When the CIA requested Bush to pull the forged Iraq uranium document from his STU, why didn't he?

Question

CIA doubts

In early October 2002, George Tenet called Deputy National Security Adviser Stephen Hadley to ask him to remove reference to the Niger uranium from a speech Bush was to give in Cincinnati on October 7. This was followed up by a memo asking Hadley to remove another, similar line. Another memo was sent to the White House expressing the CIA's view that the Niger claims were false; this memo was given to both Hadley and National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
http://www.answers.com/topic/niger-uranium-forgeries

mckenziecalhoun (below) Spuds, I find it interesting that Bush, the man with a thousand classified secrets, decided that this invalidated document had to be shared with the world.

What you also do not address is the fact that Bush DID pull the invalid document from a speech in Ohio at the request of the CIA.

Answer 1

Because up til then, Bush's warnings about "Saddam's WMDs" were getting little response from the American people, who were aware of Saddam's chemical and biological weapons from back inthe Reagan days.

So he had to "punch it up a little" and started confusing people by sometimes saying "WMDs", sometimes saying "Nuclear weapons" in speeches (saying NUCLEAR really got Americans' attention, so he started using those terms all the time, all the time knowing they were bogus claims).

Making people think Saddam had nuclear ambitions was going to get Bush his invasion of Iraq, so any "memos", or suggestions, to remove this phrase or to discontinue misinforming the US public was soundly ignored.

Answer 2

Go read the Senate's bi-partisan intelligence committee report

-The Committee report notes that the CIA intelligence report "did not refute the possibility that Iraq had approached Niger to purchase uranium."(page 44)

-The Committee report notes that Wilson admitted that he may have "misspoken" or become "confused" about documents he claimed were forged, since he never saw them(page 45)


-Undermining Wilson's claim to have debunked the Niger-uranium story, the Committee report states that "DIA and CIA analysts said that when they saw the intelligence report they did not believe that it supplied much new information and did not think that it clarified the story on the alleged Iraq-Niger uranium deal."(page 46)


-And, disproving critics who claim the Administration twisted the intelligence or ignored it altogether, the Committee report states that "Because CIA analysts did not believe that the report added any new information to clarify the issue...CIA's briefer did not brief the Vice President on the report, despite the Vice President's previous questions about the issue."(page 46)


-And, despite Wilson's assertions that his wife had nothing to do with his selection for the mission, the Committee report finds that "the former ambassador's wife 'offered up his name' and a memorandum to the Deputy Chief of the CPD [Counter-Proliferation, where Wilson's wife worked] on February 12, 2002, from the former ambassador's wife says, 'my husband has good relations with the PM and the former Minister of Mines (not to mention lots of French contacts), both of whom could possibly shed light on this sort of activity." (page 39) and the British government's inquiry led by Lord Butler

"the statement in President Bush's State of the Union Address of 28 January 2003 that

The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa.'

was well-founded."

Read both reports and then comment back, please.

Posted by: Jonathan R at October 24, 2005 05:48 PM

Answer 3

Well the simple answer, is Bush did not mention the forged document in his state of the union speech.

Neither did he mention Niger in his state of union speech.

What Bush did mention, was a British intelligence report ( which he said it was a british intelligence report in his speech ) . that Iraq had tried to obtain uranium from africa.

A intelligence report that has since been upheld as valid, by the British parliment committee investigating pre war intelligence.

Or that 500,000 tons of uranium yellow cake was found at the Tawaitha Research facility outside Baghdad after the invasion.

Answer 4

on the grounds which you ask questions approximately why somone did something or thought something it would be extremely useful to invite that guy or woman as a exchange of continuous trolling however the questions you ask have a historical past that is going before, even earlier Bush yet being the neocon which you're blaming Bush comes organic How a procedures returned you may ask See under and spin that

Answer 5

He actually did the first time they warned him. It 'somehow' ended up in the infamous state of the union speech later. George Tenent took the fall for it; stating it was his fault he didn't proof read that speech.... leaving out the fact Bush had already been warned previously.

Answer 6

Keep asking those "questions"...one day someone will care!

Answer 7

he is the decider and decided not to

Answer 8

Because he didn't.