Iran NIE fallout: Either Bush is lying or he's stupid

[DeadCanDance]

republican conservative former Congressman Joe Scarborough, on Bush's claims about what he knew, and when he knew it, with regard to the Iran NIE:



Joe Scarborough Rips Bush On Iran NIE: He’s Either ‘Lying’ Or ‘Is Stupid’

Yesterday in his press conference, President Bush asserted that Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell told him “we have new information” on Iran’s nuclear program, but “he did not tell me what the information was.”

This morning, the cast of Morning Joe chided Bush’s claim. Co-host Willie Geist said, “It’s just not a credible answer, I’m afraid.” Host Joe Scarborough ripped into Bush, saying that president is either “lying to the American people” or is simply “stupid”:

"We are left with only two options here. Either the President of the United States is lying to the American people about what happened during that meeting, or the President of the United States is stupid."


http://thinkprogress.org/

 

[maineman]

why must it be either/or?

 

[LordBrownTrout]

Scarborough has no credibility.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

why must it be either/or?

Sure, why beat around the Bush? Why not just call him a stupid liar like you really want?

ijits.

 

[Shogun]

Scarborough has no credibility.

how so?

because he isn't falling in line, starry eyed, behind the war drum despite evidence?

 

[maineman]

Sure, why beat around the Bush? Why not just call him a stupid liar like you really want?

ijits.

I am pretty sure that was the clear implication.

moron

 

[LordBrownTrout]

how so?

because he isn't falling in line, starry eyed, behind the war drum despite evidence?

No, its just that he's so mad, has changed his mind several times and spews vitriol. There are people on the other side that do this too, conservatives, which I lend no credibility either. Hannity is the name.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

I am pretty sure that was the clear implication.

moron

like i said, why beat around the Bush?

ijit bushwacker

 

[DeadCanDance]

standard GOP misdirect: make the issue about Scarborough.

Now, do you believe that Bush only "found out" about the intelligence communities assessment about Iran a few days ago?

Or is he lying, because the findings in the NIE were basically formalized 6 months ago.


As for scarborough, sane conservatives can change their mind, based on new information. He's seen enough of Bush to conclude that Dubya is a bumbling incompetent. Most of america has.

I swear, sometimes it seems like most of the 24% dead enders - that small fraction that still worships Bush - is on this board.

 

[ScreamingEagle]

standard GOP misdirect: make the issue about Scarborough.

Now, do you believe that Bush only "found out" about the intelligence communities assessment about Iran a few days ago?

Or is he lying, because the findings in the NIE were basically formalized 6 months ago.


As for scarborough, sane conservatives can change their mind, based on new information. He's seen enough of Bush to conclude that Dubya is a bumbling incompetent. Most of america has.

I swear, sometimes it seems like most of the 24% dead enders - that small fraction that still worships Bush - is on this board.

Tell me, why would a country dripping in oil need a nuclear program to begin with?

 

[Shogun]

No, its just that he's so mad, has changed his mind several times and spews vitriol. There are people on the other side that do this too, conservatives, which I lend no credibility either. Hannity is the name.

I don't see Joe as equivalent to hannity in the blathering department. We all change our minds. I dunno.. I've seen Joe be pretty consistent before. I've grown to respect him much in the way I have grown to respect Buchannan. Ole Pat gets red in the face and is quick to tell it how he sees it too but I'd be a fool to say that this has made him wrong about quite a few things.

 

[mattskramer]

http://www.payvand.com/news/03/oct/1015.html

 

[jillian]

No, its just that he's so mad, has changed his mind several times and spews vitriol. There are people on the other side that do this too, conservatives, which I lend no credibility either. Hannity is the name.

Normal people reasses their opinions as evidence warrants. I've always seen Scarborough as one of the few rational right-wing voices in media. He believes in true conservative values and I don't agree with him on an awful lot of subjects. But the man is intelligent and he, at least, gives good reasons for his opinions, even if you differ with him.

