DoD Report Appears to Confirm Downing Street Memo

[Billo_Really]

DoD Report Appears to Confirm Downing Street Memo
By Jason Leopold t r u t h o u t | Report Friday 09 February 2007

A long-awaited report on the veracity of pre-war Iraq intelligence has found that a secretive policy shop exaggerated the Iraqi threat, providing the White House with cherry-picked information about links between Iraq and al Qaeda. The shop, operating out of the Pentagon, was set up by then-Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld. Its goal was to lay the groundwork for a pre-emptive military strike against Iraq.

The report would appear to confirm British intelligence assertions that surfaced in a document widely referred to as the Downing Street Memo that the facts against the threat posed by Iraq were being fixed around the Bush administration's policy leading up to the invasion of Iraq.

Senator Carl Levin (D-Mich.) said the report is a "a devastating condemnation of the activities of the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy. Those activities supported the Bush administration's misleading case for war against Iraq."

So all that pre-invasion hype was a lie after all.

 

[Binary_Digit]

I've searched their official website and I can't find any reference to this report. Can you help me?

United States Department of Defense Office of Inspector General

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Binary Digit:
I've searched their official website and I can't find any reference to this report. Can you help me?

Here you go, it's the first two on the list.

Pressroom

 

[Billo_Really]

Here's another article on the same issue...

Pre-war intelligence gathering under fire
By Julian E. Barnes, Times Staff Writer
2:29 PM PST, February 9, 2007


WASHINGTON -- Senate Democrats assailed Pentagon officials today for insisting to the White House in the months before the Iraq war that Saddam Hussein had direct links to Al Qaeda — despite doubts within the U.S. intelligence community.

Defense Department Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble told the lawmakers that he questioned Douglas J. Feith, the influential former undersecretary, about the incident.

Feith was a prime architect of Bush administration policies and presented policymakers with allegations of links between Iraq and Al Qaeda that did not accurately reflect the views of U.S. intelligence agencies.

"He said it was left out because it was critical of the intelligence community," Gimble said.

 

[tryreading]

So all that pre-invasion hype was a lie after all.

I learned a new government-speak phrase today. This is the old definition:

Alternative intelligence - Intelligence that is false.

New definition:

Alternative intelligence - Intelligence that is false, but you go to war with the intelligence that you have (or manufactured).




The Iraq war was under way well before it began. It would have started even sooner if inconvenient facts didn't have to be disputed by the Administration with alternative information.

Under Secretary of Defense for Policy... exaggerated a connection between Iraq and al-Qaida while the Intelligence Community remained consistently dubious...

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community:

As a result, the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy did not provide "the most accurate analysis of intelligence"' to senior decision-makers.



Even if they were!?! Which is it?

The Under Secretary of Defense for Policy... stating that their actions were not intelligence activities and, even if they were, would be appropriate given that they were responding to direction from the Deputy Secretary of Defense.

 

[cherokee]

So all that pre-invasion hype was a lie after all.

Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

I just don’t see it...:shrug:

 

[tryreading]

Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

I just don’t see it...:shrug:

When we don't learn our history we are doomed to repeat it. We are repeating it right now:

Gulf of Tonkin, manufactured incident, used as an excuse to attack another country, stay 12 years, kill almost 60,000 Americans. Saddam and Al Queda, WMD, manufactured intelligence, used as an excuse to attack another country, stay 4 years so far, kill about 3,000 Americans so far...

The more information revealed while the Administration and the Congress that started the war are still in power, the better. Would you rather this information be classified for a decade and then declassified? This country has a short memory. Lets get as much as possible out in the light now and throw it in the laps of the responsible irresponsible people who made the stupid decision.

 

[cherokee]

When we don't learn our history we are doomed to repeat it. We are repeating it right now:

Gulf of Tonkin, manufactured incident, used as an excuse to attack another country, stay 12 years, kill almost 60,000 Americans. Saddam and Al Queda, WMD, manufactured intelligence, used as an excuse to attack another country, stay 4 years so far, kill about 3,000 Americans so far...

The more information revealed while the Administration and the Congress that started the war are still in power, the better. Would you rather this information be classified for a decade and then declassified? This country has a short memory. Lets get as much as possible out in the light now and throw it in the laps of the responsible irresponsible people who made the stupid decision.

