Don't Pity George Tenet

National Review Online: Uproar Over Misquote Is Misguided; Tenet Deserves Blame For CIA Failures

(National Review Online)  This column was written by the Editors of National Review.

---

Poor George Tenet. Everyone has been quoting his infamous comment in the Oval Office that the intelligence on Iraq's weapons-of-mass-destruction programs was a "slam dunk." As he has made clear in his book, "At the Center of the Storm," and Sunday night's 60 Minutes segment, Tenet considers this very unfair — "despicable," even — since his comment supposedly wasn't about the intelligence itself but about the ease with which the public presentation of the intelligence could be strengthened.

This is a distinction without a difference. If the underlying intelligence wasn't reliable, why was Tenet so slam-dunk certain that the presentation of it could be improved? Tenet's words became so widely cited not because Bush officials wanted to pin the war on him, as Tenet believes, but because it is the easiest way to make a thumbnail argument that there was a broad consensus behind the judgment that Saddam had WMDs. This is what Vice President Cheney was getting at when he quoted Tenet's "slam dunk" remark during the Meet the Press appearance that Tenet angrily invoked last night.

Tenet shouldn't be so offended when people quote his words, since they reflect an essential truth — that he indeed had no doubt that Saddam had WMDs. But Tenet is now engaged in a classic instance of self-serving Beltway memoir-writing, settling scores against Dick Cheney and the "neocons" who were allegedly impervious to the facts so diligently assembled by the CIA.

Tenet says that the war wasn't really about weapons of mass destruction. It's true that the case for war wasn't built entirely on Saddam's possessing WMDs — as the war's supporters have long pointed out. But this was certainly the most important element in the case. The alarming 2002 National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq's weapons capabilities was a key part of the debate prior to the war. When Secretary of State Colin Powell went to the United Nations — with Tenet sitting behind him — there was a reason he devoted so much time to talking about Saddam's weapons programs. George Tenet might not like to be reminded that his CIA thought it was a slam dunk that Saddam had dangerous weapons, and that this played a decisive role in going to war, but there's no getting around it.

Sunday night, Tenet gave the impression that any thought of Saddam and al Qaeda's cooperating was pure fantasy. You never would have known that in October 2002, Tenet wrote a letter to Sen. Bob Graham that said: "We have solid reporting of senior-level contacts between Iraq and al-Qa'ida going back a decade"; "Credible information indicates that Iraq and al-Qa'ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression"; "We have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad"; "We have credible reporting that al-Qa'ida leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities"; and so on.

That was then. Now that the war has proved difficult and unpopular, Tenet feels safe in attacking its advocates. In a widely quoted anecdote, he says he saw Richard Perle exiting the White House on September 12, when Perle told him Iraq should be punished for the attack since it bore responsibility. Perle says this couldn't have happened because he was in France at the time, as Bill Kristol has noted. (Tenet apparently has a problem getting the facts straight even in his post-CIA life).

Tenet is especially harsh on Dick Cheney's supposed tendency to go beyond the intelligence. But when he warned that a Cheney speech about links between Iraq and al Qaeda went too far, it wasn't delivered. As for President Bush's controversial 16 words about the British learning that Saddam sought uranium from Niger, Tenet didn't bother to read the State of the Union speech before it was delivered, and so didn't advise the White House to keep them out.

The fundamental problem wasn't that the administration wanted to go beyond the intelligence, but that the intelligence itself was flawed. George Tenet bears a large measure of responsibility for this, as he headed an agency that had no clandestine service to speak of and was unimaginative and plodding in its analysis. But some of his explanations for getting it wrong are sound, even if self-serving.

As he explained on 60 Minutes, intelligence is inherently uncertain, or it wouldn't be intelligence. No one was attempting to lie about the intelligence; as he said, it would have been crazy to send Colin Powell with to the U.N. if the claims Powell made weren't thought to be true. And in a line from his book that will be neglected, Tenet writes, "Intelligence professionals did not try to tell policy makers what they wanted to hear, nor did the policy makers lean on us to influence outcomes."

Given the limits of our intelligence capabilities to this day, interrogations of terror leaders are crucial. Tenet says they have been more important than the information gathered by the FBI, the National Security Agency, and the CIA put together, and have saved American lives. He is adamant that the so-called enhanced interrogation techniques don't amount to torture, and he is correct to note the difficulty of getting information from hardened thugs trained not to talk (but ready to ask for legal representation, as Khalid Sheik Mohammed did upon capture).

