Report: No Proof Of Qaeda-Saddam Link
There's no evidence Saddam Hussein had a relationship with Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Al Qaeda associates, according to a Senate report on prewar intelligence on Iraq. Democrats said the report undercuts President Bush's justification for going to war.
The declassified document being released Friday by the Senate Intelligence Committee also explores the role that inaccurate information supplied by the anti-Saddam exile group the Iraqi National Congress had in the march to war.
The report comes at a time when Mr. Bush is emphasizing the need to prevail in Iraq to win the war on terrorism while Democrats are seeking to make that policy an issue in the midterm elections.
It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates," according to excerpts of the 400-page report provided by Democrats.
Mr. Bush and other administration officials have said that the presence of Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a connection between Saddam's government and al Qaeda. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in June this year.
White House press secretary Tony Snow played down the report as "nothing new."
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a member of the committee, said the long-awaited report was "a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts" to link Saddam to al Qaeda.
The administration, said Sen. John D. Rockefeller, D-W.Va., top Democrat on the committee, "exploited the deep sense of insecurity among Americans in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, leading a large majority of Americans to believe — contrary to the intelligence assessments at the time — that Iraq had a role in the 9/11 attacks."
The chairman of the committee, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said it has long been known that prewar assessments of Iraq "were a tragic intelligence failure."
But he said the Democratic interpretations expressed in the report "are little more than a vehicle to advance election-year political charges." He said Democrats "continue to use the committee to try and rewrite history, insisting that they were deliberately duped into supporting the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime."
The panel report is Phase II of an analysis of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The first phase, issued in July 2004, focused on the CIA's failings in its estimates of Iraq's weapons program.
The second phase has been delayed as Republicans and Democrats fought over what information should be declassified and how much the committee should delve into the question of how policymakers may have manipulated intelligence to make the case for war.
The committee is still considering three other issues as part of its Phase II analysis, including statements of policymakers in the run up to the war.
Republican members of the intelligence committee would not comment on the report Thursday, but Democrats, who have been pushing for its release, said it backed up their argument that Mr. Bush's case for war in Iraq was misleading.
Democrats have argued that Chalabi, in his campaign to topple Saddam, fed U.S. intelligence agencies information that exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq's WMD capabilities. Republicans have countered that Chalabi's influence was limited.
© 2009 CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. The Associated Press contributed to this report. The declassified document being released Friday by the Senate Intelligence Committee also explores the role that inaccurate information supplied by the anti-Saddam exile group the Iraqi National Congress had in the march to war.
The report comes at a time when Mr. Bush is emphasizing the need to prevail in Iraq to win the war on terrorism while Democrats are seeking to make that policy an issue in the midterm elections.
It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddam's government "did not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates," according to excerpts of the 400-page report provided by Democrats.
Mr. Bush and other administration officials have said that the presence of Zarqawi in Iraq before the war was evidence of a connection between Saddam's government and al Qaeda. Zarqawi was killed by a U.S. airstrike in June this year.
White House press secretary Tony Snow played down the report as "nothing new."
"In 2002 and 2003, members of both parties got a good look at the intelligence we had and they came to the very same conclusions about what was going on," Snow said. That was "one of the reasons you had overwhelming majorities in the United States Senate and the House for taking action against Saddam Hussein," he said.
Read the Senate committee report on information provided by the Iraqi National Congress.
Read the Senate committee report on Iraq's alleged terror links.
Warning: These are large files.
Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., a member of the committee, said the long-awaited report was "a devastating indictment of the Bush-Cheney administration's unrelenting, misleading and deceptive attempts" to link Saddam to al Qaeda.
The administration, said Sen. John D. Rockefeller, D-W.Va., top Democrat on the committee, "exploited the deep sense of insecurity among Americans in the immediate aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, leading a large majority of Americans to believe — contrary to the intelligence assessments at the time — that Iraq had a role in the 9/11 attacks."
The chairman of the committee, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said it has long been known that prewar assessments of Iraq "were a tragic intelligence failure."
But he said the Democratic interpretations expressed in the report "are little more than a vehicle to advance election-year political charges." He said Democrats "continue to use the committee to try and rewrite history, insisting that they were deliberately duped into supporting the overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime."
The panel report is Phase II of an analysis of prewar intelligence on Iraq. The first phase, issued in July 2004, focused on the CIA's failings in its estimates of Iraq's weapons program.
The second phase has been delayed as Republicans and Democrats fought over what information should be declassified and how much the committee should delve into the question of how policymakers may have manipulated intelligence to make the case for war.
The committee is still considering three other issues as part of its Phase II analysis, including statements of policymakers in the run up to the war.
Republican members of the intelligence committee would not comment on the report Thursday, but Democrats, who have been pushing for its release, said it backed up their argument that Mr. Bush's case for war in Iraq was misleading.
Democrats have argued that Chalabi, in his campaign to topple Saddam, fed U.S. intelligence agencies information that exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq's WMD capabilities. Republicans have countered that Chalabi's influence was limited.
Popular in Politics
- FBI director acknowledges domestic drone use
- Obama and Berlin: Faded echoes meet new realities
- Smooth, on-time Obamacare rollout no sure thing: GAO
- Obama on NSA programs: Americans "not getting the complete story" 259 Comments
- House Republicans pass 20-week limit on abortions 426 Comments
- Senators: U.S. must take "more decisive" military action in Syria
- Obama renews push for a nuclear disarmament legacy
- GOP Sen. Murkowski backs same-sex marriage
When Bush was making his case to invade Iraq before Congress, the U.N., etc., it was obvious to my wife and me that he was lying. We could see it in his eyes and hear it in his voice. It was obvious that Sadaam Hssein was no threat to the U.S. So why are members of Congress (who certainly had much more information at their disposal than I did)and the general public only now beginning to claim that they were deliberately misled?
Precisely, but many voters also understand a GOP smoke bomb of distraction with Clinton is tacit admission they cannot defend Bush, as charged. Like a prisoner claiming a sudden attack of asthma to escape a court appearance, the GOP is working hard to change the subject of Bush and his appalling incompetence prior to (and after) 911. Talk about anything else, they say, just stop shaking your fist at our boy.
The gnomes producing the Disney Fantasyland special admitted their abundant license with history should not raise objections, since it is mere "drama" and subject to content distortions like any movie treatment of real events. Such drama, therefore, cannot be a documentary. Even more interesting, however, Disney refused to distribute its Miramar subsidiary's Fahrenheit 911 documentary-- though Moore vetted every line of the script for documented accuracy-- in not wanting to seem "partisan", it said. How is it, in the next breath, Disney punted this inflammatory fiction in the spirit of pure partisanship?
If any measure of public endorsement, Moore's F911 was a rousing success with paying viewers and won critical acclaim at Cannes, while this fruitcake of a six-hour attack ad has to be launched at network expense.
I hope this poor excuse of a president ruins this country. Then we can rebuild it, and eliminate our current failures, and attitudes towards letting our politicians run wild, and unchecked.
If Clinton can be impeached for lying about a minor sexual indiscretion, then surely Bush MUST be held accountable for the loss of so many American military lives?