Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Your Govt. at Work: Reportedly Most Senators Did Not Read Pre-War Intelligence

  1. #1
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like

    Your Govt. at Work: Reportedly Most Senators Did Not Read Pre-War Intelligence

    [QUOTE=CNN.com][B][U][SIZE=4]Records: Senators who OK'd war didn't read key report[/SIZE][/U][/B]
    POSTED: 7:25 a.m. EDT, May 29, 2007

    WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A new biography of Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton has once again raised the issue of whether members of Congress read a key intelligence report before the 2002 vote to authorize war in Iraq.

    Clinton did not read the 90-page, classified National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq, according to "Her Way: The Hopes and Ambitions of Hillary Rodham Clinton."

    For members of Congress to read the report, they had to go to a secure location on Capitol Hill. The Washington Post reported in 2004 that no more than six senators and a handful of House members were logged as reading the document.

    The Clinton biography, written by New York Times reporters Jeff Gerth and Don Van Natta Jr., summarizes the intelligence estimate, which combined reports of U.S. intelligence agencies about Iraq.

    Clinton, a New York Democrat, was briefed on the intelligence report multiple times, a spokesperson told CNN.

    Clinton is one of six presidential candidates who were in the Senate in October 2002 who voted for the resolution to authorize the invasion of Iraq.

    Candidate and then-Sen. John Edwards "read and was briefed on the intelligence" while sitting on the Senate Intelligence Committee, a spokesman said. Edwards has called his vote for the 2002 resolution a mistake. Another Democratic candidate, Sen. Joseph Biden, said he read the report.

    A spokesman for presidential candidate Sen. Christopher Dodd said the Connecticut Democrat did not read the document, either.

    Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain of Arizona also voted in favor of the resolution without reading the report.

    A spokesman for McCain told CNN his boss was briefed on the document "numerous times, and read the executive summary."

    Other candidates were not available for comment Monday.

    Misleading report
    The National Intelligence Estimate concluded that the United States had "compelling evidence" that Iraq was restarting its efforts to develop a nuclear bomb and had concealed stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons from U.N. inspectors after the cease-fire that ended the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

    That was wrong, but that wasn't established until after a U.S. -led army toppled Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's government in April 2003.

    The intelligence report did contain passages that raised questions about the weapons conclusions, said John McLaughlin, then deputy director of the CIA.

    "I think if someone read the entire report, they would walk away thinking the intelligence community generally thinks he has weapons of mass destruction, but there are quite a bit of differences," he said.

    McLaughlin, now a CNN contributor, said dissenting views by the State Department, Department of Energy and the Air Force made up about 10 to 12 pages of the report -- but critics say those dissents were not highlighted.

    Biden, the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said he held a closed session at which members could read the report along with top CIA officials. (Watch Sen. Biden say he couldn't vote against funding the war and put troops in greater jeopardy )

    Biden told CNN that he read the dissents in the report and he "spoke to the ones who dissented."

    Biden ended up voting for the resolution, but argued that he was casting a vote "to avoid a war."

    "It was a vote to give the authority to the president to avoid war by keeping the pressure on Saddam Hussein," the Delaware Democrat said Monday.

    He said Bush initially told Congress he would allow inspectors to certify whether Iraq had dismantled its weapons programs.

    "The president misused the power we gave him under that resolution," said Biden.

    Bush said war was necessary because Iraq was deceiving weapons inspectors and had demonstrated its unwillingness to disarm.

    A U.S.-led survey later concluded that Iraq had attempted to conceal some weapons-related research from the United Nations, but had abandoned its chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in the 1990s.[/QUOTE]

    Any Senator who voted but did not personally read all available pre-war intelligence reports provided to them, should be fired on the spot. Period. It is pathetic.

  2. #2
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=Warfish]Any Senator who voted but did not personally read all available pre-war intelligence reports provided to them, should be fired on the spot. Period. It is pathetic.[/QUOTE]


    I wonder how many bills actually EVER get read.

    Congress managed to write the 350+ page Patriot Act in a little more over a month. When did they get time to read it? Wait....congress can write 350 pages in a month?

  3. #3
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    468
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan]I wonder how many bills actually EVER get read.

    Congress managed to write the 350+ page Patriot Act in a little more over a month. When did they get time to read it? Wait....congress can write 350 pages in a month?[/QUOTE]

    Most bills are written by lobbyist groups and their army of lawyers and experts and then handed over to a representative.

  4. #4
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    warfish i agree, senators like Kerry and clinton were just as guilty as anyone else in the runup to war.

    ironically senator byrd who has been mocked tirelessly by the right was one of the few elected officials to stand up and say hey wait a minute.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=finlee17]Most bills are written by lobbyist groups and their army of lawyers and experts and then handed over to a representative.[/QUOTE]


    [IMG]http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images/declaration5.jpg[/IMG]
    [SIZE=3]
    [B]"That's exactly what we had in mind. Jolly Good!"[/B][/SIZE]

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    608
    Post Thanks / Like
    Here's a little grassroots effort trying to get this Bill some sponsors.
    It's way to logical to ever make any head way.

    [url]http://www.downsizedc.org/rtba_legislation.shtml[/url]

  7. #7
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Long Island & Section 337
    Posts
    4,859
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=bitonti]warfish i agree, senators like Kerry and clinton were just as guilty as anyone else in the runup to war.

    ironically senator byrd who has been mocked tirelessly by the right was one of the few elected officials to stand up and say hey wait a minute.[/QUOTE]
    Was he wearing his white hood when he stood up and said wait a minute?

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Philly
    Posts
    38,782
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=HDCentStOhio]Was he wearing his white hood when he stood up and said wait a minute?[/QUOTE]

    har dee har har

    meanwhile Senator Byrd was one of the only elected officials who had the best interests of the country at heart during that vote.

  9. #9
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote of the day.

    [QUOTE]I would like to suggest...that maybe we give Paul Wolfowitz a new job and send him over [to Iraq] as mayor since the neocons got us in over there.

    Rep. WALTER JONES (R-N.C.) [/QUOTE]]

  10. #10
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    The ultimate cause of this is political parties, the blind idolatry of which leads to irresponsible government. If the people of each district simply elected the best representive instead of the best Democrat or Republican who develop the habit to vote on party lines, in-part thanks to laziness, none of this probably would have happened.

  11. #11
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    3,555
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=PlumberKhan][IMG]http://www.wilsonsalmanac.com/images/declaration5.jpg[/IMG]
    [SIZE=3]
    [B]"That's exactly what we had in mind. Jolly Good!"[/B][/SIZE][/QUOTE]


    I'd like to point out that in 1776, those men were TERRORISTS in the eyes of the British.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetsCrazey]I'd like to point out that in 1776, those men were TERRORISTS in the eyes of the British.[/QUOTE]


    Watch this: [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f36gPAfgRMU[/url]

  13. #13
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetsCrazey]I'd like to point out that in 1776, those men were TERRORISTS in the eyes of the British.[/QUOTE]

    "Rebellion" would be the word you are actually looking for. Nice try though. :rolleyes:

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Posts
    14,747
    Post Thanks / Like
    What is the difference between the two?

    [QUOTE=Warfish]"Rebellion" would be the word you are actually looking for. Nice try though. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

  15. #15
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726]What is the difference between the two?[/QUOTE]

    [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com[/url] :P

  16. #16
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=cr726]What is the difference between the two?[/QUOTE]


    Terrorists - evil
    Rebels - good

    Haven't you ever watched Star Wars? ;)

  17. #17
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't recall our founding fathers going back to Mother England and killing innocent citizens. Maybe I missed that in history class.

  18. #18
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetFanTransplant]I don't recall our founding fathers going back to Mother England and killing innocent citizens. Maybe I missed that in history class.[/QUOTE]

    Yeah, but we didn't fight the way we were supposed to fight. We hid behind trees/rocks and had hit and run tactics. The Brits wanted us to line up and duke it out fair and square. We couldn't match up like that so we decided to go about things a little differently. We played dirty until we could get some help and match up evenly on the battlefield.

    When up against a superior foe who has superior firepower, how do think you'll fight? You'll fight anyway you can. You'll fight dirty, you'll hide, and you'll harass until the enemy goes home.

    The problem with Iraq and terrorists is how do you irradicate something that can quickly blend in with the rest of the population when things get too hot? How do you win a war like that? The answer is so long term and so not a military solution. It's about stabilization of the economy, safety and then education. If in the short term our military can do this (and I think it is trying but ultimately the initial forces were not enough and this is now dragged us into a police operation that is far too costly and has taken far too long) then the long term may hold some hope.

    The real question now is how long can we keep a large chunk of our military in Iraq to try and police that state?
    Last edited by F-4 Phantom; 05-30-2007 at 04:59 PM.

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=F-4 Phantom]Yeah, but we didn't fight the way we were supposed to fight. We hid behind trees/rocks and had hit and run tactics. The Brits wanted us to line up and duke it out far and square. We couldn't match up like that so we decided to go about things a little differently. We played dirty until we could get some help and match up evenly on the battlefield.

    When up against a superior foe who has superior firepower, how do think you'll fight? You'll fight anyway you can. You'll fight dirty, you'll hide, and you'll harass until the enemy goes home.

    The problem with Iraq and terrorists is how do you irradicate something that can quickly blend in with the rest of the population when things get too hot? How do you win a war like that? The answer is so long term and so not a military solution. It's about stabilization of the economy, safety and then education. If in the short term our military can do this (and I think it is trying but ultimately the initial forces were not enough and this is now dragged us into a police operation that is far too costly and has taken far too long) then the long term may hold some hope.

    The real question now is how long can we keep a large chunk of our military in Iraq to try and police that state?[/QUOTE]

    ok... I don't recall our founding fathers hiding behind trees killing innocent civilians. :rolleyes:

  20. #20
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    319
    Post Thanks / Like
    [QUOTE=JetFanTransplant]ok... I don't recall our founding fathers hiding behind trees killing innocent civilians. :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    Good point. Though there were not many British "civilians" over here. There were a lot of loyalists to the crown who I believe were driven out (fled to Canada, Bermuda and several other areas or lynched).

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us