<div>Tony, Nick et. al.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>I don't think it matters to Tony what defense Nick offers to Tony's list of objections to Nick's post on the Bush administrations deceptions regarding the intelligence and facts used to justify the US invasion and occupation of Iraq.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Tony appears to be following the old adage "don't confuse me with the facts, my mind's made up."</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Perhaps Tony would believe Colin Powell? </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Odd that we don't hear much about Colin Powell in the media recently. Is it that liberal leftist media bias (tongue in cheek alert!) that keeps his critical comments about the pre-war Iraq WMD/terrorism intelligence of the Bush administration off the headlines? Really though, it's probably more that Colin Powell is a loyal soldier who does not want to slam his former boss too much in public! Note below how he pushes the blame for the false intelligence to those who were "not senior people." Of course the "senior people," meaning Bush, Condi Rice, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et. al., should have been listening to all credible sources of intelligence on Iraq, and offered Colin Powell all the best information before he went before the UN, or they were not doing their job very well, were they?
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Does the "buck stop" on Bush's desk, Tony? Maybe Bush does not have the integrity of a Harry S. Truman!</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Colin Powell thinks intelligence reports were false that he was given by the Bush administration regarding Iraq WMDs presenting an immanent threat to the USA, intelligence that he presented before the UN before the Iraq invasion. He also states quite emphatically that "...he had "never seen evidence to suggest" a connection between the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States and the Saddam regime."
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>His opinion should give die hard Bush loyalists pause, loyalists who continue to insist Bush has no or limited culpability for the false intelligence, if indeed they even think that there was false intelligence, that led the USA into this foolish war. He was Secretary of State during W. Bush's first term, the general and military architect who led the first gulf war to push Iraq out of Kuwait, the war that Colin Powell insisted be fought with a clear exit strategy, the war that former President Bush senior had the sense to end after the mission was truly accomplished, rather than getting sucked into a nation building mess by going all the way to Baghdad to remove Saddam, as some wanted.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Too bad a man of Colin Powell's integrity was duped by the Bush administration into making a fool of himself before the UN and the whole world!</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Will Tony ask Colin Powell for his "proof" that he was, in Colin Powell's words, "misinformed" regarding the pre-war Iraq WMD intelligence he presented to the UN?:</div>
<div> </div>
<div><a href="http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1456650.htm">http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/200509/s1456650.htm</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>Former US secretary of state Colin Powell says his United Nations speech making the case for the US-led war on Iraq was "a blot" on his record. </div>
<div>
<p class="wallacepara">Mr Powell has also said that he had "never seen evidence to suggest" a connection between the September 11, 2001 terror attacks in the United States and the Saddam regime. </p>
<p class="wallacepara">In an interview with American ABC TV news to be broadcast on Friday (US time), Mr Powell said "it's a blot" on his record.</p>
<p class="wallacepara">"I'm the one who presented it on behalf of the United States to the world, and (it) will always be a part of my record. It was painful. It's painful now," he said.</p>
<p class="wallacepara">He said he felt "terrible" at being misinformed. </p>
<p class="wallacepara">Some members of the US intelligence community "knew at that time that some of these sources were not good, and shouldn't be relied upon, and they didn't speak up," Mr Powell said. </p>
<p class="wallacepara">"These are not senior people, but these are people who were aware that some of these resources should not be considered reliable," he said. </p>
<p class="wallacepara">"I was enormously disappointed." </p>
<p class="wallacepara">-------------</p></div>
<p class="wallacepara">Colin Powell is disappointed.</p>
<div>
<p class="wallacepara">What about you, Tony?</p>
<p class="wallacepara">More on Colin Powell and his UN Iraq WMD speech, Feb. 5, 2003, used to justify the US invasion:</p>
<p class="wallacepara"><a href="http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/">http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/</a></p>
<p class="wallacepara">Ted Moffett</p></div>
<div><span class="gmail_quote">On 4/29/06, <b class="gmail_sendername"><a href="mailto:ToeKneeTime@aol.com">ToeKneeTime@aol.com</a></b> <<a href="mailto:ToeKneeTime@aol.com">ToeKneeTime@aol.com</a>> wrote:</span>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0px 0px 0px 0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: #ccc 1px solid">
<div style="DIRECTION: ltr"><font face="Arial" color="#000000" size="2">
<div>Nick,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Re: Atta in Prague, What American intelligence agencies? And do you have proof that Cheney was specifically aware of this determination prior to making his assertions?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>second point: Did Bush/Cheney not have other intel sources advising them otherwise? Could you provide dated quotes from either man, post commission report?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Point 3: How do you know that Saddam's government didn't respond to Bin Laden's request? That doesn't sound like the sort of dialog one might engage in openly.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>4) Are you saying that this 2002 team of inspectors was IN Iraq, freely conducting their mission, when Bush made his July declaration?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>5) I assume you meant to refer to the 911 commission? If so, so what? The fact that some bureaucratic commission failed to confirm it, does not prove that the alleged meeting Bush referred to did not take place.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>6) When and where did Bush/ Cheney make these assertions after Rummy's declaration?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>6) Cheney should have known "full well" that Zarqawi was not then in Iraq. Why? Why are you surprised that captured documents failed to confirm a connection to Baghdad Is it not possible that certain documentation was either destroyed or never existed at all? The absence of proof does not disprove.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>7) Why is Bush automatically presumed wrong, while the Atomic Energy Association is presumed right? Could you site dated examples of specific statements made regarding Iraq's supposed nuclear capabilities?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>8) "that they could find......." Well that gives one pause. Can you understand how, given Iraq's history of nuclear production to which you refer, this administration and congress might regard reports of continued activity as requiring action? Did congress, by authorizing the use of force, not second the administration's concerns? Is it fair to laboriously heap all this blame at Bush's feet?
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>9) "most likely....." Again that nasty pause. And what experts? Isn't it possible that Bush may have been advised otherwise by other experts? Perhaps a consensus was arrived at after consulting several...... who knows for certain?
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>10) Is David Albright a nuclear scientist? How is he specifically qualified to make such a determination?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>11) I don't know that I find the potential for a brief and necessary tap on my phone line to be unreasonable in a post 911 environment. I trust that these folks will by and large direct their curiosities toward appropriate targets. How can we demand protection from our government when we deny it the sometimes gritty tools it may need to deal with murderous sociopaths.
</div>
<div> </div>
<div>12) Not necessarily a contradiction. The administration couldn't provide ALL it's intel re: Iraq to the congress. Yet what WAS provided did lead to a consensus in favor of action.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>13) Memo from where? And how was this meeting "secret" if it was detailed in a lengthy memo?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>14) Did the administration "cook" the intel on Iraq? The jury is still out. </div>
<div> </div>
<div>Best, --Tony</div></font></div><br>_____________________________________________________<br> List services made available by First Step Internet,<br> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.<br>
<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="http://www.fsr.net/" target="_blank">http://www.fsr.net</a><br> mailto:<a onclick="return top.js.OpenExtLink(window,event,this)" href="mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com">
Vision2020@moscow.com</a><br>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ<br><br><br></blockquote></div><br>