The Tangled Web

Rimrock

Moderator
PREWAR INTELLIGENCE
Insulating Bush
By Murray Waas, National Journal
© National Journal Group Inc.
Thursday, March 30, 2006

Karl Rove, President Bush's chief political adviser, cautioned other White House aides in the summer of 2003 that Bush's 2004 re-election prospects would be severely damaged if it was publicly disclosed that he had been personally warned that a key rationale for going to war had been challenged within the administration. Rove expressed his concerns shortly after an informal review of classified government records by then-Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen J. Hadley determined that Bush had been specifically advised that claims he later made in his 2003 State of the Union address -- that Iraq was procuring high-strength aluminum tubes to build a nuclear weapon -- might not be true, according to government records and interviews.


As the 2004 election loomed, the White House was determined to keep the wraps on a potentially damaging memo about Iraq.



Policy Council: Sponsored Links

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Position papers, expert contacts and other resources from Policy Council members are available below.




Hadley was particularly concerned that the public might learn of a classified one-page summary of a National Intelligence Estimate, specifically written for Bush in October 2002. The summary said that although "most agencies judge" that the aluminum tubes were "related to a uranium enrichment effort," the State Department's Bureau of Intelligence and Research and the Energy Department's intelligence branch "believe that the tubes more likely are intended for conventional weapons."

Three months after receiving that assessment, the president stated without qualification in his January 28, 2003, State of the Union address: "The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."

The previously undisclosed review by Hadley was part of a damage-control effort launched after former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson IV alleged that Bush's claims regarding the uranium were not true. The CIA had sent Wilson to the African nation of Niger in 2002 to investigate the purported procurement efforts by Iraq; he reported that they were most likely a hoax.

The White House was largely successful in defusing the Niger controversy because there was no evidence that Bush was aware that his claims about the uranium were based on faulty intelligence. Then-CIA Director George Tenet swiftly and publicly took the blame for the entire episode, saying that he and the CIA were at fault for not warning Bush and his aides that the information might be untrue.

But Hadley and other administration officials realized that it would be much more difficult to shield Bush from criticism for his statements regarding the aluminum tubes, for several reasons.

For one, Hadley's review concluded that Bush had been directly and repeatedly apprised of the deep rift within the intelligence community over whether Iraq wanted the high-strength aluminum tubes for a nuclear weapons program or for conventional weapons.

For another, the president and others in the administration had cited the aluminum tubes as the most compelling evidence that Saddam was determined to build a nuclear weapon -- even more than the allegations that he was attempting to purchase uranium.

And finally, full disclosure of the internal dissent over the importance of the tubes would have almost certainly raised broader questions about the administration's conduct in the months leading up to war.

"Presidential knowledge was the ball game," says a former senior government official outside the White House who was personally familiar with the damage-control effort. "The mission was to insulate the president. It was about making it appear that he wasn't in the know. You could do that on Niger. You couldn't do that with the tubes." A Republican political appointee involved in the process, who thought the Bush administration had a constitutional obligation to be more open with Congress, said: "This was about getting past the election."

The President's Summary
Most troublesome to those leading the damage-control effort was documentary evidence -- albeit in highly classified government records that they might be able to keep secret -- that the president had been advised that many in the intelligence community believed that the tubes were meant for conventional weapons.

The one-page documents known as the "President's Summary" are distilled from the much lengthier National Intelligence Estimates, which combine the analysis of as many as six intelligence agencies regarding major national security issues. Bush's knowledge of the State and Energy departments' dissent over the tubes was disclosed in a March 4, 2006, National Journal story -- more than three years after the intelligence assessment was provided to the president, and some 16 months after the 2004 presidential election.

The President's Summary was only one of several high-level warnings given to Bush and other senior administration officials that serious doubts existed about the intended use of the tubes, according to government records and interviews with former and current officials.

In mid-September 2002, two weeks before Bush received the October 2002 President's Summary, Tenet informed him that both State and Energy had doubts about the aluminum tubes and that even some within the CIA weren't certain that the tubes were meant for nuclear weapons, according to government records and interviews with two former senior officials.

Official records and interviews with current and former officials also reveal that the president was told that even then-Secretary of State Colin Powell had doubts that the tubes might be used for nuclear weapons.

When U.S. inspectors entered Iraq after the fall of Saddam's regime, they determined that Iraq's nuclear program had been dormant for more than a decade and that the aluminum tubes had been used only for conventional weapons.

In the end, the White House's damage control was largely successful, because the public did not learn until after the 2004 elections the full extent of the president's knowledge that the assessment linking the aluminum tubes to a nuclear weapons program might not be true. The most crucial information was kept under wraps until long after Bush's re-election.
Here it is in it's entirety
http://news.nationaljournal.com/articles/0330nj1.htm

I wonder if this will get as much ink as a loose canon Congresswoman's limp wristed attack on a Fed Cap Cop with a cell phone?

Read it & weep!

Rimrock
 
It's a non-issue in my opinion. It's also ancient history.

What's amazing to me is that anyone would think that our elected leaders could be perfectly honest. That doesn't make any realistic sense to me.

Anyone around here claim to be perfectly honest?


Me neither.
 
Roosevelt had us at war in the Atlantic long before the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor. This war was necessary as well and while there may have been some doubt the President cannot take chances with US security.
 
Ohmygosh - the President reached a conclusion without unanimity of opinion within the ranks of the administration.

If this is supposed to be an indictment of Bush, you can add another charge - he stubbornly expects the sun to rise every morning.

.... and now we take you back to our regularly scheduled program.
 
I wonder how many young kids joined the "War" effort and died or lost limbs because they believed this lying POS.:mad:
Yeah, hell let's give him a pass! What's the big deal for taking a nation to War under false pretences? To many other real important things to which we can concern ourselves.
Rimrock
 
"_____Yeah, hell let's give him a pass! What's the big deal for taking a nation to War under false pretences? To many other real important things to which we can concern ourselves.__"

President Bush does not have the authority to go to war without the consent of our legislators.

"_____I wonder how many young kids joined the "War" effort and died or lost limbs because they believed this lying POS__"

I wonder how many more children and other innocents would have been maimed or mudered by Saddam and his mob if President Bush had not had the gonads to take him out.

Are you saying that you are perfectly honest?
 
"I wonder how many young kids joined the "War" effort and died or lost limbs because they believed this lying POS."

Do you believe everything you read? Okay, let's say the report is accurate... "most agencies judge" that the aluminum tubes were "related to a uranium enrichment effort," and TWO others "believe that the tubes more likely are intended for conventional weapons." Not only were they in the minority, the best they could say was more likely? Not definitely likely, more likely.

And is the name calling really necessary?

John
 
Back
Top