Bush defends `darned good intelligence' on Iraq | McClatchy Washington Bureau

×
Sign In
Sign In
    • Customer Service
    • Mobile & Apps
    • Contact Us
    • Newsletters
    • Subscriber Services

    • All White House
    • Russia
    • All Congress
    • Budget
    • All Justice
    • Supreme Court
    • DOJ
    • Criminal Justice
    • All Elections
    • Campaigns
    • Midterms
    • The Influencer Series
    • All Policy
    • National Security
    • Guantanamo
    • Environment
    • Climate
    • Energy
    • Water Rights
    • Guns
    • Poverty
    • Health Care
    • Immigration
    • Trade
    • Civil Rights
    • Agriculture
    • Technology
    • Cybersecurity
    • All Nation & World
    • National
    • Regional
    • The East
    • The West
    • The Midwest
    • The South
    • World
    • Diplomacy
    • Latin America
    • Investigations
  • Podcasts
    • All Opinion
    • Political Cartoons

  • Our Newsrooms

You have viewed all your free articles this month

Subscribe

Or subscribe with your Google account and let Google manage your subscription.

Latest News

Bush defends `darned good intelligence' on Iraq

Jonathan S. Landay - Knight Ridder Newspapers

July 14, 2003 03:00 AM

WASHINGTON—President Bush on Monday defended the intelligence on which he based his decision to go to war with Iraq, saying it was "darn good," despite recent revelations that one of his allegations against Saddam Hussein couldn't be confirmed.

With polls showing support for the president and his war policy slipping, Bush vigorously defended his original contention that Saddam was developing weapons of mass destruction that could pose a threat to the United States.

"I think the intelligence I get is darned good intelligence," he said. "And the speeches I have given were backed by good intelligence. And I am absolutely convinced today, like I was convinced when I gave the speeches ... that our country made the right decision."

His comments represented another attempt to contain the furor over his use of disputed claims that Iraq had attempted to buy African uranium for nuclear weapons.

White House spokesman Ari Fleischer said the information about uranium played no role in the decision to attack Saddam.

"This revisionist notion that somehow this is now the core of why we went to war, a central issue of why we went to war, a fundamental underpinning of the president's decisions, is a bunch of bull," Fleischer said.

Fleischer was referring to an allegation Bush made Jan. 28 in his State of the Union address that Iraq had tried to purchase uranium in Africa for nuclear weapons.

The White House acknowledged last week that the allegation about an attempted uranium purchase shouldn't have been included in Bush's State of the Union address because it was based on British intelligence that the CIA was unable to confirm. The United States had its own separate reports of Iraqi attempts to buy African uranium, White House officials said, but they were fragmentary and inconclusive.

CIA Director George Tenet took responsibility last week for including the allegation in Bush's address, saying it was cleared in advance by the spy agency.

Critics, led by Democratic presidential candidates and lawmakers, have seized on the issue, contending that the Bush administration—in seeking to boost popular support for invading Iraq—exaggerated or misrepresented intelligence of Saddam's threat to the United States.

Bush said Monday that he wouldn't have included the uranium allegation if the CIA hadn't cleared it. He repeated his contention that Iraq had been hiding banned biological and chemical weapons, which he said were threats to its neighbors and the United States.

He then asserted that the United States had invaded only after Saddam refused to readmit U.N. weapons inspectors, who had been barred from Iraq since 1998.

"The fundamental question is: Did Saddam Hussein have a (banned) weapons program? And the answer is: absolutely," Bush said during a White House news conference with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan. "And we gave him a chance to allow the inspectors in, and he wouldn't let them in. And, therefore, after a reasonable request, we decided to remove him."

In fact, Iraq readmitted the U.N. inspectors last November. The mission's director, former Swedish diplomat Hans Blix, subsequently accused the United States of not giving his staff enough time to complete their search before the invasion began March 20.

The uranium furor erupted after Joseph Wilson, a former U.S. diplomat whom the CIA sent to the West African nation of Niger in 2002 to investigate the allegation, said last week that he had been unable to substantiate intelligence reports that Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. Documents on which those reports were based subsequently had been determined to be crude forgeries.

Fleischer reiterated Monday that there was intelligence indicating that Iraq tried to purchase uranium elsewhere in Africa, but it wasn't strong enough to have been included in the State of the Union speech.

Fleischer said the inclusion of the disputed uranium material in the president's speech had been fully explained, and that the White House now considered the issue closed.

"I think the bottom has been gotten to," Fleischer said. "No one can accurately tell you it (the intelligence) was wrong. That is not known." In his address, Bush said "the British government has learned" that Iraq was trying to purchase uranium in Africa.

The Senate Intelligence Committee and the CIA inspector general's office are looking into how the allegation was included in the State of the Union address.

Britain on Monday stood by its contention that it had evidence other than the forged Niger documents that Saddam was seeking uranium in Africa.

"This information on which we relied, which was completely separate from the now-notorious forged documents, came from foreign intelligence sources," British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw told BBC Radio.

———

(c) 2003, Knight Ridder/Tribune Information Services.

Iraq

Read Next

Latest News

Republicans expect the worst in 2019 but see glimmers of hope from doom and gloom.

By Franco Ordoñez

December 31, 2018 05:00 AM

Republicans are bracing for an onslaught of congressional investigations in 2019. But they also see glimmers of hope

KEEP READING

MORE LATEST NEWS

Latest News

Trump administration aims to stop professional baseball deal with Cuba

December 29, 2018 02:46 PM

Latest News

No job? No salary? You can still get $20,000 for ‘green’ home improvements. But beware

December 29, 2018 08:00 AM

Congress

’I’m not a softy by any means,’ Clyburn says as he prepares to help lead Democrats

December 28, 2018 09:29 AM

Courts & Crime

Trump will have to nominate 9th Circuit judges all over again in 2019

December 28, 2018 03:00 AM

Congress

Lone senator at the Capitol during shutdown: Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts

December 27, 2018 06:06 PM

Congress

Does Pat Roberts’ farm bill dealmaking make him an ‘endangered species?’

December 26, 2018 08:02 AM
Take Us With You

Real-time updates and all local stories you want right in the palm of your hand.

McClatchy Washington Bureau App

View Newsletters

Subscriptions
  • Newsletters
Learn More
  • Customer Service
  • Securely Share News Tips
  • Contact Us
Advertising
  • Advertise With Us
Copyright
Privacy Policy
Terms of Service