Can you show me where I said turn a blind eye?

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Cherokee
Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

I just don’t see it...

Do you see that over 3000 of your co-workers have died because of lies?

 

[tryreading]

Can you show me where I said turn a blind eye?

I didn't say you said that, but:

I just don’t see it...

 

[Binary_Digit]

Here you go, it's the first two on the list.

Pressroom

Thanks!

Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

I just don’t see it...:shrug:

It won't cure AIDS either, but that doesn't mean it's not good to know about.

 

[cherokee]

Do you see that over 3000 of your co-workers have died because of lies?

How does bringing that up help stabilize the fooking country today? Hmm.
It doesn’t! Look if you believe Bush lied then fooking impeach him but LEAVE the troops out of your fooking hate campaign. I swear to god every time I turn around you accusing the military of some atrocities or another just to attack Bush.

I didn't say you said that, but:

Originally posted by Cherokee
Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

I just don’t see it...

I said I don’t see how impeaching bush will change anything going on in Iraq.
Besides putting Dick in charge......

 

[cherokee]

Thanks!


It won't cure AIDS either, but that doesn't mean it's not good to know about.

Did I say to forget the DAMN thing? No I didn’t!
What the hell?........you people have missed is my point of leaving our troops out of you hate campaign for bush.

 

[EAGLE1]

Did I say to forget the DAMN thing? No I didn’t!
What the hell?........you people have missed is my point of leaving our troops out of you hate campaign for bush.

Wha?? Eh??? How does pointing out lies made by elected representatives and to pointing out casualities suffered mean your attacking the troops. If anything it means youre supporting the troops.

 

[Stinger]

When we don't learn our history we are doomed to repeat it. We are repeating it right now:

They history that we have learned is that in fact Saddam's secret police were in fact trying to further ties with Al qaeda and other terrorist groups at Saddam's insistence. That Saddam's secret police were trying to develop phony perfume sprayers and other delivery devices terrorist could use to disperse chemical and biological agents.

So why are people still arguing over whether or not Saddam was a threat?

 

[Stinger]

Wha?? Eh??? How does pointing out lies made by elected representatives and to pointing out casualities suffered mean your attacking the troops. If anything it means youre supporting the troops.

Well let's point out your lie, there is no evidence anyone lied about anything so why do you keep stating it as fact? There were disagreements within the intelligence community.......................DUH. As it turns out those who said Saddam was a threat were correct. So what others said different, they were wrong.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Stinger:
Well let's point out your lie, there is no evidence anyone lied about anything so why do you keep stating it as fact? There were disagreements within the intelligence community.......................DUH. As it turns out those who said Saddam was a threat were correct. So what others said different, they were wrong.

Stinger, you gotta warn me when you start spewing bullshit like this! I almost didn't have time to pull up my pant legs before your sewage post rolled on by!

Anyone who says Hussein was a threat is the biggest ***** on the planet. Because what you're saying is that a country that was bombed back to the stone age, that barely has running water and electricity, that is a population of goat herders, that is 9000 miles away with no navy, is a threat to the most technologically advanced military the world has ever seen.

S.h.i.t, it only took a 100 hours to beat'em the first time...

People that think Iraq was a threat either have an agenda their manifesting or they have chicken-little syndrome.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by cherokee
How does bringing that up help stabilize the fooking country today? Hmm.
It doesn’t! Look if you believe Bush lied then fooking impeach him but LEAVE the troops out of your fooking hate campaign. I swear to god every time I turn around you accusing the military of some atrocities or another just to attack Bush.

You know a lot better than I do that the recruiting standards have been relaxed to the point where certain types of people, who would not normally qualify to be admitted, are in uniform. Those in uniform that commit atrocities are criminals. If they were not in uniform, they'd still be committing atrocities. Because that's the kind of people they are.

I'm also on record saying the majority of troops do their very difficult job as professionally as they can, given the circumstances. I'm also on record saying that I support them by wanting them the hell out of there [Iraq]. I want them out of harms way. I want this war to stop now. I do not believe the bullshit coming out of Washington. This is Bush's war. Not the troops war. They did not decide to go to Iraq. Bush did.