In the end, it was a mistake for President Bush to keep George Tenet on as CIA director after he took office in 2001, let alone award him a Medal of Freedom. Tenet was primarily a political player who didn't understand what it took to revive the CIA. He presided over two debacles — 9/11 and the flawed intelligence about Iraq — and contributed to the administration's dysfunction with his internal bureaucratic warfare. If he seemed defensive in his 60 Minutes interview, it was because he has a lot to be defensive about.

[xfredmenzies]

Why is anyone even talking about George Tenet?

[idlepugilist]

The collective wit of the Editors of the NRO surmised that Tenet deserves blame. Better, once again, thou purveyors of conservative agenda, to cast blame at anyone other than George and/or ***. Perhaps Tenet wasn't fit to be the head of the CIA. Our President proved the same with his decisions to selectively choose intelligence, close his ears to debate, berate our allies, and follow a shoot-from-the-hip plan with Iraq.
You would have been hard-pressed to find many Decmocrats in America who disagreed with Bush's choice to attack Afghanistan. You may now stop defending the choices our President has made these past years.

[marcodele]

Typical neocon reaction: attack the messenger, ignore the message.

We're lucky someone like Tenet is willing to speak out, criticize, and help us learn from our mistakes. With the Sopranos running the country, I'd be afraid to.

[cburn665]

Mr. Tenet should be stripped of the medal which apparently was some sort of pay-off from Mr. Bush.

What a crook!

[marcodele]

"Tenney, you're doing a heck of a job."

[hangbush]

Wow, NeoCon attacking one of its own!! What gives??
Let's see, oh because he was trying to protect his own hide? WOW! It shows how vicious the Republicans are when they feel threatened. They would even try to gang up on one of its own. What does that tell you of average american voter who they obviously have no interest in?

[marcodele]

They fired 8 of their own U.S. attorneys for not hounding Democrats.

Is there anyone out there dumb enough to think they're not ruthless cut throat partisan hacks?

[toldyouso21]

"As for President Bush's controversial 16 words about the British learning that Saddam sought uranium from Niger, Tenet didn't bother to read the State of the Union speech before it was delivered, and so didn't advise the White House to keep them out."

Stop right there O LYING right wing rag--the Administration was warned about the veracity of the yellowcake as far back as 2002 from Italy, Germany and the UN--the same is true about the mobile biolabs--Bush was told Curve ball was delusional and decided to go with the intel anyway.

The fact is, after the yellowcake speech, Bush and co said a speech writer forgot to remove the information. The fact is, 2 weeks BEFORE the speech, The White house admitted receiving a letter from the CIA forwarded from Italy about the lies of the yellowcake--so Tenet did not have to read the speech--because the President already had been briefed several times over the months from several sources.

The problem with "facts" in the so called post tv/news world is that we can get information from a variety of sources--often before the MSM reports it and that, after the fact--no matter what is deleted or rewritten--some of us got the old news and followed the bread crumbs. If you want to talk about credibility--not only does Bush have none and Tenet very little--this rag has lost its own as well.

[roger_inkart]

Tenet was never a neo-con. He saw himself as a survivor and was trying to please his the new bosses by telling them what wanted to hear. He knew what they intended. He knew what was going on.

He's just a weak-willed shell of a man. He had his chance to stand up, resign and go public with any doubts he had. Instead he helped the Bush administration's insane drive to the war.

If he had any honor he would return the Medal of Freedom he receieved.

[roger_inkart]

From the article:

"The fundamental problem wasn't that the administration wanted to go beyond the intelligence, but that the intelligence itself was flawed."

You're kidding. All those neo-cons who were drooling over the idea of a pliable White House dummy, eager to invade Iraq, were somehow just duped by bad intel? Who are you trying to kid (besides the other deluded, out-of-touch Bush zealots that is?)

[tejasdemo]

They fired 8 of their own U.S. attorneys for not hounding Democrats.

Is there anyone out there dumb enough to think they're not ruthless cut throat partisan hacks?
Posted by marcodele at 02:13 PM : Apr 30, 2007

****
NO ! Republicans would sell their mothers up the river. What a pathetic bunch.

[vet_sk]

How these high level officials, who were so wrong {no not wrong, but liars for their own cause for war to get GWB reelected} stay out of trouble? It is like playing the stock market for them: you lose one, you lose another ...who cares because it is someone elses money (kids).