Or is it only when someone has a conservative "conversion" like Romney suddenly deciding he's anti-choice that a flip flop isn't a flip flop?

Can't help thinking about something Stephen Colbert said about George Bush at the Washington Press Corps dinner last year. He said" I love this man [Bush]. And do you know why I love him? Because he believes the same thing on Wednesday that he did on Monday...... no matter what happened on Tuesday".

 

[DeadCanDance]

Tell me, why would a country dripping in oil need a nuclear program to begin with?

this has been explained ad naseum to bush voters on this board. Do a search.

And of course, this is another attempt to divert the thread away from bush.

do you really think bush "just" found out a few days ago that Iran had stopped their nuclear weapons program? It would seem odd, given that this NIE was virtually completed a year ago.

 

[Shogun]

I guess I fail to see how one commodity (oil) displaces the desire for another commodity (nuclear energy). It's borderline comatose retarded to insist that having oil should keep a nation from wanting nuclear energy too. Further, American citizens have about as much valid input in another nation's desire for energy as they have about OUR energy prerogative.

 

[Annie]

As I said earlier, why not take a look at what the report actually says? At the site you can find a link to the report. It seems to me that if the argument against the administration is that it is 'warmongering' then those arguing against it should be able to say realistically what is and isn't a danger. :

http://strata-sphere.com/blog/index.php/archives/4723

...In the end even this newly leaked NIE notes Iran is not really dropping its dreams of the atomic bomb:

The estimate does say that Iran’s ultimate goal is still to develop the capability to produce nuclear weapon.

…

The new report concludes that if Iran were to end the freeze of its weapons program, it would still be at least two years before Tehran would have enough highly enriched uranium to produce a nuclear bomb. But it says it is still “very unlikely” Iran could produce enough of the material by then.

Instead, the N.I.E. concludes it is more likely Iran could have a bomb by the early part to the middle of the next decade. The report states that the State Department’s Bureau of Intelligence and Research judges Iran is unlikely to achieve this goal before 2013, “because of foreseeable technical and programmatic problems.”​

Well, this is good news if true. Sadly it is intelligence and therefore fraught with potential errors. The question is whether this situation can be verified by independent inspectors! That will be the real test. I hope Iran has come to its senses. And my guess is there may be a lot of classified aspects of this we will not know for decades to come. It seems awfully convenient that we get a big “never mind” as Iran is working to get out from under all that international pressure!

For those interested here is the actual report (well caveated). H/T Kevin Drum.

Major Addendum - Must Read!: There is a reason people outside of government should realize that they cannot simply glance at a government report and pretend to grasp it. Government jargon is as complex and nuanced as that in any scientific field. It takes years to truly master. So why am I not surprised all the amateurs are misreading the report? Here is what is said about the three levels of confidence in the reported findings:

•

High confidence generally indicates that our judgments are based on high-quality information, and/or that the nature of the issue makes it possible to render a solid judgment. A “high confidence” judgment is not a fact or a certainty, however, and such judgments still carry a risk of being wrong.

• Moderate confidence generally means that the information is credibly sourced and plausible but not of sufficient quality or corroborated sufficiently to warrant a higher level of confidence.

• Low confidence generally means that the information’s credibility and/or plausibility is questionable, or that the information is too fragmented or poorly corroborated to make solid analytic inferences, or that we have significant concerns or problems with the sources.​

Read these VERY CAREFULLY to understand the conclusions. They basically fall into (1) Highly probably but small chance it could be wrong; (2) Who the hell knows, its possible and some hints are there; and (3) Not likely. With only three levels this is all you get. So anything in the Medium Confidence category is really a guess.

Now look at the report’s conclusions and it has two flavors. First is whether Iran stepped down from developing nuclear weapons in 2003 (after we invaded Iraq [hint, hint]):

We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program;

…

• We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.