And for that, yes, I'd like to see his a.s.s impeached. Our standing around the world would improve if we impeached him. The chances of people getting their heads chopped off would decrease if he was impeached. If we want to properly fight the bullshit war on terror, then we should impeach the President and Vice-President, then charge them both with war crimes and turn them over to an International Court of Law. At which point, this country would re-assume it's position as a great nation once again.

 

[Iriemon]

They history that we have learned is that in fact Saddam's secret police were in fact trying to further ties with Al qaeda and other terrorist groups at Saddam's insistence.

Strange that Hussein would want to help a terrorist organization dedicated to bringing his type of Govt down.

That Saddam's secret police were trying to develop phony perfume sprayers and other delivery devices terrorist could use to disperse chemical and biological agents.

Oh yes, the great urgent perfume sprayer threat posed by Iraq.

So why are people still arguing over whether or not Saddam was a threat?

Beats me.

 

[EAGLE1]

Strange that Hussein would want to help a terrorist organization dedicated to bringing his type of Govt down.



Oh yes, the great urgent perfume sprayer threat posed by Iraq.



Beats me.

:rofl the great Iraqi eau de Toilette danger to the Homeland. Gosh darnit shoulda seen that one comin!

 

[Simon W. Moon]

Ok and how does this matter now? Will it help stabilize Iraq? Maybe this will cause the sunni and shia to forgive each other? Iran will stop supporting terrorists groups?

I agree bush only has ½ a brain but this along with you yelling “illegal war” wont change a thing on the ground in Iraq today. Even if you impeach him how will it change anything?

How many times should the US be misled to war?
Should we be mad as hell that someone misled this country into one of the gravest enterprises possible and take steps to prevent it from happening again?
Or, when it happens, should we shrug off the deaths and sacrifices as if they were unimportant and inconsequential and allow the perpetrators to go unpunished just because only some of us caught them in the act?
Should we also apply this principle to other types of crimes? IF we don't catch a murderer in the act we should just throw our hands up and say, "Prosecuting him now won't bring back the dead- so forget about it?"

 

[Simon W. Moon]

http://www.dodig.osd.mil/IGInformation/archives/Unclass Executive Summary.pdf

http://www.dodig.osd.mil/IGInformation/archives/OUSDP-OSP Brief.pdf

http://www.dodig.osd.mil/IGInformation/archives/OUSDP-OSP Brief.pdf

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy [OUSD(P)] developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community, to senior decision makers.

While such actions were not illegal or unauthorized, the actions were, in our opinion, inappropriate given that the products did not clearly show the variance with the consensus of the Intelligence Community and were, in some cases, shown as intelligence products.​

It seems they showed senior decision makers "some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community" "as intelligence products" when they were not.
Here's the rub, these actions were not unauthorized.

Who authorized the OSP to show "senior decision makers" "alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaida relationship" as though they were products of the intelligence community?​

 

[tryreading]

They history that we have learned is that in fact Saddam's secret police were in fact trying to further ties with Al qaeda and other terrorist groups at Saddam's insistence. That Saddam's secret police were trying to develop phony perfume sprayers and other delivery devices terrorist could use to disperse chemical and biological agents.

So why are people still arguing over whether or not Saddam was a threat?

Anyone who says Hussein was a threat is the biggest ***** on the planet. Because what you're saying is that a country that was bombed back to the stone age, that barely has running water and electricity, that is a population of goat herders, that is 9000 miles away with no navy, is a threat to the most technologically advanced military the world has ever seen.

You took the exact word out of my mouth - I was going to respond to Stinger, before I saw your post, that the people arguing that Saddam was not a threat are not ******s.

Well, I guess even Stinger would say he's not a threat now. So maybe he rests easier these days.

But who will protect us from the people who wage war needlessly, who promise that a war will cost $30 billion dollars when they know its a lie, who create 'alternative intelligence,' who spend our money mindlessly, who can't protect our borders, who...

 

[tryreading]

I said I don’t see how impeaching bush will change anything going on in Iraq.
Besides putting Dick in charge......

I don't think he should be impeached. But the truth should be exposed.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

So all that pre-invasion hype was a lie after all.

A) You said "all," the intelligence this report was specifically in relation to the AQ Saddam links.

B) Where exactly does it say that anyone was lying? For the life of me I can't find that anywhere.

C) Somebody ought to inform the DOD about DOCEX that proves conclusively that their was infact an AQ Saddam relationship and it was collaborative.