David Kay States President Bush Was Abused by Failure of the Intelligence Community
 

It will be beneficial to all before drawing conclusionsin regard to David Kays view of the conduct of President Bush in making the decision to take the country to war to view this mornings sessions when they are aired again on C-Span or read the transcripts when they are available.

David Kayviewsthe President of these United States asbeing abused bythe failure of the intelligence community as opposed to abusing the intelligence he was given.A failure that goes back to decisions made by previous administrations beginning with President Carter to depend more onliaisons within the intelligence community rather than human intelligence within specific areas of operation. He in no way was demeaning the analyst within the intelligence community only stating that the operationalapparatus for gathering information was flawed.

Mr. Kay's testimony this morning proves once again that the news media both printed and televised is quite capable of putting a slant on words and statements taken out of context to suit their individual agendas.

On a personal note it has always been important to me to get as close to the source being quoted as possible before making decisions. I'm very greatful for the work of C-span in allowing this nation to do that.

Peace on your paths today and always,

Arrow>>>>>>>>

Click here to visit C-Span

What was it Harry S. Truman Said?? :x:

VERITAS

Well Sis,......
 

.......it?s a true thing that anything said by anybody during political election season will pass through the mix master, then the sausage machine, then the dryer, then the pressing machine and finally on to packaging and distribution. But due to geographical and demographics differences there could be several different packages prepared for distribution and no two looking exactly the same. So yes, live word for word interviews are highly modified to address whose ox is to be gored or not and it is sometimes real fun to compare the original to the end product. But it is real sad also.

So was Bush snookered by our intel outfits? I have no idea. Could be, as the FBI sure sold a bunch of trash to Janet Reno over Waco and the CIA sold some mighty shoddy and defective goods to Clinton regarding the bombing of Belgrade. But if Bush bought into shoddy and defective goods he will have to eat the meal, not the CIA or whoever.

But on the other hand, where is a President supposed to get his information? Seems like the CIA, FBI and NSA cost a bundle and should be presumed to be accurate and reliable. But maybe not and maybe the Guy that sells newspapers at one of the DC kiosks or a DC cabbie may have better and more reliable information.

I genuinely feel sorry for any President of any political party that will have to make decisions during this war with the terrorists as the razor sharp pendulum of suspect intel seems to be indifferent as to who?s head it chops off or why.

Scamp

The intel ( FBI and CIA and NSA ) took a huge hit right after Watergate ( 30 years ago ). They haven't been the same since. I think their reliability is very suspect. Just more government bureaucracy.....

Larry

Truman on "The Buck Stops Here"

At the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made."

In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.

---------

HChasour Commander In Chief at any time stated that it was not his decision togo to war?As I readPresident Truman's concept of"the buck stops here"it would appear that President Bushfollowed the concept to the letter.

History is of course going to hold him accountable for the decision as to the right or wrong of it.Howeverif we did indeed have an intelligence failure and for the reasons that David Kay has stated then that is the fault of more than one administration. Although that failure also will fall on the Presidents shoulders as most in this country believe the President is a one man show.Indeed the buck does stop with him as it has been passed through every goverment and military agency one can think of until it comes to rest on the desk of the man that sets in the Oval Office.It isthen his job to decide if the information it represents can be trusted or not. Adecision that calls for the wisdom of Solomon.

Peace,

Arrow>>>>>>>

Truman Library

Quote:

Well Sis,......

That one had me laughing out loud. By the way Scamp I'm sorry I missed your birthday. I am as always wishing you all the best in this coming year.:nn:

Skeptic and Cynical
 

I am Skeptical of anything written in the press. Liberals spin (add on and interpret their personal opinions) Conservatives tend also place their interpretations on events, though I don't believe they spin as much with half-truths and scare tactic. But they both spin. So my personal opinion of the press is usually believe half of what you read in the magazines or newspapers or see posted on line and investigate completely the rest. After having been in politics, I have seen the press destroy at will fine politicians (both conservative and liberal)

Anyway thats my take on it.

Now, the subject at hand. Yes, a bad job of intelligence can make a commander look very bad. Whether he be the president or a field general. Many a battle has been lost because of poor intelligence, and by the same toke battle have been won by very good intelligence.

Keith

LITTLE SPARROW -

Quote:

HC has our Commander In Chief at any time stated that it was not his decision to go to war? As I read President Truman's concept of "the buck stops here" it would appear that President Bush followed the concept to the letter

Sparrow -

How about the qualifier - "I was operating upon faulty intelligence, supplied me by the intel community", does that count?

If he didn't deny that it was his decisions, he sure as hell implied that this decission was predicated upon what he claimed that he was led to believe! "So are we to assume that the buck only stops here when convenient, and that in such cases, the dead can be resurrected?"

As far as going to war against Iraq for a second time, let me repeat my stance- "Hussein had to be put down!!" This is a task that should have been completed 13 years ago! And it was not going back to war that bothered me, but rather, the never ending excuses when things did not go quite right! And make no bones about it, for any president, of any party, to take the bows, but pass the blame, is in itself, nothing more than a politically motivated excuse, in my opinion!! :cd:

VERITAS

Harry Truman said in a televised interview with David Susskind ( I will try to find it ) in the early 1960s that the CIA should be dismantled and its duties parceled out among other agencies. He called it an out-of-control bureacracy, and he was sorry he signed the orders to establish it in 1947. JFK wanted to abolish it, after the anti-Castro "army" he inherited from Nixon was defeated in Cuba. He was murdered soon after saying so publicly... What does that tell you about the CIA ? Don't forget Eisenhower and his warning about the military-industrial complex. I admire these 3 men a great deal. The losers we have running this country now pale in comparison....

IMHO

Larry

DUDE -

Strange that you should mention how "Old Harry" thought that the CIA should be dismantled as far back as the early 60's! An agency out of control, I believe you said!?

It was also in the early 60's (and before), that this same CIA, in a rival project to the Army's, imported and used LSD on the unsuspecting! (at least according to DAIG-IN 21-75?)

"JUST A POINT OF FACT!" :r:

VERITAS