Originally posted by �¡Oracle!:
I don't know why anyone thinks that the executive branch has exclusive access to the intel before anyone else?



common sense says they do. the SIC is an oversight committee, not a decision making committee. you know what that means right?

they don't run the country on a day to day basis so why would they review intel prior to the CIC? in addition the SIC depends on a staff of (non-politcal ) people to plan their meetings and prepare their breifs. if they were to have access to secure information prior to the executive branch there would be room for leaks which could jeopardize decision making at higher levels.

Originally posted by �¡Oracle!:
Now after the fact these clowns are acting most disgracefully when they deny the very statements that many of them made about the intel.


the questions brought up by the SIC are valid. how was the intel used and was all of it made available to them for oversight. obviously not! we have at least two examples where they didn't have the whole story... the example on the documents used to link iraq to nukes, and the truth about curveball being a undependable source with an agenda and axe to grind on iraq/saddam. yet the facts about both of those situations were not made available to the SIC until they were disclosed by others. why is that? why did rumsfeld pay visits to the FBI, NSA, CIA, DIA and have conversations with them about the intel they were providing early on? conversations we still don't know the full details of? we do have some insight based on conjecture that he was pressuring them for the "slam dunk" info the bush admin needed for pre-emptive war, but of course it can't be proven. i'm sure he wasn't asking them to commit resources to anything that might show iraq wasn't the threat it was being presented as though. why hasn't the SIC and everyone else been able to get the full complete story on that? it's funny how when they're doing their job, now they're coined as clowns and the blame is on them.




'03 Saab 9-5 Aero