Remove Tenet's medal of freedom (which is now considered a joke of a medal) his pension and his freedom. Isn't the lying of a public official a crime? This should be just start: Condi, Cheney, Rums. and Bush are criminals.

[macusweil]

"Tenet is now engaged in a classic instance of self-serving Beltway memoir-writing, settling scores against *** Cheney and the "neocons" who were allegedly impervious to the facts so diligently assembled by the CIA."

NRO is 100% correct this time around!!

During the period in question there is no reason Tenet should not have come out and exposed the charade. We now know from the Downing Street minutes clearly state that Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action regardless of the truth. The neo.con plan was to justify their illegal invasion by linking Iraq to terrorism and WMDs. Insiders all knew the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.

[vet_sk]

"...as he said, it would have been crazy to send Colin Powell with to the U.N. if the claims Powell made weren't thought to be true."

In this comment, Tenet just admitted to another lie by himself and the administration. Colin Powell's former chief of staff wrote that the night before Colin said, "I can't presenet this *** [before the UN]." He did and that makes him a criminal too.

Why is it that just because the Constitution give the president the power to appoint his secretaries (with advise and consent of the senate) that they believe that they have to go along with the party line of the white house. They serve the constitution and the people - not the president. Another question for current presidential candidates; how much of lease will the president hold over their secretaries.

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[gkc99]

Tenet twisting slowly, slowly in the wind . . . poor baby. Let me get my crying towel.

May the next sacrifice be Darth Chickenshit.

[katg21]

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...
Posted by processor2 at 03:27 PM : Apr 30, 2007

Yes, it may be true but there's no way the dems are going to agree that Clinton was anything but perfect.

The NRO would, of course, jump all over Tenet for misleading hair-trigger Bush and Cheney, but it was obvious in the interview that the White House had already made up its mind to invade Iraq, even cutting short the U.N. inspectors from carrying out their inspections. Obviously, our intrepid leader did not like the fact that the U.N. was not finding weapons of mass destruction and decided instead to invade right away. It doesn't take a genius to see that this Administration was determined to attack Iraq, and all but pathetic apologists for the Bush Administration know it.

[ajmarine1]

He was the #1 man when it came to giving intelligent reports to the White House; if he was telling them one thing, and they were saying another, he should have resigned then, not write a book about it 6 years later.

[ammianus]

The Sorrows of Young Dumus, Art. XX:
Successful crime knows nothing of satiety. Both the exhilarating momentum of conquest, and the need to distract the populace from the escape of ibn Shaitan demanded the subjugation of Mesopotamia. In this adventure, the Oligarchs inflexibly pursued two paramount objectives. The first of these was the establishment of a docile client state firmly garrisoned by the Hegemon in the very heart of Dar al-Islam. The second object, urged in part by the thirst for more energy resources (Art.XI), was the complete control of the wealth of the country by the Oligarchy. No sacrifice of the populace, however bloody, and no crime, however brutal, would deter the Oligarchs from these goals. But at the outset, Mesopotamia appeared as a rich fruit, ripe for the plucking. The tyrant, Nur ud Din, had made himself odious to mankind by his blatant cruelties. The strangulation of Mesopotamia by the elder Dumus had impoverished the country and rendered it defenseless, while its reserves of hydrocarbon energy resources were second only to the House of Saaud. Even better, the land could be exploited as a royal demesne with much of the public revenue diverted to the imperial clique of Dumus. The gold, thus plundered, fed a cloud of delators, worm-tongues, and agents of provocation; all dedicated to the extinction of the last embers of freedom within the Hegemon. As a final advantage, Persia could be attacked from the west as well as from the north and east.

[ammianus]

