Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bush unsure of NIE findings probe

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Leo 9 Donating Member (560 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 09:10 PM
Original message
Bush unsure of NIE findings probe
Source: United Press International

Bush unsure of NIE findings probe


Published: Dec. 13, 2007 at 8:17 PM

WASHINGTON, Dec. 13 (UPI) -- U.S. President George W. Bush isn't sure it's necessary for a panel to look into the findings of the National Intelligence Estimate, the White House said.

Sen. John Ensign, R-Nev., has called for the creation of a panel of House and Senate members to examine the findings of the NIE on Iran's capability to develop nuclear weapons.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the NIE "supports the president's contention that Iran is still dangerous, and that it continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material."

Regarding a non-partisan commission to investigate the intelligence, Perino said: "The bottom line for the president on the NIE was that the 16 intelligence communities ... came together, they assessed all of the intelligence. They spent a good deal of time checking it.

snip


Read more: http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2007/12/13/bush_unsure_of_nie_findings_probe/8477/
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 09:12 PM
Response to Original message
1. Funny thing, I didn't see "Iran is still dangerous" in that NIE. Did you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
laconicsax Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 09:52 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. They just left out a bit of their explanation.
"...supports the president's contention that Iran is still dangerous, and that it continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material."

Rearrange the words:

"Iran continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material, supporting the president's contention that Iran is still dangerous."

Change "is still" to "would be"

"Iran continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material, supporting the president's contention that Iran would be dangerous."

Add a bit to the end:

"Iran continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material, supporting the president's contention that Iran would be dangerous if they decided to restart a nuclear arms program."

And then a little touch of Scare-the-shit-out-of-peopleTM:

"Iran continues to enrich uranium, moving towards fissile material, supporting the president's contention that Iran would be dangerous if they decided to restart a nuclear arms program. If they were to move such a program forward in secrecy, they could develop a nuclear warhead in less than a year. This is why Iran needs to come clean about the full extent of its nuclear program. If we wait for evidence that they have restarted a secret nuclear arms program, the smoking gun could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."

Pretty simple really.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robinlynne Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 01:19 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. ohhhhh. now I get it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kestrel91316 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 09:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. I thought John Ensign was supposed to be running the plan to get
more Republicans elected in 2008. Guess that isn't working out so well, eh, John?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rockybelt Donating Member (938 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 09:45 PM
Response to Original message
3. Of course he don't want to look into the NIE report.
It would probably be his worst nightmare (If he is capable of that) for someone to look closely at the NIE. Their findings would be the same as the 16 intelligence agencies or maybe even a worse scenereo for bushco. What if they were to report that Cheney was trying to cook the books on this one too? What if they reported that the shrub had his hand in the deceptions also?

What if they dug deep enough to uncover some more treasonous things that bushco did? Just imagine!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sam sarrha Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 10:20 PM
Response to Original message
5. that wet brain fetal alcoholic isn't sure whether to use 'is' or 'are' in a 4 word sentence, F'n Mor...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Plaid Adder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-13-07 10:53 PM
Response to Original message
6. You know, I was just saying this evening...
...that the way Bush is handling the NIE report on Iraq just shows you how deeply, deeply messed up this administration is.

Basically the gist of the report is this: Iran *was* working on nuclear weapons, but they shut down the program in 2003. Why? Because we invaded Iraq over "weapons of mass destruction," and they didn't think having one of these open-secret type WOMD programs was such a hot idea any more.

Under the leadership of ANY OTHER PRESIDENT, the release of the NIE report would have been greeted with shouts of joy and crows of triumph and all kinds of cheering and hoo-hah about what a major diplomatic success it represents. Because what this actually would seem to indicate is that in fact, invading Iraq did act as a deterrent for another hostile power that was trying to achieve nuclear capability. Which means that regardless of how shitty everything has turned out in Iraq, Bush could actually point to this and say, "See, I was right, this pre-emptive war shit really works!"

Instead, Bush is whining and pouting and saying, "But don't think this doesn't mean we're not going to come over there and light up the untamed fire of freedom all over your country!"

And that's because *all he wants to do is start another war.* He doesn't care--or even appear to have noticed--that he, the world's most terrifying blind pig, has finally stumbled across a pretty tasty acorn. Actually making the world safer from nuclear destruction is not on his to-do list. Instead of being pleased--and at this point, amazed--that someone has actually determined that there was at least one good thing that came out of his disastrous Iraq campaign, he's just pissed off because this news will make it harder for him to start his NEXT disastrous campaign.

This administration shouldn't even have a Secretary of State. They can't do diplomacy at all. They don't seem to understand how it works. Even at the lowest level of Mafia goondom it is understood that in order to run a successful protection racket, you have to distinguish between people who comply with your demands and people who don't. If you beat up *everyone* on your list, even those who have paid their protection money, what incentive does anyone have to pay you? If your object is to stop countries you don't like from developing nuclear weapons by threatening to invade them if they do it, it's kind of stupid to go on threatening to invade said countries even after they've caved and done what you wanted. You'd think the smart response would be, "Hey, you scrapped your program cause you're shit-scared we're gonna attack you! That's what we like to hear! Keep up the good work!" And instead we get, "Oh, dang, they just dismantled their nuclear program. Well, we'll find a reason to invade them anyway!"

:argh:

The Plaid Adder
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
focusfan Donating Member (884 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-14-07 09:28 AM
Response to Original message
8. he's hoping they will start enriching uranium so
he can start another war.it's killing him he wants to make
more money
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC