Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BUSH Interview: "So "mislead" means, do I think somebody lied to me? No, I don't."

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 » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
kpete Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:21 AM
Original message
BUSH Interview: "So "mislead" means, do I think somebody lied to me? No, I don't."
Interview with President Bush
By WHITE HOUSE TRANSCRIPT | 5/13/08 5:17 PM EST


Q Mr. President, I'm going to surprise you -- there's a question from a user, Bruce Becker, and he asks: Do you feel that you were misled on Iraq?

THE PRESIDENT: I feel like -- I felt like there were weapons of mass destruction. You know, "mislead" is a strong word, it almost connotes some kind of intentional -- I don't think so, I think there was a -- not only our intelligence community, but intelligence communities all across the world shared the same assessment. And so I was disappointed to see how flawed our intelligence was.

Q And so you feel that you didn't have all the information you should have or the right spin on that information?

THE PRESIDENT: No, no, I was told by people that they had weapons of mass destruction -- as were members of Congress, who voted for the resolution to get rid of Saddam Hussein. And of course, the political heat gets on and they start to run and try to hide from their votes. But intelligence communities all across the world felt the same thing. This was kind of a common assessment.

So "mislead" means, do I think somebody lied to me? No, I don't. I think it was just, you know, they analyzed the situation and came up with the wrong conclusion.

more at:
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0508/10316_Page3.h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:23 AM
Response to Original message
1. and he feels no regret for the hundreds of thousands killed by his 'oops'
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sarge43 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:30 AM
Response to Original message
2. He can not accept or acknowledge any responsibility.
Oh he can shake his fist and snarl about making the hard decisions, but when faced with the consequences, someone gets the blame.

He's an emotional/mental 10 year old. (And my apologies to 10 year olds.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Ghost in the Machine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:31 AM
Response to Original message
3. George Walker Bush introduces: STUPID V2.5.0
This idiot is dumber than a bag of hammers...

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WinkyDink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:34 AM
Response to Original message
4. He's defending himself there, obviously, for lying to the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angstlessk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
5. "I feel like -- I felt like there were weapons of mass destruction."
how in the hell do you 'feel' WMD? this is why we are so fucked up after 8 yers of this idjit..he 'feels' the economy is good. see, no one can question a 'feeling' as they are personal and one cannot prove you are lying...I want to see him on trial where his 'feelings' mean absolutely nothing and only the facts will prevail!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sinkingfeeling Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:50 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. So, we've murdered a million people and spent $1 trillion because GWB had indigestion? Or some
'feeling' in his gut? How could anybody respect the USA after that?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
angstlessk Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 10:45 AM
Response to Reply #6
11. I can hear it now: boosh: I have a tummy ache...no wait...IRAN..ATTACK IRAN
it ain't a tummy ache it is my feeling they have them thar nucular weapons!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Solly Mack Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 08:59 AM
Response to Original message
7. Poor thing....how could any of it possibly be his fault.
If they were all just so perfectly innocent in their actions, there wouldn't be this mad rush of books filled with excuses as to why it isn't their fault.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LynnTheDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
8. So George W. bUsh LIES AGAIN. Gee I am so fucking shocked.
SUMMER, 2002 CIA WARNINGS (about lack of "WMD") TO WHITE HOUSE EXPOSED
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovi...

SEPTEMBER, 2002 DIA TELLS WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF CHEMICAL WEAPONS
http://www.iraqwatch.org/government/US/Pentagon/us-dod-...

SEPTEMBER 20, 2002 DEPT. OF ENERGY TELLS WHITE HOUSE OF NUKE DOUBTS (aluminum tubes for conventional rockets, NOT nukes)

While National Security Adviser Condi Rice stated on 9/8 that imported aluminum tubes are only really suited for nuclear weapons programs, centrifuge programs a growing number of experts say that the administration has not presented convincing evidence that the tubes were intended for use in uranium enrichment rather than for artillery rocket tubes or other uses. Former U.N. weapons inspector David Albright said he found significant disagreement among scientists within the Department of Energy and other agencies about the certainty of the evidence."
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/20...

OCTOBER 2002 CIA DIRECTLY WARNS WHITE HOUSE

"The CIA sent two memos to the White House in October voicing strong doubts about a claim President Bush made three months later in the State of the Union address that Iraq was trying to buy nuclear materials in Africa."
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/news/nation/636209...

OCTOBER 2002 STATE DEPT. WARNS WHITE HOUSE ON NUKE CHARGES

The State Departments Intelligence and Research Department dissented from the conclusion in the National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqs WMD capabilities that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. "The activities we have detected do not ... add up to a compelling case that Iraq is currently pursuing what INR would consider to be an integrated and comprehensive approach to acquiring nuclear weapons."

INR accepted the judgment by Energy Department technical experts that aluminum tubes Iraq was seeking to acquire, which was the central basis for the conclusion that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, were ill-suited to build centrifuges for enriching uranium.
http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/pdf/Iraq/declass...

OCTOBER 2002 AIR FORCE WARNS WHITE HOUSE (against "drones")

"The government organization most knowledgeable about the United States' UAV program -- the Air Force's National Air and Space Intelligence Center -- had sharply disputed the notion that Iraq's UAVs were being designed as attack weapons" a WMD claim President Bush used in his October 7 speech on Iraqi WMD, just three days before the congressional vote authorizing the president to use force.
http://www.independent-media.tv/item.cfm?fmedia_id=2755...

JANUARY, 2003 STATE DEPT. INTEL BUREAU REITERATE WARNING TO POWELL

"The Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR), the State Department's in-house analysis unit, and nuclear experts at the Department of Energy are understood to have explicitly warned Secretary of State Colin Powell during the preparation of his speech that the evidence was questionable. The Bureau reiterated to Mr. Powell during the preparation of his February speech that its analysts were not persuaded that the aluminum tubes the Administration was citing could be used in centrifuges to enrich uranium."
http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/justif...

FEBRUARY 14, 2003 UN WARNS WHITE HOUSE THAT NO WMD HAVE BEEN FOUND
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/14/sprj.irq.un /

FEBRUARY 15, 2003 IAEA WARNS WHITE HOUSE NO NUCLEAR EVIDENCE
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b24889.ht...

FEBURARY 24, 2003 CIA WARNS WHITE HOUSE NO DIRECT EVIDENCE OF WMD
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/3340723 /

MARCH 7, 2003 IAEA REITERATES TO WHITE HOUSE NO EVIDENCE OF NUKES
http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/kfiles/b24889.ht...

Doubts, Dissent Stripped from Public Version of Iraq Assessment
The public version of the U.S. intelligence community's key prewar assessment of Iraq's illicit arms programs was stripped of dissenting opinions, warnings of insufficient information and doubts about deposed dictator Saddam Hussein's intentions, a review of the document and its once-classified version shows.

As a result, the public was given a far more definitive assessment of Iraq's plans and capabilities than President Bush and other U.S. decision-makers received from their intelligence agencies.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0210-02.htm

CIA to Bush: 'No clear Evidence of WMD'
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120103A.shtml

Why the CIA thinks Bush is wrong
The president says the US has to act now against Iraq. The trouble is, his own security services don't agree.
http://www.sundayherald.com/28384

CIA in blow to Bush attack plans
The letter also comes at a time when the CIA is competing with the more hawkish Pentagon, which is also supplying the White House with intelligence on the Iraqi threat.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.h...

White House 'exaggerating Iraqi threat'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence

http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.h...

"I would remind you that when the inspectors first went into Iraq and were denied - finally denied access, a report came out of the Atomic -the IAEA that they were six months away from developing a weapon. I don't know what more evidence we need."
-Bush speaking at a news conference Sept. 7 with Tony Blair

There never was, never has been, any such report.
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm

France & Russia knew;

'French intelligence was telling us that there was effectively no real evidence of a WMD program That's why France wanted a longer extension on the weapons inspections. The French, the Germans and the Russians all knew there were no weapons there -- and so did Blair and Bush as that's what the French told them directly. Blair ignored what the French told us and instead listened to the Americans.'

The debate on Iraqi WMD continues. For example, Russia was not convinced by either the September 24, 2002 British dossier or the October 4, 2002 CIA report. Lacking sufficient evidence, Russia dismissed the claims as a part of a "propaganda furor."
http://www.isis-online.org/publications/iraq/usallieswm...

The UK knew
"They also ignore the statements of Robin Cook, the former British foreign secretary who resigned on the eve of the war to protest Prime Minister Tony Blairs war policy. Cook was quoted in the June 18, 2003 Guardian newspaper as saying: I think it would be fair to say that there was a selection of evidence to support a conclusion. I fear we got into a position in which the intelligence was not being used to inform and shape policy, but to shape policy that was already settled.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/20...

Don't forget Poland! Even they knew -and publicly admitted- it was for the OIL.

Poland, which has sent troops to support the US-led forces in Iraq, has acknowledged its "ultimate objective" is to acquire supplies of Iraqi oil.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3043330.stm

But George W. bUsh was..."mislead"...


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fed-up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:05 AM
Response to Original message
9. no f*ckwad (* not OP), you were the DECIDER and came up w/wrong conclusion to go to war
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
VP505 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:52 AM
Response to Original message
10. That a-hole went into office
Edited on Wed May-14-08 09:53 AM by vpilot
with an agenda and was willing to do WHATEVER it took to accomplish it. There is no doubt in my mind that * and his cronies spent more time figuring how they could manipulate the intelligence to fit the scenario they wanted rather than analyzing the consequences. Kind of like the way a dumb criminal just know he won't get caught so why bother spending time thinking about what NOT to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LSK Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 10:47 AM
Response to Original message
12. "intelligence communities all across the world felt the same thing"
No, they did not. This lie gets repeated a lot and it is not true.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Johonny Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 10:50 AM
Response to Original message
13. but intelligence communities all across the world
except well those communities that didn't have to rely on the US intelligence or listen to the UN inspectors... Bushes whole world encompasses 4-5 people around him.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bvar22 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
14. Democrats who OPPOSED the Iraq War:
Not EVERYBODY believed that Saddam was a threat to the US!



The Democratic Party Honor Roll
These Democrats should be remembered for their principled stand against the WAR Machine.

IWR

United States Senate

In the Senate, the 21 Democrats, one Republican and one Independent courageously voted their consciences in 2002 against the War in Iraq :

Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii)
Jeff Bingaman (D-New Mexico)
Barbara Boxer (D-California)
Robert Byrd (D-West Virginia)
Kent Conrad (D-North Dakota)
Jon Corzine (D-New Jersey)
Mark Dayton (D-Minnesota)
Dick Durbin (D-Illinois)
Russ Feingold (D-Wisconsin)
Bob Graham (D-Florida)
Daniel Inouye (D-Hawaii)
Jim Jeffords (I-Vermont)
Ted Kennedy (D-Massachusetts)
Patrick Leahy (D-Vermont)
Carl Levin (D-Michigan)
Barbara Mikulski (D-Maryland)
Patty Murray (D-Washington)
Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)
Paul Sarbanes (D-Maryland)
Debbie Stabenow (D-Michigan)
The late Paul Wellstone (D-Minnesota)
Ron Wyden (D-Oregon)

Lincoln Chaffee (R-Rhode Island)


United States House of Representatives

Six House Republicans and one independent joined 126 Democratic members of the House of Represenatives:

Neil Abercrombie (D-Hawaii)
Tom Allen (D-Maine)
Joe Baca (D-California)
Brian Baird (D-Washington DC)
John Baldacci (D-Maine, now governor of Maine)
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wisconsin)
Xavier Becerra (D-California)
Earl Blumenauer (D-Oregon)
David Bonior (D-Michigan, retired from office)
Robert Brady (D-Pennsylvania)
Corinne Brown (D-Florida)
Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio)
Lois Capps (D-California)
Michael Capuano (D-Massachusetts)
Benjamin Cardin (D-Maryland)
Julia Carson (D-Indiana)
William Clay, Jr. (D-Missouri)
Eva Clayton (D-North Carolina, retired from office)
James Clyburn (D-South Carolina)
Gary Condit (D-California, retired from office)
John Conyers, Jr. (D-Michigan)
Jerry Costello (D-Illinois)
William Coyne (D-Pennsylvania, retired from office)
Elijah Cummings (D-Maryland)
Susan Davis (D-California)
Danny Davis (D-Illinois)
Peter DeFazio (D-Oregon)
Diana DeGette (D-Colorado)
Bill Delahunt (D-Massachusetts)
Rosa DeLauro (D-Connecticut)
John Dingell (D-Michigan)
Lloyd Doggett (D-Texas)
Mike Doyle (D-Pennsylvania)
Anna Eshoo (D-California)
Lane Evans (D-Illinois)
Sam Farr (D-California)
Chaka Fattah (D-Pennsylvania)
Bob Filner (D-California)
Barney Frank (D-Massachusetts)
Charles Gonzalez (D-Texas)
Luis Gutierrez (D-Illinois)
Alice Hastings (D-Florida)
Earl Hilliard (D-Alabama, retired from office)
Maurice Hinchey (D-New York)
Ruben Hinojosa (D-Texas)
Rush Holt (D-New Jersey)
Mike Honda (D-California)
Darlene Hooley (D-Oregon)
Inslee
Jackson (Il.)
Jackson-Lee (TX)
Johnson, E.B.
Jones (OH)
Kaptur
Kildee
Kilpatrick
Kleczka
Kucinich
LaFalce
Langevin
Larsen (WA)
Larson (CT)
Lee
Levin
Lewis (GA)
Lipinski
Lofgren
Maloney (CT)
Matsui
McCarthy (MO)
McCollum
McDermott
McGovern
McKinney
Meek (FL)
Meeks (NY)
Menendez
Millender-McDonald
Miller
Mollohan
Moran (Va)
Nadler
Napolitano
Neal
Oberstar
Obey
Olver
Owens
Pallone
Pastor
Payne
Pelosi
Price (NC)
Rahall
Rangel
Reyes
Rivers
Rodriguez
Roybal-Allard
Rush
Sabo
Sanchez
Sanders
Sawyer
Schakowsky
Scott
Serrano
Slaughter
Snyder
Solis
Stark
Strickland
Stupak
Thompson (CA)
Thompson (MS)
Tierney
Towns
Udall (NM)
Udall (CO)
Velazquez
Visclosky
Waters
Watson
Watt
Woolsey
Wu


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone
















Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
eowyn_of_rohan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
15. actually, the word is "misled" (sometimes mispronounced in written form) ;)
had to throw that in
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 Sat Sep 23rd 2017, 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) 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