http://www.counterpunch.org/frank11032005.html
November 3, 2005
Senate Democrats Stage Political Disappearing Act
Sham Behind Closed Doors
By JOSHUA FRANK
Oh, what a farce it was. On Tuesday November 1, the Senate Democrats pulled a rare maneuver, kicked the press and the public out of their hallowed chambers, slammed the doors, and for 3 1/2 long hours purportedly took the Republicans to task. The Democrats demanded that the Republicans give them what was promised: an investigation into the Bush administration's misuse of intelligence leading up to the invasion of Iraq.
It sounds noble enough and predictably their act, which was led by Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, has been praised by a flurry of antiwar pundits and bloggers who claim the Democratic Party must finally be warming up to their side of the war question.
But just because something sounds noble, doesn't mean it is.
Writing for The Nation online, John Nichols gushed,
"Remarkable as it may sound, there is reason to believe that Congressional Democrats may finally be waking from their long slumber and stirring into a functional opposition party ... [Reid] merits the high praise of being referred to not as a Democrat or a Republican but as the leader of the opposition that this country has so sorely needed."
Opposition to what? Calling for an investigation into how the Bush administration manipulated the public (forget that the Democratic leadership throughout the1990s up until, well, November 1, were propagating the same lies about Saddam's threat) isn't called "leadership," let alone the makings of "functional opposition party," as Nichols believes. It was all just a silly ruse. The Democrats certainly know how the Republicans misrepresented and inflated intelligence about Saddam's WMD.
But there is a much bigger charade going on here that most have missed: despite their newly found tenacity, the Democrats still have not taken a sound position on the war in Iraq.
The grassroots of the Party -- if their trendy blog DailyKos is an accurate sample -- have missed the boat on this fact entirely. As a popular DK blogger by the name of Hunter, exclaimed jovially, "In a move worthy of a Wild West gunfight, Minority Leader Harry Reid changed the political landscape on a dime, and cleaved the Republican talking point brigades into shards and splinters. This move was political brilliance on more fronts than I can count."
What a crock. Even though the Democrats have allegedly changed their tune on pre-war intelligence, it doesn't mean a whole hell of a lot, even if Hunter et al say so. And if an investigation is ever honestly waged (not likely) you can forget about it meaning anything more than just another blow to Bush's already plunging popularity. But Bush's poll figures, up or down, good or bad, isn't going to bring the troops home. Nope, even if the Dems somehow expose the bipartisan lies that led to the Iraq invasion, the current occupation will still rage on. And even if the Dems take back the House and Senate in 2006, thanks in part to their latest political stunt, there won't be an exit strategy in place. The Democrats are so pitifully predictable that they'll simply say that since our troops are there now, we can't just "cut and run." How is this any different than the Democrat's weak position before their Senate close out?
It's not.
What Senator Harry Reid and the other Senate Dems pulled wasn't an act of gallant proportions as so many liberals and antiwarriors contend. It was just a political trick intended to persuade their base and the antiwar movement into believing they actually are an "oppositional party."
So don't go getting your hopes up. The Democrats have a long way to go before anyone can consider them an opposition to the Republican agenda. For that to happen they'd have to call for an end to this illegal war. And that's not going to happen anytime soon.
Joshua Frank is the author of the brand new book, Left Out!: How Liberals Helped Reelect George W. Bush, which has just been published by Common Courage Press. You can order a copy at a discounted rate at www.brickburner.org. Joshua can be reached at Joshua@brickburner.org.
Full Version: Senate Democrats Stage Political Disappearing Act
Common Ground Common Sense > National & International News > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media > Op-Ed Articles from the Mainstream Media Archive
The stunt resulted in getting what has already been provide, or what was going to be provided in the next week or two.
What did the stunt accomplish?
What did the stunt accomplish?
QUOTE(vadiver @ Nov 3 2005, 01:14 PM)
The stunt resulted in getting what has already been provide, or what was going to be provided in the next week or two.
What did the stunt accomplish?
What did the stunt accomplish?
It kept the issue of the Bush Administration lies and the Iraq War disaster in the media headlines.
That's all.
But that's something.
The first belated beats in what needs to be an endless drumbeat.
What more can you expect from a DLC-fake-centrist dominated Democratic Party Leadership, which shares in so many of the neoconservative principles, and which was part of a Bi-Partisan drive for the invasion (not simply "spineless" acquiescence)?
Be thankful for ANY action.
