Merely reinforced what Bush and the Neo-Cons wanted to hear in order to justify/rationalize/excuse what Bush and the Neo-Cons clearly wanted to do all along.
The real question is why?
ALWAYS question the motives of anyone who tells you something you want to hear, particularly when both you and him know that you want to hear it and hearing it is of some great importance to you.
So again, why?
Report Warned Bush Team About Intelligence Suspicions
DOUGLAS JEHL, New York Times, November 6, 2005:
WASHINGTON, Nov. 5 - A high Qaeda official in American custody was identified as a likely fabricator months before the Bush administration began to use his statements as the foundation for its claims that Iraq trained Al Qaeda members to use biological and chemical weapons, according to newly declassified portions of a Defense Intelligence Agency document.
Forum: The Transition in Iraq
The document, an intelligence report from February 2002, said it was probable that the prisoner, Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, "was intentionally misleading the debriefers" in making claims about Iraqi support for Al Qaeda's work with illicit weapons.
The document provides the earliest and strongest indication of doubts voiced by American intelligence agencies about Mr. Libi's credibility. Without mentioning him by name, President Bush, Vice President Dick Cheney, Colin L. Powell, then secretary of state, and other administration officials repeatedly cited Mr. Libi's information as "credible" evidence that Iraq was training Al Qaeda members in the use of explosives and illicit weapons.
Among the first and most prominent assertions was one by Mr. Bush, who said in a major speech in Cincinnati in October 2002 that "we've learned that Iraq has trained Al Qaeda members in bomb making and poisons and gases."
The newly declassified portions of the document were made available by Senator Carl M. Levin of Michigan, the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee.
Mr. Levin said the new evidence of early doubts about Mr. Libi's statements dramatized what he called the Bush administration's misuse of prewar intelligence to try to justify the war in Iraq. That is an issue that Mr. Levin and other Senate Democrats have been seeking to emphasize, in part by calling attention to the fact that the Republican-led Senate Intelligence Committee has yet to deliver a promised report, first sought more than two years ago, on the use of prewar intelligence.
A White House spokeswoman said she had no immediate comment on the D.I.A. report on Mr. Libi. But Senate Republicans, put on the defensive when Democrats forced a closed session of the Senate this week to discuss the issue, have been arguing that Republicans were not alone in making prewar assertions about Iraq, illicit weapons and terrorism that have since been discredited.
Mr. Libi, who was captured in Pakistan at the end of 2001, recanted his claims in January 2004. That prompted the C.I.A. , a month later, to recall all intelligence reports based on his statements, a fact recorded in a footnote to the report issued by the Sept. 11 commission.
Mr. Libi was not alone among intelligence sources later determined to have been fabricating accounts. Among others, an Iraqi exile whose code name was Curveball was the primary source for what proved to be false information about Iraq and mobile biological weapons labs. And American military officials cultivated ties with Ahmad Chalabi, the head of the Iraqi National Congress, an exile group, who has been accused of feeding the Pentagon misleading information in urging war.
The report issued by the Senate intelligence committee in July 2004 questioned whether some versions of intelligence report prepared by the C.I.A. in late 2002 and early 2003 raised sufficient questions about the reliability of Mr. Libi's claims.
But neither that report nor another issued by the Sept. 11 commission made any reference to the existence of the earlier and more skeptical 2002 report by the D.I.A., which supplies intelligence to military commanders and national security policy makers. As an official intelligence report, labeled DITSUM No. 044-02, the document would have circulated widely within the government, and it would have been available to the C.I.A., the White House, the Pentagon and other agencies. It remains unclear whether the D.I.A. document was provided to the Senate panel.
In outlining reasons for its skepticism, the D.I.A. report noted that Mr. Libi's claims lacked specific details about the Iraqis involved, the illicit weapons used and the location where the training was to have taken place.
"It is possible he does not know any further details; it is more likely this individual is intentionally misleading the debriefers," the February 2002 report said. "Ibn al-Shaykh has been undergoing debriefs for several weeks and may be describing scenarios to the debriefers that he knows will retain their interest."
Mr. Powell relied heavily on accounts provided by Mr. Libi for his speech to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, saying that he was tracing "the story of a senior terrorist operative telling how Iraq provided training in these weapons to Al Qaeda."
