how much more patisian can you get -
The top 2 are written by Republicans, the 3rd by a journalist and the 4th by a bi- partisan committee

The 9/11 Commission was divided evenly with both Democrats and Republicans on the committee.
It does not say, as you claim, that there was manipulation and pressure by the White House to "cook" the pre war intelligence.
Again, books don't count.
See my reasoning from the previous post

Books don't count !!!!!!!!!! Go back to the your cave

Again, let's keep it civil.
Three separate bipartisan investigations found no evidence of pressure from the White House to manipulate pre war intelligence.
The Butler report also came to that conclusion in the case of Tony Blair.
If these investigations came to the opposite conclusion, then as far as I am concerned, Bush should be tried.
Until that comes, then I have to go with those.
But you trust books written by people who may have a bias creeping into their writing.
You believe them because they support your own bias.
So are all the anti Hillary books true???

read the books !!!!!!!! And there are plenty more.

I have no idea where you have gotten your information, but it is sooooo wrong its accutally funny

Well, for starters the 9/11 Commission, The Silberman-Robb Report, The Butler Report, the bipartisan Senate Select Committee on Intelligence Report.
I offer information.
You offer attacks.
And I invite you to look up everything I have typed and prove me wrong.
No, in fact, I beg you to.
Not that I have any delusion it will change your mind
All I have gotten so far are lines telling me to go back to my cave and that I am ignorant.
So I will follow your logic and now declare all anti Hillary books are all true.
Every last word, no matter how out of this world they may be.

Lastly, when you go look up the information I have provided, look up the actual reports.
Do not go to web sites that tell you what they say.
I do this as a public service.
I don't want you to just take my word for all of this but to investigate it yourself.
After you get a chance to read these reports, I mean really read them, then come back and tell me I am wrong.

It is so obvious that both sides of this subject only looks for facts to support ones own point of view.

when are you going to realize it is aliens(martians) that are behind it all. Check out area 51 and the stargate in the mountains.

I've offered information and you have refused to look at it.

You wanted bi-partisian, and I gave it to you. You wanted sources and I gave them to you.

if you're not smart enough to research a book for content and credibility, than you're not smart enough to read them.

Your Butler report - discredited - http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2004/dec/10/uk.butler

and your The Silberman-Robb Report -

November 16, 2005
What the Silberman-Robb commission found

Now that President Bush is finally reponding to claims that he lied about the pre-war intelligence regarding Iraq, attention has focused on the report by the Silberman-Robb Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction. The president has pointed to its findings as supporting the integrity of his pre-war statements about WMD. His critics respond that the commission was not charged with determining whether the administration exaggerated or distorted the intelligence it received.

This argument is true at one level, but quite misleading at others. The commission was asked to determine, among other things, whether the administration pressured analysts to slant their intelligence findings. This issue was critical because it represented the only plausible basis for suggesting that the administration engaged in misconduct. There wasn't much mystery about what the intelligence said -- it was well understood that the intelligence supported what the administration had said about Saddam and WMD. The only opening the Democrats thought might be available to them was that, perhaps, the administration pressured analysts to paint a false or misleading picture.

Now that this door is closed, the Dems want to try the other door. They realize that the intelligence (now determined not to have been coerced) overwhelmingly supported what the president told Congress and the American people (even Dana Milbank and Walter Pincus of the Washington Post admit this). But they are hoping to paint a different picture -- one they know to be false.

But let's consider what the Silberman-Robb commission did find. The very first pages of its report inform us that

The United States government asserted that Saddam Hussein had reconstituted his nuclear weapons program, had biological weapons and mobile biological weapon production facilities, and had stockpiled and was producing chemical weapons. All of this was based on the assessments of the U.S. Intelligence Community.
So the core assertions about which Bush is said to have lied "all" were based on the assessments of our intelligence community.

Moreover,

[Our intelligence agencies] collected precious little intelligence for the analysts to analyze, and much of what they did collect was either worthless or misleading. [And there] was a failure to communicate effectively with policymakers; the Intelligence Community didn't adequately explain just how little good intelligence it had--or how much its assessments were driven by assumptions and inferences rather than concrete evidence.
So the administration not only received poor intelligence, it was misled into thinking the intelligence was not poor.

President Bush, then, is absolutely correct when he cites the Silberman-Robb commission as supporting the view that he did not intentionally mislead the public. The commission's report shows that he was not in a position to provide the public with accurate information about Iraqi WMD, and not in a position to realize that the information he did provide was dubious.

Those who downplay the significance of the commission's findings are wide of the mark.


