jojo

Salon: Former CIA officers report Bush 'didn't give a fuck about intelligence' Jason Rhyne

Months before the Iraq invasion, President Bush apparently ignored a 2002 Oval Office briefing in which CIA director George Tenet provided the president with intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not possess weapons of mass destruction, according to former Clinton advisor and Salon columnist Sidney Blumenthal.

Reporting in Salon, Blumenthal writes that according to his sources, two former CIA officers,"Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam's inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again."
Blumenthal also adds that the intelligence from that day was left out of the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which definitively stated that Iraq had WMD.

"The president had no interest in the intelligence," a CIA officer disclosed. "Bush didn't give a fuck about the intelligence. He had his mind made up."
"No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq," Blumenthal writes. "The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD."

Blumenthal's sources confirm a 2006 interview with the CIA's chief of clandestine operations for Europe, Tyler Drumheller, who told CBS's 60 Minutes that his agency had received intelligence from Saddam Hussein's foreign minister, Naji Sabri, indicating Iraq possessed no WMD.
"[The two former CIA officers] have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it," Blumenthal reports. "They described what Tenet said to Bush about the lack of WMD, and how Bush responded, and noted that Tenet never shared Sabri's intelligence with then Secretary of State Colin Powell."

Powell would later present US evidence justifying the preemptive invasion of Iraq to the United Nations--without knowledge of the Sabri information.
The former officials instead say that the information was "distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs." That information was in turn passed to British intelligence, who used it in briefing Prime Minister Tony Blair as to validation for going to war.
"Tenet told me he briefed the president personally," one of the former CIA officers informed Blumenthal, referring to the Oval Office briefing session on Sept. 18, 2002. Bush, reportedly, thought the information was 'the same old thing,' insisting it was only what Hussein wished him to think.

Prior to Bush's briefing, CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, although reportedly excited about Sabri's report, was concerned that the information conflicted with a source code-named "Curveball," who was to be revealed later as a former Iraqi taxi driver pretending to be a chemical engineer.
Continuing to believe that the Iraqi foreign minister's information was significant, the officers were told by a Tenet deputy that "You haven't figured this out yet. This isn't about intelligence. It's about regime change."
"In the congressional debate over the Authorization for the Use of Military Force," Blumenthal writes that "even those voting against it gave credence to the notion that Saddam possessed WMD...Not a single senator contested otherwise...none of them had an inkling of the Sabri intelligence."

As war approached, the officers on Sabri's case attempted to set up a defection for the foreign minister in order to help show that he stood behind his information. "He dithered," said one officer, and the war began before anything could come of the plan.

"The real tragedy is that they had a good source that they misused," said one of the former CIA officers. "The fact is there was nothing there, no threat. But Bush wanted to hear what he wanted to hear."

Why am I not surprised!

Let me start off by saying that in 2000 I said, 'Vote for me. I'm an agent of change.' In 2004, I said, 'I'm not interested in change --I want to continue as president.' Every candidate has got to say 'change.' That's what the American people expect." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 5, 2008

Advertising

michaelr

Hey jojo, this has always been a war of aggression. I am glad that people like you continue to bring articles like this up. Truth told, it's old news, but important. Maybe someday Bush will get whats coming to him.

A war of aggression is a war crime! Let's treat it as such.

jojo

I sometimes wonder if there is a point to hashing over the details - but then I decide I don't want the lying fucks to get away with it. The more I deal with this crap, the more I am for impeachment.

Then again, Bush was quoted recently as saying he cries all the time - maybe impeachment would just be a relief.

Let me start off by saying that in 2000 I said, 'Vote for me. I'm an agent of change.' In 2004, I said, 'I'm not interested in change --I want to continue as president.' Every candidate has got to say 'change.' That's what the American people expect." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 5, 2008

johnflesh

The best way to never let it happen again is to do away with the war itself. In this day and age war is the enemy.

American People 08'

johnflesh

If you look enough at say the past 50 years, stories like the one posted are common and mostly can be defined as a trend. Luckily I have picked up on it for my family's sake but for my neighbor and my country, this will have to be something noted and eyes opened in order to change and hold those responsible. For in the long run, we are all responsible if no one is.

American People 08'

jojo

Yeah, the same rich power brokers and the same corruption - but Bush has crossed over a line. The scary part is that people are so accepting of the loos of liberties, and so certain it can't affect them personally.

I assume, once the cream has moved to Kuwait, we''ll slowly devolve as 95% of the population is saddled with the debt run up by the govt - and the other 5% enjoys their wealth. You know what 5% I mean, all those countries that moved offshore but still get lucrative govt contracts from their friends in office.

Let me start off by saying that in 2000 I said, 'Vote for me. I'm an agent of change.' In 2004, I said, 'I'm not interested in change --I want to continue as president.' Every candidate has got to say 'change.' That's what the American people expect." --George W. Bush, Washington, D.C., March 5, 2008

Inkslinger

Ooooh Righties... come out, come out, wherever you are!

America didn't jump off a cliff.... it was Bushed.

Davocrat

You'd think this article would be a big problem for the US. But it's another in a long line of call-outs that get ignored. It's maddening. Well, maybe THIS one will get us pissed off enough to impeach or at least make Bush account for it.

Throwing my shoes for peace!
"This is a farewell ... you dog!"

kmiller1610

The long term threat that Sadaam represented demanded his removal.

He had the body count, the ambition and the ruthlessness that required he be deposed.

CIA reports come in every shape and size. They are called on to produce "what-if" scenarios and speculations of every type. Those sponsering a particular theory (such as Sadaam had no WMDs) could be expected to be pissed when their theory was rejected.

namvet69

What about the supposed ties to Alqaida that were used to sell it? So now we go to war over what ifs? Wow! That's rich. Theories, what ifs, conjecture, holy shit! We'll be at war in perpetuity. Good call.

No, you can't have my constitutional rights, I'm still using them!
One Nation- Under Surveillance, With Liberty and Justice for None.

Mr Con: A lot of Generals bought into the plan and the plan to remove Saddam Hussein was handled flawlessly. It is the aftermath that didn't go well at all.