At the time of Mr. Powell's speech, an unclassified statement by the C.I.A. described the reporting, now known to have been from Mr. Libi, as "credible." But Mr. Levin said he had learned that a classified C.I.A. assessment at the time went on to state that "the source was not in a position to know if any training had taken place."
In an interview on Friday, Mr. Levin also called attention to another portion of the D.I.A. report, which expressed skepticism about the idea of close collaboration between Iraq and Al Qaeda, an idea that was never substantiated by American intelligence agencies but was a pillar of the administration's prewar claims.
"Saddam's regime is intensely secular and is wary of Islamic revolutionary movements," the D.I.A. report said in one of two declassified paragraphs. "Moreover, Baghdad is unlikely to provide assistance to a group it cannot control."
At the time of his capture, Mr. Libi was the most senior Qaeda official in American custody. The D.I.A. document gave no indication of where he was being held, or what interrogation methods were used on him.
Mr. Libi remains in custody, apparently at in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, where he was sent in 2003, according to government officials.
-- Modified on 11/5/2005 11:13:27 PM
This is interestesting in lots of ways.
It seems to me the fear of terrorist attack is probably as effective as the reality of terrorist attack [except for the death and destruction of course] as it forces us to consider, and sometims adopt, policies and courses of action we would not otherwise. Which may prove to be, and this might be the ultimate goal of the terrorists, detrimental to the long-term interests and well-being of the US.
Why would Libi tell lies that obviously reinforced the palpable desire of Bush and the Neo-Cons to wage war on Iraq? Was Al Qeada trying to "use" us to eliminate the secularist Hussein? Were they trying to drag us into a quagmire for which there would be no quick or easy or inexpensive exit? A war whose pursuit might render the US unable to respond to some other still to happen event/problem/crisis in the region? Is/was Libi serving more than one master [Al Qeada and...?]. Was Libi interrogated harshly/tortured and just told the tales he suspected the US wanted to hear?
This doesn't surprise me in the least. Except for the guy who makes the sacrifice and is "captured" to tell tall tales to the US, think how cheap and easy it is for these folks to sow confusion with a few simple well-placed and well-timed lies. And we buy it every time.
Amazing!
Not all of us buy it, or bought it, or ever did.
Unfortunately for the vast majority of people in this country, as well as overseas, the ones who stand the most to gain financially are the ones perpetuating the lies. Eisenhower was a Prophet.
Not all of us buy it, or bought it, or ever did.
Unfortunately for the vast majority of people in this country, as well as overseas, the ones who stand the most to gain financially are the ones perpetuating the lies. Eisenhower was a Prophet.
What you are saying is that Libi duped Bush, etal. into war? Hmmmm. And then he recently resigned, interesting.
Merely reinforced what Bush and the Neo-Cons wanted to hear in order to justify/rationalize/excuse what Bush and the Neo-Cons clearly wanted to do all along.
The real question is why?
ALWAYS question the motives of anyone who tells you something you want to hear, particularly when both you and him know that you want to hear it and hearing it is of some great importance to you.
So again, why?
Not much to choose from, but I'd believe Libi before I believed Libby.
What a great world we live in.
I have to admit it. This administration is shameless and calculating. Their tentacles in spreading misinformation have gone deep into all levels to deceive the American Public on this war....
October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry -- all Democrats
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Joe Biden > August 4, 2002
"This is a guy who is an extreme danger to the world, and this is a guy who is in every way possible seeking weapons of mass destruction."
Chuck Schumer > October 10, 2002
"It is Hussein's vigorous pursuit of biological, chemical and nuclear weapons, and his present and future potential support for terrorist acts and organizations that make him a danger to the people of the united states."
Nancy Pelosi > December 16, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Senator Carl Levin > September 19, 2002
"We begin with a common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations, is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
John Kerry > February 23, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."
Al Gore > December 16, 1998
"[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He has already demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons..."
Maybe we need to have an investigation into these co-conspirators to find out what they knew and when they knew it.
These guys ought to be very embarrassed. They're privy to all types of information we are not, and still they got bamboozled like most of the rest of us. Or perhaps they bamboozled themselves?
With the possible exception of Ford, all of these senators are proud to be identified as strong supporters of Israel.
Anyone want to try to connect some dots?