Here, the NY Times once again serves as a handy talking points memo for the left wing, asserting that the Bush Administration relied on the claims of an Al Qaeda who was designated as a "likely fabricator" to support its claims that Iraqis were training Al Qaeda in the production of chemical weapons.
How ironic that it's implicitly chastising President Bush for being so driven by an agenda that he failed to take all the facts into account -- when it's doing the same thing.
As Stephen Hayes points out, there's plenty that the Times is overlooking:
1. "The head of the U.S. intelligence community made the same claim Bush did--using almost exactly the same words--some four months after Bush's speech." This suggests that, in fact, Administration officials didn't go beyond the intelligence in making claims about Iraqi training of Al Qaeda -- their statements were perfectly consistent with the intelligence they were given by the CIA.
2. Carl Levin, who now criticizes the inclusion of the alleged fabricator's statements in Colin Powell's address to the UN, in the past signed off on the Senate Intelligence Committee's report that, in fact, stated both that Powell's speech had been carefully vetted by the appropriate personnel and that none of the intelligence reporting in Powell's speech differed from previous intelligence assessments.
3. The CIA produced a classified analysis in September of 2002 that stated, "The general pattern that emerges is of al Qaeda's enduring interest in acquiring chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) expertise from Iraq." With that background, the alleged fabricator's statements gained added credibility.
4. After striking pharmaceutical factories in Sudan back in 1998, the Clinton Administration justified the strikes by asserting both that they were suspected chemical weapons facilities AND that there was an al Qaeda presence there. As Hayes puts it, "These facilities, according to both Clinton administration spokesmen and senior intelligence officials, were the result of a collaborative effort between Iraqi scientists, the Sudanese Military Industrial Corporation and al Qaeda terrorists. Clinton administration officials stand by those claims today."
So someone tell me: Was the Clinton national security team "lying" too?
Cross posted at CarolLiebau.blogspot.com.