The Sorrows of Young Dumus, Art. XVIII:
Thousands died when both the commercial and the administrative capitals of the Hegemon were attacked (A.J. 6715, 23 Lo:os) and now Dumas could play the conquering hero. Ibn Shaitan had hid in the Ghaznavid territories, a guest of the government of Omar who offended the decency of mankind by his oppressions. Thus the subjugation of that country could be effected with some semblance of justice. However, sacrificing his pride to the vain hope of survival, Omar offered to deliver the person of ibn Shaitan. As this would set in train the ruin of Dumus, he spurned the offer and erased all public record of it. Dumus launched an aerial assault that quickly overwhelmed Omar with an indiscriminate slaughter. Of necessity, Dumus pretended to hunt for ibn Shaitan. But as the ring of encirclement was about to close, Vulturinus entrusted the mouth of the trap to known adherents of Omar who escorted ibn Shaitan safely to the mountains of Kafiristan. Success seemed complete: While seeming to pursue him, Dumus had avoided the capture of ibn Shaitan and his escape could be plausibly explained; Hegemon troops garrisoned the country and a route of attack was opened on Persia to the west. However, the Ghaznavids soon compared the effete brutality of the Hegemon to the rough virtues of their countrymen. The puppet government in Kabul reigned there and nowhere else. The fanatic followers of Omar nursed their wounds and recruited their strength.

[joenc-2009]

Its starting to look like every right-wing neocon conservative is playing pin the tale on every other right-wing, neocon, conservative.

:-)

Back in 2002-2003, they were getting carpel-tunnel syndrome patting each other on the back.

Now, they're all auditioning for SPEED 4: Reality edition ... Where the winner throws everyone else under the bus.

My money is on Bushjaya.

[one_american]

The one possibility that continues to be overlooked is that perhaps Tenet, Clinton and Bush were ALL correct - that Saddam did indeed have WMD - just that the U.N. inspectors were blind of the fact that Saddam moved them out of the country before the war started.

This possibility cannot be ruled out yet; absence of proof is not proof of absence.

[joenc-2009]

The one possibility that continues to be overlooked is that perhaps Tenet, Clinton and Bush were ALL correct - that Saddam did indeed have WMD - just that the U.N. inspectors were blind of the fact that Saddam moved them out of the country before the war started.

Posted by One_American

This is an interesting position that I've heard before. But consider this ... if your theory is correct ... it still means that GW's invasion failed it's main mission. GW's goal was to get rid of the WMD ... if they move, he failed.

And, if Saddam was able to move them somewhere else before GW could get there ... GW's preinvasion bluster helped accelerate the movement.

Same is true for GWs "Aix of Evil" speech. He basically warned Iran and North Korea that they better accelerate their efforts BEFORE we got to them.

And they have.

[andrew_693]

yeah, and maybe Santa Claus is resting in Aruba, that's why we can't find him in the north pole. Maybe tomorrow it will rain upside down and roaches will actually sing in spanish "la cucaracha" if they don't will just have to send the marines to find them. Halliburton, bush , cheney,wolfowitz and their friends and girlfriends (in wolfowitz case) will find a way to use your tax payers money till it runs out, I'm sure they will enojoy making mansions in exotic places, like Kenneth Lay from enron did with the retirement money of his workers. If money runs out, no problems, there is always social security benefits, or veteran benefits we can do without, they are the ones who wanted this war anyway.

[jsilver2th]

Don't worry we don't pity National Review on line either... Your President and his little war - it's all worked out so grand...

Where does the buck stop? Anywhere but El Presidente's desk...

Scapegoats and Fall Guys litter the landscape...

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[processor2]

George Tenet was a Clinton appointee and was kept by Bush.

That would explain why BOTH PRESIDENTS Clinton & Bush went on TV explaining Hussein was "developing Weapons of Mass Destruction"

Maybe neither Clinton nor Bush lied about WMD, maybe they were both misled by this idiot.

...

[azman80]

I dont really give a *** about Tenet and his faults. Truth of the matter is that Cheney, Rice, and Bush are the ones to blame because they made the ultimate decision to go to war. Truthfully, Cheney and Rice are the ones to really blame based on their aggressivness toward other people, the mass amounts of money they were to make on this conflict, and because I think they are on such a power trip, its crazy. Tenet needs to spill as much information as he can about The War Against Terror (T-W-A-T) haha

[joenc-2009]

Posted by processor2

If Clinton and Bush both believed Iraq was a threat, why didn't Clinton make the same mistake Bush did?

And why didn't all the other countires that the right like to say "agreed" join in the fight ... and why aren't they there now?

Many had concerns about Iraq ... Bush used those concerns and created a war out of it.

This is mess is all his.