And last but not least - the 9/11 Commision report -

As a result of the 9/11 Commisssion Report, we now know that within hours after the attack of September 11, 2001, Secretary Rumsfeld was busy attempting to find a way to link Saddam Hussein with the attack. We have the sworn testimony of the Presidents White House head of counterterrorism, Richard Clarke, that on the day after the attack, Sept 12, the president wanted to connect the attacks to Saddam...............

You know to start with I am sorry for 9-11 what the blame me. Comes down to it why not. In this world all bush is a yes man. Blame who you want, what you want. All it does is causes unrest in the ranks. They make you think 1 way and you go 1 way. Some other person come along and bashes you and you go that way. Then you to are a puppet. Who or what are pulling the strings who knows, but its not you.

They say it came from a report. Big deal there is 1 to counter it. I came from a book there is 1 to counter. It is like a study. You find results and 6 mnths I will have 1 to say your are wrong.This day and age there to many people just short of all the facts. So there they form opions that could be right or dead wrong. So the story goes on and on and on..............

WOW!!
First I can say this isn't exactly how i divised the course of this thred but......

Imhooked, your absolutely right and i can honestly say i haven't heard to many more intelligent arguments on this particular website. I really feel that the major thing that's wrong with this country is not our president, but the poor decisions of individuals to run the own lives and rely on others to do it for them...i.e. government. It seems to me that there is to much instances of attack and not enough reason. Once again, imhooked, very sound reasoning and intelligents...kudos to you. I would also just like to say that i'm very very proud to live in this country and fro the bottom of my heart i can say that we as intelligent and reasonable and agendaless americans will still continue to make this country what it was and is. GOD Bless America.

Now back to the reason of my post......

I didn't catch alot of fish today...Bush's fault!!

I stubbed my to this morning...yup..Bush's fault!!

Took the wife out for steak dinner this evening and it was a little over done and you guessed it...it was Bushy's fault!!!!

Long live America and the intelligent, reasonable people who live here and for GOD's sake start respecting our Commander-in-Chief. Are all of you so damned perfect and never make mistakes??

Were these results of a bi partisan investigation??
An article from The UK Guardian is not a bi partisan investigation
I am still asking for that bipartisan investigation. Not a book or an article. You only provided books and newspaper articles.
Along with name calling and snide remarks.
Neither add to your argument, by the way
It is obvious you're getting flustered.
Plus, it appears your attempt to discredit me actually makes my point.
At about the sixth paragraph down.
Now, as I have said before, read the ACTUAL reports. Do not read someone's opinion on them.
Nor a book or article about the reports.

For someone who has no difficulty telling others who disagree with them to "get educated" and to "open their minds," you seem to have difficulty doing both yourself.

I am not saying the bipartisan investigations were flawless.
Nor am I not saying the threat Saddam may or may not have posed was possibly a little overstated.
Nor am I not saying that there were not a host of intelligence failures.
I am saying that no bipartisan investigation has proven the intelligence was manipulated by President Bush, an impeachable offense.

And I will not ask for impeachment of a president based on books and newspaper articles.

And in my book, along with the U.S. Constitution, as an American citizen he is entitled to an assumption of innocence until such day an investigation proves him guilty, if ever.

If his opponents want to grant these same rights to the detainees at Guantanamo Bay, why can't they afford a sitting U. S. President the same courtesy??

What I find confusing, reelemin, is your side of the political spectrum considers Bush the dumbest animal on two feet and yet he was somehow able to fool the world's intelligence community, a former U.S. President, along with the House and Senate, to go along with his manipulation.
Most confusing,indeed.

So, I will use your logic and declare Hillary Clinton as unfit for office as I read in a book and a web site that she was involved in the death of Vince Foster.
I know it to be true, even though investigations have not proven such a thing, because a book and an article said it was.

Anyways, this back and forth is getting repetitive and I have papers to grade.

Well this one turned exactly where it would have been predicted to go!!! Differing opinions are one thing, but this one has gotten way past difference of opinions.

are you kidding. im loving it. i have read the 9/11 commission and what imhooked said has some truth to it. the other things he/she listed i have not read and will have to put it on my to do list.
i have seen plenty were reelem in has told all those who disagree with her to get educated. i just dismiss it. some people see it as a hostile invite to debate. imhooked does make some very powerful points. he seems more measured. like a passive aggressive thing. it does get repetitive. like all the global warming threads. me i prefer not to debate too much at this point how we got to iraq, i want to know how we will get ou. not just a pull out, but a good strategy that doesnt leave iraq in chaos. havent heard any good ideas from any of the candidates
i always get a laugh on how these threads go whoooosh in a whole different direction
anyways had a decent fishing day

I agree we need to move past the why and how we got there and come up with reasonable exit plan. It doesn't take rocket science to know we need to PUSH more responsibility on the Iraqis for taking care of their own, other wise we will never be able to leave in good conscience. If we just walk out now we will have just peed all over the last few years of work.