• We judge with high confidence that the halt lasted at least several years.
​

OK, we spooked them by taking out Saddam so damn fast they stood back for a while from building their bombs. But are they STILL suspended in their activities (given Ahmedinejad’s and the UN’s IAEA’s recent statements this is an important question!). Apparently we do not know!

We assess with moderate confidence Tehran had not restarted its nuclear weapons program as of mid-2007, but we do not know whether it currently intends to develop nuclear weapons.
​

The NIE is quite clear. We know they stopped, we have no intel on whether they are still stopped or not. The reporting that Iran has stopped as of now is not accurate. Here is the scary part - Iran is still processing fuel! They don’t NEED to process fuel for Nuclear Energy. Russia has offered to SELL THEM fuel if they return the spent fuel so it cannot be used to make weapons. Note this when reading this next finding:

C. We assess centrifuge enrichment is how Iran probably could first produce enough fissile material for a weapon, if it decides to do so. Iran resumed its declared centrifuge enrichment activities in January 2006, despite the continued halt in the nuclear weapons program. Iran made significant progress in 2007 installing centrifuges at Natanz, but we judge with moderate confidence it still faces significant technical problems operating them.
​

And there are more indicators Iran has simply decided to proceed with technology that is dual use - civilian and military - as a way to hide their intentions. Note that the NIE concludes with confidence Iran wants nuclear weapons. And one way to proceed is to do so under the cover of dual use programs:

D. Iranian entities are continuing to develop a range of technical capabilities that could be applied to producing nuclear weapons, if a decision is made to do so. For example, Iran’s civilian uranium enrichment program is continuing. We also assess with high confidence that since fall 2003, Iran has been conducting research and development projects with commercial and conventional military applications—some of which would also be of limited use for nuclear weapons.​

The fact is this is not the slam-dunk assessment it is reported to be. The centrifuges are the key. With Russia’s offer on the table to provide civil energy ready fuel the centrifuges are not needed for Iran’s civil energy needs. But the NIE is confident this unnecessary effort is continuing? Why is it continuing? Folks, they just don’t know for sure and that is the bottom line. They know it was stopped in 2003, but they don’t know if it has been restarted under dual use cover.

Posted by AJStrata on Monday, December 3rd, 2007 at 1:52 pm.

Lots more here for those truly curious about what is going on with Iran.

 

[Alpha1]

standard GOP misdirect: make the issue about Scarborough.

Now, do you believe that Bush only "found out" about the intelligence communities assessment about Iran a few days ago?

Or is he lying, because the findings in the NIE were basically formalized 6 months ago.


As for scarborough, sane conservatives can change their mind, based on new information. He's seen enough of Bush to conclude that Dubya is a bumbling incompetent. Most of america has.

I swear, sometimes it seems like most of the 24% dead enders - that small fraction that still worships Bush - is on this board.

From a Washington Post article....link posted by DCD in another thread...
I don't have the link, try DCD's posts in other threads...

But do continue your rants...
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Hadley said Bush was first told in August or September about intelligence indicating Iran had halted its weapons program, but was advised it would take time to evaluate. Vice President Cheney, Hadley and other top officials were briefed the week before last. Intelligence officials formalized their conclusions on Tuesday and briefed Bush the next day.

 

[eots]

Sure, why beat around the Bush? Why not just call him a stupid liar like you really want?

ijits.

bush is a stupid liar

 

[maineman]

From a Washington Post article....link posted by DCD in another thread...
I don't have the link, try DCD's posts in other threads...

But do continue your rants...
'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

Hadley said Bush was first told in August or September about intelligence indicating Iran had halted its weapons program, but was advised it would take time to evaluate. Vice President Cheney, Hadley and other top officials were briefed the week before last. Intelligence officials formalized their conclusions on Tuesday and briefed Bush the next day.

and Bush made his World War Three comment in October. Thank you for helping prove the point.

 

[M14 Shooter]

standard GOP misdirect: make the issue about Scarborough.

Attacking his credibilty is perfectly legitimate.

After all, the only reason you posted him is because he said something you like.