[walt1944-2009]

Tenet is "spinning like a top" even though he isn't working for Bush anymore. First he says "his" CIA had no proof of WMD's in Iraq, then he says he was convinced Iraq had chemical and biological weapons, which happen to be WMD's! Then he says he never saw anyone tortured and his agency doesn't use torture; but he also says they used "advanced interrogation techniques" which sounds like a "politically correct term" for using water-boarding, intense cold, loud music, and maybe the rack and the thumbscrew, and when those "advanced techniques" were brought up, he didn't want to talk about it. All he wanted to talk about was "it's not my fault", and slam-dunk was never used the way people say he used it.
Do I smell a politican here? I believe that Bush, Cheney, Rice, and Rove decided weeks, maybe months ahead of 9/11 to go into Iraq and used 9/11 to hood-wink everybody, but as to the rest of it, Tenet is just as guilty as Bush and company no matter how much he says "Its not my fault"!

[mygramma]

Nobody at the National Review has the balls to put their name on the opinion piece? Signed, the editors?? I would venture a guess that it is "an" editor who has control over the National Review's ideology, but it doesn't matter. Denial is denial. Partisanship is partisanship. There is NOTHING definitive web can learn from the National Review.

Get it straight... this war was a mistake on everybody's part, starting with arrogant violations of the basic principle of international law that a foreign power does not overthrow a sovereign leader and government of another nation except under extreme circumstances out of self preservation. And we did not have that here, not even close. George Tenet knew it, and maybe realized the full ramifications too late when he didn't speak out when he should have.

I have been on this planet since Roosevelt and I have never seen a president and his administration so stupid and naive and vindictive and self loved and incompetent as the current administration.

What disheartens me more than anything is the trashing of our constitution. I hear Gorge Tenet trying to reclaim the high ground of principle that we perched ourselves on a few hundred years ago.

[frb01]

The war in Iraq was a mistake, so why did Tenet wait until the book is released to start shooting his mouth off. If anything we should be asking why did you not get it about Osama Bin Laden and tell the new administration about that concern from day 1.

[kansas1946]

Don't worry. The last person or persons that I am going to have sympathy for are the ones that think torture is okay, and keeps their mouth shut about this corrupt and evil administration until they have a book out. This guy is as slimey as anyone else that is still clinging onto this administration and is no patriot. He needs to go home, suck his thumb, and try to figure out how grown ups behave.

[rwnb2]

What didn't they know, and when didn't they know it?

It is good that Tenet's "slam-dunk" comment is back in the news. There is something very troubling about that verbal exchange between Tenet and Bush.

Much has been written about this monumental error on the part of Tenet. But, why hasn't this conversation been analyzed from another perspective?

Tenet's comment resulted from a question posed to him by the man with his finger on the trigger of war. "George, how confident are you?" the president asked. "Don't worry, it's a slam-dunk.", Tenet said. The question the president asked, related directly to the quality of evidence against Iraq.

Just the fact that the president asked the question, speaks volumes. Obviously, at that point, Bush still had doubts. Otherwise, he would not have asked. Why would Bush even be asking Tenet about his confidence? Why didn't Bush already know whether or not it was a "slam-dunk"? How did they get that far in the marketing campaign without knowing for sure?

And, after Tenet blurted out his infamous comment, Bush did not perform the most basic due diligence task expected of any leader. He did not say "Slam-dunk? Great! Then this should be easy. CAN I SEE THE EVIDENCE?". He wasn't sure, and he didn't ask for (or look at) the proof!

He started a war, and he didn't know? He had doubts, and he didn't ask? He "decidered" to do it anyway?

The one thing he knew for sure, was that he didn't know for sure. George Bush is accountable for this!

[sparks224]

%u201CThe war in Iraq was a mistake, so why did%u2026.%u201D
Posted by frb01 at 10:27 PM : Apr 30, 2007

frb01,
Starting a war under false pretenses is NOT a mistake. It%u2019s a Crime.

I look forward to the day when these neo-con Fascists are brought to justice for it.

[norcalruss]

