Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

CIA Did Not OK White House Claim-Hussein Could Launch in 45 Minut

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
 
RamboLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:07 PM
Original message
CIA Did Not OK White House Claim-Hussein Could Launch in 45 Minut
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A17424-20...

The White House, in the run-up to war in Iraq, did not seek CIA approval before charging that Saddam Hussein could launch a biological or chemical attack within 45 minutes, administration officials now say.

The claim, which has since been discredited, was made twice by President Bush, in a September Rose Garden appearance after meeting with lawmakers and in a Saturday radio address the same week. Bush attributed the claim to the British government, but in a "Global Message" issued Sept. 26 and still on the White House Web site, the White House claimed, without attribution, that Iraq "could launch a biological or chemical attack 45 minutes after the order is given."

The 45-minute claim is at the center of a scandal in Britain that led to the apparent suicide on Friday of a British weapons scientist who had questioned the government's use of the allegation. The scientist, David Kelly, was being investigated by the British parliament as the suspected source of a BBC report that the 45-minute claim was added to Britain's public "dossier" on Iraq in September at the insistence of an aide to Prime Minister Tony Blair -- and against the wishes of British intelligence, which said the charge was from a single source and was considered unreliable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlashHarry Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:09 PM
Response to Original message
1. I didn't realize Bush made the claim, too.
I thought it was just Blair who claimed they could hit us in 45 minutes. If he did, in fact, say that, it's clearly a lie.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Liberal Veteran Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. He sorta said it in a deniable way....
Following the meeting the president addressed a press conference in company with the members of Congress in the Rose Garden where he said, "The danger to our country is grave. The danger to our country is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more biological and chemical weapons. And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given".


It's a lousy defense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Frances Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:29 PM
Response to Reply #3
9. On the White House web site without mention of Britain
when the Post article was written anyway.

<<but in a "Global Message" issued Sept. 26 and still on the White House Web site, the White House claimed, without attribution, that Iraq "could launch a biological or chemical attack 45 minutes after the order is given.">>
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:12 PM
Response to Reply #1
4. ..me to...
somebody get their sources wrong?????//////
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocketdem Donating Member (496 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. "untruth" or "based on questionable information"
He certainly didn't lie. No straight-shooter, no adult, no man of morals and deep convictions would repeatedly lie to lead a nation into an illegal war. That would be criminal.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:13 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. ooops
did you forget to turn off the sarcasm key?

:evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tedoll78 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:17 PM
Response to Original message
6. Well, well, well..
I wonder if the rest of the media will run with this ball. Last week was Yellow Cake Week.. we need a catchy name for this week's Bush lie.

I'm also glad to see this coming from a more mainstream news source. If this had come from commondreams or another small independent news source, we wouldn't hear a peep about it and the average uninformed voter wouldn't be clued-in. No offense to those very respectable sites, but when I see a headline that could help us take this pResident down, I want to see a big media outlet behind it.

A pattern of lies is now being established. WMD... Cake.. 45 minutes.. the drumbeat rolls on. Bush is down to 53% in Zogby this week, and around 59% in his highest approval poll. Let's see how good this gets. And pass the popcorn.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Resistance Is Futile Donating Member (693 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. Don't get your hopes up
Bush is down to 53% in Zogby this week, and around 59% in his highest approval poll. Let's see how good this gets. And pass the popcorn.

Don't get your hopes up. The IAEA has supposedly just found enriched uranium in Iran. The Junta will just ramp up to 'liberate' someone else if their popularity falls too far.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indictrichardperle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:36 PM
Response to Reply #7
11. the iranian uranium report has already been dis-credited
iaea denies it. Just more bullshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 11:46 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. Already?
?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ewagner Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:28 PM
Response to Original message
8. Another 2 cents worth
The interesting thing here is that hsi defense is that the British had said it so it was "okay" for him to repeat it.

The pattern is that he never vetted anything, just used the Brits to prop up his case. At the veery least its a pattern...and a very disturbing one at that which should make the press stand up and take notice.

....and....yes...I too am worried about what will happen if the approval ratings fall too much. the only bright spot is that these guys seem to be so amateaurish they'll mess that up too.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
democrat in Tallahassee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:31 PM
Response to Original message
10. Pincus and Milbank better stay out of small planes; they are nailing
him with this stuff
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indictrichardperle Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:39 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. its been rumored for years
that the Grahams/WP accept alot of CIA plant stories, and that the CIA has tentacles through-out the media.

Payback is a bitch. Hundreds of pissed off mid-level CIA analysts.......

I think the leaks are going to continue until the neo-cons say "uncle".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
section321 Donating Member (632 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Wouldn't it be ironic if some spook from CIA stopped the BFEE
from bumping them off.

Not that we would ever know.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grasswire Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:48 PM
Response to Reply #10
14. we knew this....
....months ago. Why couldn't The Post ask the questions before Bush committted us to thousands of deaths and the wrecking of the economy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
15. From the WH web site. Bush is vouching for the British claims here
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/iraq/20...

President Bush Discusses Iraq with Congressional Leaders
Remarks by the President on Iraq
The Rose Garden

10:46 A.M. EDT

THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. We've just concluded a really good meeting with both Democrats and Republicans -- members of the United States Congress -- to discuss our national security and discuss how best to keep the peace. The security of our country is the commitment of both political parties and the responsibility of both elected branches of government.

We are engaged in a deliberate and civil and thorough discussion. We are moving toward a strong resolution. And all of us, and many others in Congress, are united in our determination to confront an urgent threat to America. And by passing this resolution we'll send a clear message to the world and to the Iraqi regime: the demands of the U.N. Security Council must be followed. The Iraqi dictator must be disarmed. These requirements will be met, or they will be enforced.

The danger to our country is grave. The danger to our country is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more biological and chemical weapons. And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given.

more

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/2002092...

For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
September 28, 2002

Radio Address by the President to the Nation


THE PRESIDENT: Good morning. On Thursday, I met with Democratic and Republican members of Congress to discuss the threat posed by the Iraqi regime. The security of our country is the commitment of both political parties, and the responsibility of both the President and the Congress. We are united in our determination to confront this urgent threat to America.

We're moving toward a strong resolution authorizing the use of force, if necessary, to defend our national security interests against the threat posed by Saddam Hussein. And by passing this resolution we will send a clear message to the world community and to the Iraqi regime the demands of the United Nations Security Council must be followed: the Iraqi dictator must be disarmed. These requirements will be met, or they will be enforced.

The danger to our country is grave and it is growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons, is rebuilding the facilities to make more and, according to the British government, could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order is given. The regime has long-standing and continuing ties to terrorist groups, and there are al Qaeda terrorists inside Iraq. This regime is seeking a nuclear bomb, and with fissile material could build one within a year.

more

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NNN0LHI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-19-03 11:31 PM
Response to Original message
16. No attribution here
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/2002092...

For Immediate Release
September 26, 2002

Global Message

The security of our country is the commitment of both political parties, and the responsibility of both elected branches of government.

Elected officials are working for a strong Congressional resolution that sends a clear message: UN Security Council demands must be followed and the Iraqi dictator must be disarmed. These requirements will be met, or they will be enforced.

The danger is grave and growing. The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons and is rebuilding facilities to make more. It could launch a biological or chemical attack 45 minutes after the order is given. The regime is seeking a nuclear bomb -- and, with fissile material, could build one within a year.

more

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 12:46 AM
Response to Original message
18. This is BIG
This was the "immediate threat" fabrication that led us into the war with Iraq. This and the lie about nukes that Saddam was building and would have ready in less than 6 months.

Now if we can just get the Cheney energy minutes AND documents with- held about security failures on 911, Bush is TOAST.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RevolutionStartsNow Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 01:05 AM
Response to Original message
19. Good!
This is what I was hoping for, that the lies would keep revealing themselves...they can say the yellowcake thing is yesterday's news (which it's not, of course), but I want them to have to face a new lie every week.

Tomorrow's talk shows should be good...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 01:59 AM
Response to Original message
20. KICK!!!
:dem:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VolcanoJen Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 02:06 AM
Response to Original message
21. This is huge, and speaks to the "credibility" issue
Here's the crucial paragraph from the article, the way I see it:

Virtually all of the focus on whether Bush exaggerated intelligence about Iraq's weapons ambitions has been on the credibility of a claim he made in the Jan. 28 State of the Union address about efforts to buy uranium in Africa. But an examination of other presidential remarks, which received little if any scrutiny by intelligence agencies, indicates Bush made more broad accusations on other intelligence matters related to Iraq.


Also, according to the WP reporter, "administration officials now say." Is this an admission? Is this on the record? Remember, it was when "administration officials" admitted that the SOTU 16-word claim was based on faulty evidence that the lid was blown off the yellow cake issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lumpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 02:11 AM
Response to Original message
22. Did Rumsfeld repeat the 45 minute claim also ?
or am I mistaken ?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PurityOfEssence Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 02:38 AM
Response to Original message
23. Hmm...the CIA seems to be consistently more discriminating than MI-5
doesn't it?

Just by "saying things that can't be proven as lies", this misadministration somehow got two thirds of the people in this country to believe Hussein personally had a hand in taking out the World Trade Center.

The more we hammer and nibble at this, the more it becomes apparent to all that there was no imminent threat. There was a preconceived desire to have at Iraq and all was cobbled together just to insinuate and TERRORIZE us into joining the lynch mob. What was the real reason? It sure as hell wasn't that he had anything and was coming after us with it. What was it? Oil? Daddy Revenge? "teaching the world a lesson"? Good Ol' Fashioned Bloodlust? Iron Poor Blood? Penis Envy? ALL OF THE ABOVE? Keep asking and keep pushing; they'll fall apart yet.

Remember: all hopes for the Republicans rest on Junior being perceived as Brave, Honest and Caring.

Tee hee hee.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
quilp Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 08:03 AM
Response to Original message
24. Another little snippet missed by our "free" media!
Everyone knows about Blair making this claim. How many know about Bush? Just what credibility does our media have left? We'll see if this gets mentioned by Brokaw. Can't wait till The Guardian gets here. We'll just have to accept the humiliation of Europeans show us Americans what "freedom of speech" really means!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cheswick2.0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 10:44 AM
Response to Original message
25. sent Milbank an e-mail this morning
I asked him if he ever heard of someone commiting suicide by cutting one wrist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
phillybri Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Jul-20-03 11:00 AM
Response to Original message
26. Kick
:kick:
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 Mon Nov 20th 2017, 06:21 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