Bad Intel? --Tony

People in the room? Are you referring to the 110th Congress, 2nd Session,
Report 110, Stage 2?

http://intelligence.senate.gov/080605/phase2a.pdf

This document shows that there were "different interpretations" of the
intel. This was done after the fact, the report that is.

Maybe I'm just showing my favoritism again, but if you look at Page 7 of
that document, the Defense Intelligence Agency stated that it believes,
based on current intelligence, Saddam was trying to get the nuclear program
back online. Being a former Analyst and working at DIA for several years I
know how sure they have to be before publishing an official report. It's not
whimsical data.


After reading the document, I will have to say that Bush did "tweak" the
wording. I mean 7 -10 years to become nuclear, may not be construed as an
"immediate" threat by some. So yes on this, you are correct.

HOWEVER, if this was done in order to get us into Iraq, to keep the war on
foreign soil and go after terrorist cells, then I feel that it was justified. Again, that's just my "I love America" viewpoint coming out
again.

I still haven't seen where anybody credible told him in some "room" that the
intel was bad. Where did you get that?