"Now, the report does an excellent job of pointing out the
intelligence community's shortcomings. I have to say it is only an
incomplete picture of what occurred during the national debate over
the decision to invade Iraq. The report we are releasing today is a
first phase of the two- part committee investigation. Regrettably,
whereas I consider reform incredibly important, I also consider the
nature of the interaction or the pressure or the shaping of
intelligence by endless numbers of public statements emanating from
all levels high up in the administration, virtually saying that, Time
has run out, you know, mushroom cloud, grave and growing, imminent by
some, evidence supports the fact that they are developing their
nuclear weapons program -- all the rest of it.
That whole aspect is being relegated to the second part of our report
and I regret that. I felt that we should and could have addressed all
of these matters as a single matter, because under the rules of the
committee we can do that. But that was not possible and so we moved
forward. We've moved forward and produced a very good piece of work.
The central issue of how intelligence on Iraq was, in this senator's
opinion, exaggerated by the Bush administration officials was
relegated to that second phase, as yet unbegun, of the committee
investigation, along with other issues."
>From page 5 of the link below, a transcript of the press conference. I
am not going to cut and paste the whole thing. You guys who dont like
to click are just going to have to give your index finger some
exercise.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/09/politics/09TEXT-IRAQ-INTEL.html?pagewanted=1
Dana
----- Original Message -----
From: Sam Morris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Fri, 9 Jul 2004 11:41:59 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: 9/11 Commission to Cheney - You're still wrong.
To: CF-Community <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
--- Jerry Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Boy, they have you parroting the party line, don't
> they?
It's all over the news, even the liberal papers are
saying it.
>
> If you read or listen to the news, you will hear
> that many of the members of the Committee are
> complaining (dems and lower-importance republicans
> alike) that the Committe head is not allowing
> anything anti-Bush to be put into this report.
Sorry, I don't watch CNN or listen to Air America. Can
you back this statement up?
> There will be another report (planned for JUST after
> the election, which must be a coincidence) that will
> detail the shortcomings of the White House and the
> Pentagon.
It's all just a conspiracy isn't it?
-sm
>
> The committee is so not biased against Bush, unless
> you think that by listening to the facts, even if
> they are against Bush, is bias.
Say again? Oh if it's againt Bush it's fact if it's
for Bush it's bias. Got it.
> Jerry Johnson
>
>
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail________________________________
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