QUOTE(DefeatBush @ Nov 3 2005, 03:27 PM)
It kept the issue of the Bush Administration lies and the Iraq War disaster in the media headlines.
That's all.
But that's something.
The first belated beats in what needs to be an endless drumbeat.
What more can you expect from a DLC-fake-centrist dominated Democratic Party Leadership, which shares in so many of the neoconservative principles, and which was part of a Bi-Partisan drive for the invasion (not simply "spineless" acquiescence)?
Be thankful for ANY action.
That's all.
But that's something.
The first belated beats in what needs to be an endless drumbeat.
What more can you expect from a DLC-fake-centrist dominated Democratic Party Leadership, which shares in so many of the neoconservative principles, and which was part of a Bi-Partisan drive for the invasion (not simply "spineless" acquiescence)?
Be thankful for ANY action.
You mean the GWB Administration lies dating back to 1998?
IMHO this did more harm to the Dem. party than good. IMHO will will end up being like the gov. shutdown in the 90s.
It is a stunt if they don't institute hearings, call witnesses and cross examine them thoroughy and delve into the Niger Forgeries, Able Danger, and other issues. And this includes calling the Cabal up to testify before Congress as well as other individuals who have since retired from the government - like George Tenet, Col Odom and I'm sure everyone in this forum can name names. I'm hearing that there is a draft report somewhere, but that isn't enough without the testimony.
QUOTE(Snuffysmith @ Nov 3 2005, 03:49 PM)
It is a stunt if they don't institute hearings, call witnesses and cross examine them thoroughy and delve into the Niger Forgeries, Able Danger, and other issues. And this includes calling the Cabal up to testify before Congress as well as other individuals who have since retired from the government - like George Tenet, Col Odom and I'm sure everyone in this forum can name names. I'm hearing that there is a draft report somewhere, but that isn't enough without the testimony.
You mean like what they have already done?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/natio.../wmd_report.pdf
From a site that cannot be linked here at CGCS.
QUOTE
Excerpts from the Silberman-Robb Report November 2, 2005
Below are excerpts from the Report to the President by The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction -- also known as the Silberman-Robb Report -- which make it clear that allegations that intelligence was warped or manipulated are false. Below are some specific findings from the report which came out in March 2005:
(i) "Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure... The Commission has found no evidence of 'politicization' of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report, pages 187-188.
(ii) "We looked very closely at that question [Administration pressuring intelligence analysts]. Every member of the commission was sensitive to the number of questions that have been raised with respect to the, what we'll call politicization, or however you want to describe it. And we examined every single instance that had been referred to, in print or otherwise, to see if there was any occasion where a member of the administration or anyone else had asked an analyst or anybody else associated with the intelligence community to change a position that they were taking or whether they felt there was any undo influence, and we found absolutely no instance." -- Charles S. Robb, Co-Chairman, The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, March 31 press conference.
(iii) "The Intelligence Community’s Iraq assessments were ... riddled with errors. Contrary to what some defenders of the Intelligence Community have since asserted, these errors were not the result of a few harried months in 2002. Most of the fundamental errors were made and communicated to policymakers well before the now-infamous NIE of October 2002, and were not corrected in the months between the NIE and the start of the war. They were not isolated or random failings. Iraq had been an intelligence challenge at the forefront of U.S. attention for over a decade. It was a known adversary that had already fought one war with the United States and seemed increasingly likely to fight another. But, after ten years of effort, the Intelligence Community still had no good intelligence on the status of Iraq’s weapons programs." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, page 9.
(iv) "Post-war investigations concluded that Curveball's [the code-name of an Iraqisource] was not influenced by, controlled by, or connected to, the INC [Iraqi National Congress]. In fact, over all, CIA's post-war investigations revealed that INC-related sources had a minimal impact on pre-war assessments." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, page 108.
(v) "The NIE simply didn't communicate how weak the underlying intelligence was. This was, moreover, a problem that was not limited to the NIE. Our review found that after the publication of the October 2002 NIE but before Secretary of State Colin Powell’s February 2003 address to the United Nations, intelligence officials within the CIA failed to convey to policymakers new information casting serious doubt on the reliability of a human intelligence source known as 'Curveball.' This occurred despite the pivotal role Curveball’s information played in the Intelligence Community’s assessment of Iraq’s biological weapons programs, and in spite of Secretary Powell’s efforts to strip every dubious piece of information out of his proposed speech. In this instance, once again, the Intelligence Community failed to give policymakers a full understanding of the frailties of the intelligence on which they were relying." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, pages 10-11.
Below are excerpts from the Report to the President by The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction -- also known as the Silberman-Robb Report -- which make it clear that allegations that intelligence was warped or manipulated are false. Below are some specific findings from the report which came out in March 2005:
(i) "Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure... The Commission has found no evidence of 'politicization' of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report, pages 187-188.
(ii) "We looked very closely at that question [Administration pressuring intelligence analysts]. Every member of the commission was sensitive to the number of questions that have been raised with respect to the, what we'll call politicization, or however you want to describe it. And we examined every single instance that had been referred to, in print or otherwise, to see if there was any occasion where a member of the administration or anyone else had asked an analyst or anybody else associated with the intelligence community to change a position that they were taking or whether they felt there was any undo influence, and we found absolutely no instance." -- Charles S. Robb, Co-Chairman, The Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, March 31 press conference.
(iii) "The Intelligence Community’s Iraq assessments were ... riddled with errors. Contrary to what some defenders of the Intelligence Community have since asserted, these errors were not the result of a few harried months in 2002. Most of the fundamental errors were made and communicated to policymakers well before the now-infamous NIE of October 2002, and were not corrected in the months between the NIE and the start of the war. They were not isolated or random failings. Iraq had been an intelligence challenge at the forefront of U.S. attention for over a decade. It was a known adversary that had already fought one war with the United States and seemed increasingly likely to fight another. But, after ten years of effort, the Intelligence Community still had no good intelligence on the status of Iraq’s weapons programs." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, page 9.
(iv) "Post-war investigations concluded that Curveball's [the code-name of an Iraqisource] was not influenced by, controlled by, or connected to, the INC [Iraqi National Congress]. In fact, over all, CIA's post-war investigations revealed that INC-related sources had a minimal impact on pre-war assessments." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, page 108.
(v) "The NIE simply didn't communicate how weak the underlying intelligence was. This was, moreover, a problem that was not limited to the NIE. Our review found that after the publication of the October 2002 NIE but before Secretary of State Colin Powell’s February 2003 address to the United Nations, intelligence officials within the CIA failed to convey to policymakers new information casting serious doubt on the reliability of a human intelligence source known as 'Curveball.' This occurred despite the pivotal role Curveball’s information played in the Intelligence Community’s assessment of Iraq’s biological weapons programs, and in spite of Secretary Powell’s efforts to strip every dubious piece of information out of his proposed speech. In this instance, once again, the Intelligence Community failed to give policymakers a full understanding of the frailties of the intelligence on which they were relying." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report Overview, pages 10-11.
QUOTE(vadiver @ Nov 3 2005, 10:02 PM)
You mean like what they have already done?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/natio.../wmd_report.pdf
From a site that cannot be linked here at CGCS.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/natio.../wmd_report.pdf
From a site that cannot be linked here at CGCS.
Like that report. The statement:
"Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure... The Commission has found no evidence of 'politicization' of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report, pages 187-188."
is flat out wrong.
QUOTE(Snuffysmith @ Nov 3 2005, 04:17 PM)
Like that report. The statement:
"Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure... The Commission has found no evidence of 'politicization' of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report, pages 187-188."
is flat out wrong.
"Many observers of the Intelligence Community have expressed concern that Intelligence Community judgments concerning Iraq's purported WMD programs may have been warped by inappropriate political pressure... The Commission has found no evidence of 'politicization' of the Intelligence Community's assessments concerning Iraq's reported WMD programs. No analytical judgments were changed in response to political pressure to reach a particular conclusion." -- Intelligence Capabilities Commission Report, pages 187-188."
is flat out wrong.
Well, I guess we should open an investigation up on the 10 people who did the investigation and wrote the report.
I guess all of this will be wrong until the conclusion is that up until 1/20/2001 the intelegence was good, then anytime a Dem. talked about it, it was good. But anytime GWB used it he was lieing, and using doctored reports.
Were we justified in bombing Iraq in 1998? Using the same intel?
QUOTE(vadiver @ Nov 3 2005, 02:14 PM)
The stunt resulted in getting what has already been provide, or what was going to be provided in the next week or two.
What did the stunt accomplish?
What did the stunt accomplish?
This what republicans say... democrat senators refute this. According to Senator Feinstein on CNN last night, Senator Roberts was doing nothing and had no meetings scheduled until he came out after the Rule 21 session. She checked the committee schedule prior to the session.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.