Quote:
|
Originally Posted by bruiser
BTW, you realize there have been three investigations into whether the intelligence was manufactured/manipulated or the Bush administration put pressure on to get the spin they wanted. Each investigation found there were no grounds for the charges. You did know this, didn't you?
|
First of all, the administration has access to lots more intelligence than did the Senate. The Senate never interviewed Chilabi (sp?) or saw the daily briefings. So to say they say the same information is deliberately misleading. The Senate saw only what the administration showed them.
Second, the investigations DID NOT look into HOW the pre-war intelligence was used. They only focused on if analysts were pressured into changing or limiting their reports. Phase 2 of the Senate investigation was supposed to look into how the administration used those reports and if they deliberately filtered them to suit their goals. Phase 2 was due out last fall but was conveniently delayed until after the election.
There are two ways to manipulate data: 1) make sure the reports only say what you want them to say or 2) use only those portions of the reports that support your objective. The Senate concluded that #1 did not occur – but even this conclusion is being called into question. They have not reported on #2.
And enough with sharing the blame for this with Clinton. Bush was inaugurated in Jan 2001. We went to war in Mar of 2003. Anything that the Clinton administration may have had was long since out of date and would not have been used by any professional analyst except for a historical perspective.