On 8/4/06, jdiebremse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I find your reaction to be astonishing. Indeed, I suspect it is at the heart of our inability to communicate. The quote you have cited from George Tenet said "the NIE did not say that there was an imminent threat." You, however, have interpreted this statement as saying "the NIE said that the threat from Iraq was *not imminent.*"
More bullshit (can you tell I'm feeling very impatient?). I never said any such thing. Anybody with a room-temperature IQ can see that there's nothing in the declassifed parts of the NIE that says anything like, "An attack from Iraq is not imminent." It said their judgment was that there was a low probability of Iraq using WMDs against the United States if it succeeded in building them. The point is that the administration was going around saying, We have to attack Iraq because our intelligence shows that they have WMDs and they pose an imminent, mortal threat to the United States, ready to send UAVs here loaded with weaponized biological and nuclear agents and just might have nukes, we can't be sure. Not one word of that was justified by the actual intelligence report. And the intelligence report proved rather accurate, didn't it? They really didn't have WMDs, UAVs, a nuclear program, etc. Oops. And now the White House is trying to argue that they never said that Iraq posed an imminent threat... yanking out quotes in which they said we shouldn't wait until the threat is imminent, which they did say. But they ignore all the times they said it was imminent. Nick -- Nick Arnett [EMAIL PROTECTED] Messages: 408-904-7198 _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
