Wednesday, November 16, 2005

Times editorial misleads on WMD intelligence

( A welcome to readers from Betsy's Page. I hope you enjoy The Churchill Series. Just scroll down. And please take a look at some other posts. John )

In an editorial yesterday, the New York Times made a series of what can only be deliberately misleading claims regarding Iraq WMD intelligence and its prewar use.

The White House promptly issued a point-by-point refutation of the Times’ claims. Here's part of it:

The New York Times Editorial Says Foreign Intelligence Services Did Not Support American Intelligence.

"Foreign intelligence services did not have full access to American intelligence. But some had dissenting opinions that were ignored or not shown to top American officials." (Editorial, "Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials," The New York Times, 11/15/05)
But Even Foreign Governments That Opposed The Removal Of Saddam Hussein Judged That Iraq Had Weapons Of Mass Destruction (WMD.
French Foreign Minister Dominique De Villepin: "Right Now... We Have Evidence Of (Iraq's) Capacity To Produce VX And Yperite. In The Biological Domain, The Evidence Suggests The Possible Possession Of Significant Stocks Of Anthrax And Botulism Toxin, And Possibly A Production Capability." (United Nations Security Council, 4701st Meeting, New York, 2/5/03)
<...>
The New York Times Editorial Implies That Congress Was Presented With Incomplete And Manipulated Intelligence.
"Congress had nothing close to the president's access to intelligence. The National Intelligence Estimate presented to Congress a few days before the vote on war was sanitized to remove dissent and make conjecture seem like fact." (Editorial, "Decoding Mr. Bush's Denials," The New York Times, 11/15/05)
But The Presidential Daily Brief (PDB) Was Judged Not To Have Different Intelligence Than The National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) Provided To Congress, Which Represented The Collective Opinion Of The Intelligence Community.
Then-CIA Director George Tenet Said The NIE Summarized The Intelligence Community's Assessment Of Iraq's WMD Programs. TENET: "Let's turn to Iraq. Much of the current controversy centers on our prewar intelligence, summarized in the national intelligence estimate of October of 2002.
<...>
Let me be clear: Analysts differed on several important aspects of these programs and those debates were spelled out in the estimate.
<...>
(They) painted an objective assessment for our policy-makers of a brutal dictator who was continuing his efforts to deceive and build programs that might constantly surprise us and threaten our interests. No one told us what to say or how to say it." (CIA Director George Tenet, Remarks On Intelligence-Gathering And Iraq's WMD Programs, Washington, D.C., 2/5/04)
If I had read the Times' editorial in a Syrian or Iranian newspaper, I'd know why it was there.

But why is an American newspaper now making claims that have been repeatedly shown to be false?

The Times' claims only undermine American and Coalition efforts in Iraq, damage our country's credibility in the world, and poison with falsehood our political discourse.

What does the Times think it will achieve with its false claims?

1 comments:

Anonymous said...

You sure the Times isn't more read in Syria and Iran than anyplace outside NYC and Hollywood?

-AC