I saw 60 minutes and I don%u2019t think Tenet did much to enhance his image. I don%u2019t find it creditable that he told Condi, about his fear of an attack, and did not directly ask Bush if he was briefed, or informed him directly. As head of CIA I think he could have gotten hios attention. According to Tenet, CIA was way off the mark about WMD in Iraq. Was this due to gross failure in intelligence gathering, or did Tenet tell Bush what he WANTED to hear? Still, there were some interesting moments. Tenet said that Richard Perle told him on September 12th that Iraq was going to be held accountable for 9-11 even though they had NOTHING to do with it. This correlates with what Richard Clarke, said in the book, Against All Enemies. Clarke said that Rice and Wolfie blew off info on Al Qaeda and focused on Iraq prior to 9-11, and that Rumsfeld was talking about targets in Iraq on 9-12 even though he knew Iraq had NOTHING to do with it. Tenet said Iraq had NOTHING to do with any attacks against the US %u2018period%u2019. But, Bush, Cheney, and others tried to link Saddam to terror attacks in their lead up to the war. CIA repeatedly told Bus that a nuclear program in Iraq didn%u2019t exist, but Bush and others used it as an argument for war, and outed Valerie Plame to protect their lies. Congress should put Tenet under oath and subpoena EVERYONE associated with pre-war intelligence. That is the only way to know how much lying is/was going on and who was doing it.

[gdmoore2]

Read the article. Listened to Tenet on Larry King Live. Based on what I read and saw and heard, I would not trust the man's testimony. Quote, "We do not torture". Immediately followed by, "I do not talk about methods, ever." His live interview was not credible. Basically, he asserts the truth, then claims the inability to back his assertion, due to national security. "Trusssssst in me...." I do not like the Bush Administration, but George Tenet is not coming across credibly.

[hillaryin08]

October 9th, 1999 Letter to President Clinton Signed by Senators Levin, Lieberman, Lautenberg, Dodd, Kerrey, Feinstein, Mikulski, Daschle, Breaux, Johnson, Inouye, Landrieu, Ford and Kerry -- all Democrats

"We urge you, after consulting with Congress and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions, including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."

[hillaryin08]

Bill Clinton February 17, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Nancy Pelosi December 16, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

[hillaryin08]

Bill Clinton February 17, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Nancy Pelosi December 16, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

[hillaryin08]

Bill Clinton February 17, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace, and we have to use force, our purpose is clear: We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."

Nancy Pelosi December 16, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."

[hillaryin08]

Madeleine Albright February 1, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and the security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."

Madeleine Albright November 10, 1999

"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

Bill Clinton December 17, 1998

"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq.... Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."

*** Durbin September 30, 1999

"One of the most compelling threats we in this country face today is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Threat assessments regularly warn us of the possibility that North Korea, Iran, Iraq, or some other nation may acquire or develop nuclear weapons."

Bill Clinton February 17, 1998

"We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st Century.... They will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build arsenals of nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen. There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein."

[hillaryin08]

Tom Daschle February 11, 1998

"The (Clinton) administration has said, 'Look, we have exhausted virtually our diplomatic effort to get the Iraqis to comply with their own agreements and with international law. Given that, what other option is there but to force them to do so?' That's what they're saying. This is the key question. And the answer is we don't have another option. We have got to force them to comply, and we are doing so militarily."

Bill Richardson May 29, 1998

"The threat of nuclear proliferation is one of the big challenges that we have now, especially by states that have nuclear weapons, outlaw states like Iraq."

John Kerry February 23, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has already used these weapons and has made it clear that he has the intent to continue to try, by virtue of his duplicity and secrecy, to continue to do so. That is a threat to the stability of the Middle East. It is a threat with respect to the potential of terrorist activities on a global basis. It is a threat even to regions near but not exactly in the Middle East."

Al Gore December 16, 1998

"[I]f you allow someone like Saddam Hussein to get nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, chemical weapons, biological weapons, how many people is he going to kill with such weapons? He has already demonstrated a willingness to use such weapons..."

[hillaryin08]

Aperently other people had no doubt there were WMD's in Iraq also.

[hillaryin08]

Aparently other people had no doubt there were WMD's in Iraq also.

[ramos937]

Tenent writes, enet writes, "Intelligence professionals did not try to tell policy makers what they wanted to hear, nor did the policy makers lean on us to influence outcomes." The actual truth which came out long ago, was that Cheney made many trips to the CIA to browbeat CIA analysts into rewriting reports to bolster the administration's decision to invade Iraq. In one case, the head of one CIA office complained to her boss who took ordered her to not let Cheney influence her work. In another case, when an analyst complained about Cheney, his boss told him to write the report Cheney wanted because the administration had already decided to invade no matter what the facts were. In one TV interview in 2003, Cheney admitted visiting the CIA to make sure the people there got the facts right. During all of this Tenent kept his mouth shut and did not complain to the President.

Tenent failed his President; failed himself; failed his country and failed his family by not speaking out when it really counted. He can make amends by testifying before congress fully and truthfully.