what the left beieves is right and condem the democratic Senators that supported the war, voted for it, and came out and made statements about how bad Iraq was. Don't worry I'm not going to hold my breath, old age has taught me that isn't going to happen, insteed the left will say something about how we are trying to confuse the issue, or we are being mean. Yet I doubt even one on the left will come out and say their Presidental ticket was for the war based on the same intel as President Bush, and their ticket came to the same conclusion, even though they had access to the same "desenting Intel" and IGNORED IT ALSO!
|
John these are good points you make (and I’ve spent the day thinking them over) and unless the Democrats / left where collectively a set of wimps in that they where able to see through the CIA / Intel bullshit and still be to scared to stand up and voice an opinion against the Iraq war then you (and I) have to conclude that the 'facts' presented to all the politicians was done in a very calculated and convincing manner. So in that manner I agree with you.
However two or three things still leave me very uneasy about this mess.
1) Why did the republicans push for the inquiry to be split into 2, with the investigation of what the very top administration knew and pressure if any applied, till after the election? You cannot deny that it smells of cover up surely? Even if you don’t agree that there was one.
2) Obviously now, The French, German, Russian etc INTEL was different to that the CIA was pushing. Did the Bush administration not follow through the idea that the other countries may be right and they wrong? And why not, aragance?
3) Is it possible that Bush and certain top administration had separate advice than that given to the rest of the Washington mob?