rulemylife
Posts: 14614
Joined: 8/23/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: celticlord2112
quote:
That's not true and I think you know it's not. Individual members of Congress do not have access to the military intelligence the President has nor do they have the same access as a body. They were fed the same lies as the rest of us.
Members of Congress receive a National Intelligence Estimate, produced by the Director of National Intelligence
According to the report of the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction delievered 31 March 2005, in actual fact the NIE delivered to Congress might have shed a different light on the Iraqi situation:
quote:
As problematic as the October 2002 NIE was, it was not the Community’s
biggest analytic failure on Iraq. Even more misleading was the river of intelligence
that flowed from the CIA to top policymakers over long periods of
time—in the President’s Daily Brief (PDB) and in its more widely distributed
companion, the Senior Executive Intelligence Brief (SEIB). These
daily reports were, if anything, more alarmist and less nuanced than the
NIE. It was not that the intelligence was markedly different. Rather, it was
that the PDBs and SEIBs, with their attention-grabbing headlines and drumbeat
of repetition, left an impression of many corroborating reports where in
fact there were very few sources. And in other instances, intelligence suggesting
the existence of weapons programs was conveyed to senior policymakers,
but later information casting doubt upon the validity of that
intelligence was not. In ways both subtle and not so subtle, the daily reports
seemed to be “selling” intelligence—in order to keep its customers, or at
least the First Customer, interested.
By some accounts from congressional aides, a whopping 6 senators actually read the NIE before voting on Iraq.
The information was delivered to Congress, independent of the President. The opportunity was there for them to reach their own conclusions about the necessity and urgency of action in Iraq. If they read the NIE and reached the same conclusion as Bush, then the claim that Bush lied is pure unadulterated political bullshit. If they didn't read the NIE and just swallowed Bush's version of things, they were negligent and derelict in their duty.
Either way, Congress is a full equal partner in the burden of blame on the fuckup known as Iraq. Of course they want to blame Bush. So much easier when the blood is on someone else's hands. Pity this blood won't wash off--not off Bush's hands, not of Congress' hands. They are all guilty.
Impeach one? Hell, hang 'em all!
See what you've done now? You've put me in the position of defending the idiots and lowlifes that make up our Congress. Oh well, here goes.
I may not have made it clear but I never meant to imply Congress didn't have sources of information. They do not have the access though to the many different channels of information the President has. Congressman Billy Ray Joe-Bob can't get on the phone to the Joint Chiefs and say "Hey ya'll, I want to see all the intelligence you Pentagon boys have on that there Saddam feller and his WMD's. I'll be over in an hour, ya'll have that ready for me now, ya hear?".
The President can. From everything I've seen the administration chose to ignore any contradictory information that didn't suit their intention of invading Iraq. There's a big difference between negligence by Congress in not being more aggressive in seeking the facts and deliberate manipulation of the facts by the administration.
Bush, by his own words, was/is "the Decider". Let him stand by and be accountable for his decisions.
|
RE: Kucinich offers impeachment papers - 
Profile
.
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread