White House Welcomes Tenet Taking Blame

[JoFerret]

Saturday July 12, 2003 10:29 AM

By JOHN SOLOMON

Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush on Saturday welcomed CIA Director George Tenet's mea culpa for letting Bush make allegations in a January speech about Iraq's nuclear weapons program - charges the administration later admitted were unfounded.

``The president is pleased that the director of Central Intelligence acknowledged what needed to be acknowledged, which was the circumstances surrounding the State of the Union speech,'' White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said. ``The president said that line because it was based on information from the intelligence community, and the speech was vetted.''

<snip>....tempest that followed has shadowed Bush on his trip here.

Bush remains confident in the CIA director, Fleischer said. He spoke to reporters in Abuja, Nigeria as Bush visited AIDS patients, reiterating the administration's broader claim that Saddam Hussein ``was pursuing numerous ways to obtain nuclear weapons'' before the U.S. invasion.

In a carefully scripted mea culpa, the White House on Friday blamed the CIA for its January misstep and Tenet finished the job hours later with a dramatic statement accepting responsibility.

<snip>
Administration officials said that despite the miscue they did not expect Tenet to resign. He is the lone holdover from the Clinton administration and, while distrusted by some conservatives, has enjoyed Bush's confidence.

``I've heard no discussion along those lines,'' CIA spokesman Mark Mansfield said Friday night when asked whether Tenet might consider resigning.

<more>

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story/0,1282,-2899227,00.html

[jamesinca]

1. I bet they welcome it

They don't have to now, somebody took the blame for them. As an added bonus for the White House, it was a Clinton administration individual who took the blame. Anything to blame Clinton, or make reference to him, get over it Republicans, take the blame yourself.

[TreasonousBastard]

2. These people have no shame, or sense.

Eisenhower had to stand up and deal with the U2 after the Russians set him up. Kennedy had to deal with the Bay of Pigs. Nixon had to deal with the Plumbers. Reagan had to deal with Iran-Contra. The Shrub has to deal with the lies that got us into Iraq, and many others, of course.

There is a common thread here-- a President put on the spot by his subordinates, but nothing has been as clumsy as this escapade.

Eisenhower was already deified and had proved his worth fighting Hitler, and the country shared his shock and shame. The rest of them, even Nixon, could point to some accomplishments in their administrations or stand up and accept where the buck stopped.

But not Shrub. He has no accomplishments in his entire life, much less as Governor or President. His life has been one of dismal failure, bailed out by his connections, and his term as President has been no better. And, as always, he won't accept any responsibility, even for his own words.

Two and a half years of Bush and not one single thing of merit has been accomplished, and now it's all falling on the head of a Clinton holdover.

So, the buck stops with Clinton, and it's all his fault.

Why should we expect anything else from this crew?

[NickDanger]

10. The irony in the article--'The President is pleased....'

eom

[jamesinca]

13. Something I once heard and it is true for this

Rattlesnakes don't bite themselves. They are hoping this lets them off the hook. As Karl Rove has said, national security and the war in Iraq and on terrorism are the strong points of this administration. If the strong point is nothing more than BS what do they have? In a thread here by William Rivers Pitt a few days ago in the GD forum a timeline was very nicely laid out on the development of information in the case against Iraq.

The following from the thread by WR Pitt:

Let us look at the timeline of this and consider the definition of “incorrect”:

· February 2002: Ambassador Joseph Wilson is dispatched by Cheney to Niger to investigate Iraq-uranium claims. Eight days later, he reports back that the documentary evidence was a forgery;

· August 26, 2002: Dick Cheney claims Iraq is developing a nuclear program;

· September 24, 2002: CIA Director Tenet briefs the Senate Intelligence Committee on the reported Iraqi nuclear threat, using the Niger evidence to back his claims;

· September 26, 2002: The IAEA vigorously denies that any such nuclear program exists in Iraq;

· October 6, 2002: George W. Bush addresses the nation and threatens the American people with “mushroom clouds” delivered by Iraq, using the same Niger evidence;

· October 10, 2002: Congress votes for war in Iraq, based on the data delivered by Tenet and by the nuclear rhetoric from Bush four days prior;

· January 2003: George W. Bush, in his State of the Union Address, says, “The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium in Africa.”

· March-April 2003: War in Iraq kills thousands of civilians and destabilizes the nation;

· April-July 2003: No evidence whatsoever of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons can be found in Iraq. 210 American soldiers have died, and 1,044 more have been wounded, as a guerilla war is undertaken by Iraqi insurgents;

· July 2003: Amid accusations from former intelligence officials, the Bush administration denies ever having known the Niger evidence was fake.

The Bush administration knew full well that their evidence was worthless, and still stood before the American people and told them it was fact. Bush sent the Director of the CIA to the Senate under orders to use the same worthless evidence to cajole that body into war.


On my own personal note I would like to add that Bush must not be consulting with Chenney, the IAEA, Ambassador Joseph Wilson, or the CIA before he gives his speeches. If you remember a few weeks back Wolfowitz stted that it was the thing that they could all agree upon. Before the invasion if he truly meant that it was a last resort he would have pulled back on the war. Instead on 3/7/03 the Reuters news service ran an article stating the IAEA position that there was no nuclear program and the following day Bush called for the meeting in the Azores. 13 days after this story was printed in the paper the U.S. was at war with Iraq.

This is not and never has been George Tennets fault, he is just the one taking the fall for this. George Bush you knew and may God damm you to hell for your lies and crimes against humanity.

[Gman]

3. This is not good enough

``First, CIA approved the president's State of the Union address before it was delivered. Second, I am responsible for the approval process in my agency..."

A REAL president would take 100% responsibility for everything. But then, we don't have a REAL president.

[JoFerret]

5. Not anywhere close

The NYTimes has a strong edotorial. Here's an extract. (The whole is worth a read)
The Uranium Fiction

We're glad that someone in Washington has finally taken responsibility .....but the matter will not end there.
....
So far, the administration's handling of this important — and politically explosive — issue has mostly involved a great deal of finger-pointing
....

....A good deal of information already points to a willful effort by the war camp in the administration to pump up an accusation that seemed shaky from the outset and that was pretty well discredited long before Mr. Bush stepped into the well of the House of Representatives last January.

.....The uranium charge should never have found its way into Mr. Bush's speech. Determining how it got there is essential to understanding whether the administration engaged in a deliberate effort to mislead the nation about the Iraqi threat.

read).

[IndianaGreen]

4. And who will take the blame for the other WMD lies?

What about the other lies and false information that Bush gave about WMD in his State of the Union speech? Who will fall on his sword for those?

Bush said that there was an Al-Qaeda connection to Iraq, a claim that has been thoroughly debunked. Who put that lie in the SOTU?

Bush also said that Iraq had:

1. 25,000 liters of anthrax
2. 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
3. 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent
4. 30,000 chemical munitions
5. several mobile biological weapons labs
6. advanced nuclear weapons development program
7. a design for a nuclear weapon
8. five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb
9. high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production

[JoFerret]

6. Do you think

they think this can be the end of it?

[kentuck]

14. Excellent question IG! Deserving of its own post..

You are correct. That was only once of the lies. Who's going to take responsibility for the others?

[rocketdem]

17. that is what is angering me

On CNN this morning they referred to "those 16 words from the SOTU address."

No, no, no, no, no. It's not just about 16 words. It's not just about the Niger uranium.

The media is playing the game of dropping a "bombshell" and then systematically diminishing its boundaries and significance. Then, when they've dismissed it completely, the administration is effectively insulated from further critique on the subject. "That's old news..." Etc.

This cannot be allowed to die.

[caledesi]

22. Good on IG!

[teryang]

7. They are hoping this will die here

...because any investigation into this rotten corrupt regime has the potential to uncover the crime of the century.

[Best_man23]

8. This Dog Aint Going to Hunt

The Congress may be able to bottle this up, but they can't bottle up the opinions of the American people.

[grytpype]

9. Did Bush care if it was true or not?

Looks like the answer is "not," as long as he could pin the blame on someone else if things went wrong, which they have.

[saigon68]

11. LYING AWOL PRINCE

A coward, who when the going gets tough, refuses to accept responsibilty for anything.

Note:
In a prior life, was often confused with a lifestyle, consisting of Drunkeness and Cocaine Abuse.

[UpInArms]

12. blame and responsibility are two different things

they can "blame" Tenet all they want - but the liar in chief is responsible for the crap that falls out of his mouth.

To deny that * is responsible for his words only exposes that he is a puppet and is being led by a larger group -

the hunt for the cabal behind the puppet should begin.

[Robb]

15. Aside from being outraged by the content,

Doesn't "Mea Culpa" mean "my fault" in latin?

Then what the hell does "In a carefully scripted mea culpa, the White House on Friday blamed the CIA" mean?

My latin's dang rusty, but wouldn't that be a "suo culpo"? ("his fault")

:grr:

[janx]

19. You're right.

But not too many journalists study Latin. Their language now seems to the a language of buzzwords, and that was the one that came out.

[Mari333]

16. Someone on here once said

that the BFEE arrogance would be their downfall...perhaps they thought they were exempt from criticism, perhaps they believed their lies and lies and lies would be believed over and over again, perhaps they thought thousands dead and body bags of soldiers would be ignored, perhaps pride and arrogance does go before a fall, perhaps they live in a dream world inside the beltway where they think they are untouchable..


Think again, assholes.

[koopie57]

18. I wonder how they

talked Tenet into taking the blame. What sort of inducements? they used. I think if he was stupid enough to stay on board, especially after he sat by and watched Bush lie in the SOTU, he shouldn't be surprised at what is happening now. All these people who are dead or injured in Iraq alone, all the blood shed cuz no one had the balls to stand up and say this is a lie ... and then to still insult the victims further by taking the blame and letting it continue is .... how can I put into words how sick this makes me.

[FubarFly]

20. Tenet was in their pockets

ever since he stood behind Powell during the massive lie-fest to the UN.


They are holding something over him. Maybe the 9/11 investgation will shed some light. Now all I have to do is get the security clearance to read it.


:argh:

[trapper914]

21. Tenet keeps his job...

...hmmmm. Smells like a deal to me. "Fall on the sword, George. We got your back." They certainly don't want him to resign, because they don't know what he'll say once he's in the private sector.

Tenet's explanation, to me, sounds typical of how the administration operates. Technically, it's correct. The British say Iraq is trying to obtain uranium. It's wordsmithing. Just like the whole "Saddam and Osama have a relationship going back ten years." One meeting...ten years ago. That's a relationship? I met Bushie in September of 1992. Do we have a relationship that goes back ten years?

Also, using the lame British intel and ignoring the volumes of other information refuting the Niger claim is from the same playbook they've been operating under since they took office. Ignore anything that doesn't argue the admin's case. Whether its global warming reports, or Iraq intel, these guys are all about spin.

[JNelson6563]

29. Tenet gets to keep breathing

is more like it.

[htuttle]

23. Tenet didn't take the blame! Please read his actual statement!

There is some very incriminating information in his statement. The National Security staff and the White House are clearly said to be the source of both the lie about the Niger report, and the pressure behind keeping it in the speech.

He never says the CIA saw the whole speech -- in fact, he says that the CIA only saw portions of it. He wasn't even there, and never saw the speech himself. If he's taking any blame it all, it's for his staff not standing up to the White House.

Although the documents related to the alleged Niger-Iraqi uranium deal had not yet been determined to be forgeries, officials who were reviewing the draft remarks on uranium raised several concerns about the fragmentary nature of the intelligence with National Security Council colleagues. Some of the language was changed. From what we know now, agency officials in the end concurred that the text in the speech was factually correct — i.e. that the British government report said that Iraq sought uranium from Africa.

I was saying yesterday that Tenet wouldn't lose his job -- what should he lose his job for? For his staff caving to pressure, and allowing the White House to say what it wants? And for that the White House is going to fire him? Think about it.

[enough]

26. Exactly

The knife has gone in so smoothly that they didn't even feel it. The word "concurred" there is cagey. It indicates that someone was arguing that, if phrased this way referring to the British report, the text was technically correct, even though every knew that it conveyed false information.

He is blaming himself for doing what they wanted him to do, and thus pointing straight at them for wanting to do it.

[leesa]

24. I'm sure they do since Bush has never been held accountable for anything

[Southsideirish]

25. What about the talk radio mantra heard ad nausuem day in and day out?

(Whoever the person is in question) has GOT to LEARN to be RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS!!!!!"
UGH!!!!!!!
My stomach turns evey time I hear this hackneyed phrase but now that it has become SO APPROPRIATE for the Bush regime - they cravenly point fingers to others.

Absolutely pathetic!

[Star]

27. White House "WELCOMES" Tenet taking blame

They WELCOME that the CIA didn't properly do its job?

Why aren't they OUTRAGED that the CIA didn't properly do its job, and because of that we can't trust other CIA intelligence leading up to the war, and as a result of that, over 200 American men and women have died?

Why aren't they OUTRAGED that the CIA didn't properly do its job and because of that the pResident suffered embarrassment and loss of face?

Why aren't they OUTRAGED that the CIA didn't properly do its job and because of that the American people were misled?

This headline tells everyone all they need to know about the attempted cover-up of this misadministration's lies.

[Nottingham]

28. Cheney Cheney Cheney! is the Major Player here! Tenet is Distraction

:bounce: This shows me Cheney is being protected

This was before Wilson went public, but he is undoubtedly the "former ambassador to Africa" discussed.

...the tale begins at the end of 2001, when third-rate forged documents turned up in West Africa purporting to show the sale by Niger to Iraq of tons of "yellowcake" uranium. Italy's intelligence service obtained the documents and shared them with British spooks, who passed them on to Washington. Mr. Cheney's office got wind of this and asked the C.I.A. to investigate.

The agency chose a former ambassador to Africa to undertake the mission, and that person flew to Niamey, Niger, in the last week of February 2002. This envoy spent one week in Niger, staying at the Sofitel and discussing his findings with the U.S. ambassador to Niger, and then flew back to Washington via Paris.

Immediately upon his return, in early March 2002, this senior envoy briefed the C.I.A. and State Department and reported that the documents were bogus, for two main reasons. First, the documents seemed phony on their face — for example, the Niger minister of energy and mines who had signed them had left that position years earlier. Second, an examination of Niger's uranium industry showed that an international consortium controls the yellowcake closely, so the Niger government does not have any yellowcake to sell.

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/unmovic/2003/0613denial.htm

Further on, Kristof says "My understanding is that while Director of Central Intelligence George Tenet may not have told Mr. Bush that the Niger documents were forged, lower C.I.A. officials did tell both the vice president's office and National Security Council staff members."


from other thread on Tenet by Merlin It shows Cheney is majorly involved in this. :bounce: