wrote:
> The impression given is that Bush and his staff
> ignored those who warned
> about the 'evidence' and the conclusions drawn from
> the intelligence
> because they had their own agenda to push, which was
> to depose Saddam
> and install a democratic government in the middle
> east.
That's the opposite of what the report said. Everyone
believed the info was correct and
the entire committee agreed unanimously that Bush did
not apply pressure.
> You're asking that Bush not be blamed, or be
> described as lieing simply
> because the intelligence on which he based his
> decisions was false.
Is this a trick question?
> Are you admitting that there was a massive failure
> of intelligence and
> that the entire premise put forward for the war on
> Iraq was false?
> Because this is the implication of the Senate
> committee findings.
Again, that is not what the said. They said the info
from the CIA was not check as thoroughly as it should
have been. They were under a lot of pressure to
prevent another terrorist attack like 9/11. The
Niger/Uranium issue has not been discredited. That was
one of the issues. The WMD's they say proved to be
false info but that was only one of many reasons for
the war.
-sm
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail - 50x more storage than other providers!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
