Video: Tenet says Iraq wouldn’t have had nukes until 2007 or 2009

posted at 8:46 am on April 30, 2007 by Ian

Well, I guess we should have waited to invade until last year:

Transcript:

SCOTT PELLEY, CBS’ “60 MINUTES”: January ’03, the President, again: “imagine those 19 hijackers this time armed by Saddam’s Hussein,” is that what you’re telling the President?

GEORGE TENET: No.

[narrating voice]

The Vice President up the ante, claiming Saddam had nuclear weapons when the CIA was saying he didn’t.

PELLEY: What’s happening here?

TENET: I don’t know what’s happening here. The intelligence community’s judgemnet is he will not have a nuclear weapon until the year 2007, 2009.

PELLEY: That’s not what the Vice President is saying.

TENET: Well I can’t explain it.

(h/t Lorie Byrd)

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

All right Tenet, you narcissistic dolt . . . give back the medal and any other fraudulent awards you may have received over the years.

rplat on April 30, 2007 at 8:51 AM

What part of “we can’t wait until the threat is imminent” doesn’t he understand?

The just-in-time theory is a great concept…for businesses. For intel, however, just-in-time is just too late.

James on April 30, 2007 at 8:53 AM

The interview was stunning in its audacity. CBS repeated the absolute LIE that the White House leaked Plame’s name to discredit Wilson and the dispicable, incompetent Tent played along. Disgusting.

Once again, this man presided over the largest, most deadly intelligence failure in US History on 9/11. He then went on to screw up the intelligence on Iraq. Now, to escape blame for historic incompetency, he does what all Democrats do, blame Republicans in a book. All the while knowing the dishonest, disgraceful media in this country will help him in his mission. It is infuriating.

TheBigOldDog on April 30, 2007 at 8:54 AM

Sweet, another Democrat, who was a complete failure, is getting a book deal and face time for denouncing the evil Bush administration.

Let this be a lesson to the next GOP president who wants to “reach across the aisle”. When you take the White House, fire every single holdover (this includes 99% of the current chowderheads). Fire them, fire anyone they know, fire anyone they helped get a job, fire all their first cousins, fire their neighbors….

I don’t think people fully understand just how much Clinton has hurt the country, when you look at what he did and what his underlings have done and are still doing. Bush isn’t off the hook either, though. Let’s hope the next POTUS has a killer instinct, is a ruthless politician, and has some brass balls.

reaganaut on April 30, 2007 at 8:58 AM

If we hadn’t invaded, Iraq wouldn’t have had nukes till 2007 or 2009.

Now it won’t have them at all.

You can always trust a libtard to find something to bitch about.

fusionaddict on April 30, 2007 at 9:04 AM

Not news. That’s what the CIA said in the 2002 NIE.

However, they also said (in 2002), “If Baghdad acquires sufficient fissile material from abroad it could make a nuclear weapon within several months to a year.”

And also, “In a much less likely scenario, Baghdad could make enough fissile material for a nuclear weapon by 2005 to 2007 if it obtains suitable centrifuge tubes this year and has all the other materials and technological expertise necessary to build production-scale uranium enrichment facilities.”

Today’s poll – who prefers the 2007 we actually have to a 2007 where Saddam remained power and just tested his first nuke? Hmmm, let me think…

Lehuster on April 30, 2007 at 9:08 AM

Am I forgetting something major here? I’m really pretty sure Cheney never said Iraq had nuclear weapons.

He said they were moving toward acquiring them. Is that a new allegation in Tenet’s book? They should have said so.

Big, apology-worthy difference, CBS.

see-dubya on April 30, 2007 at 9:11 AM

Pelley acted like a little punk IMO. Not until N.Y. or L.A. is a glowing pile of debris, will these leftist pukes get it.

roninacreage on April 30, 2007 at 9:13 AM

see-dubya on April 30, 2007 at 9:11 AM

That’s indicative of the whole interview see-dubya. It was audacious in its mendacity. Did you see it? I was surprised and it’s not that easy to surprise me these days.

TheBigOldDog on April 30, 2007 at 9:21 AM

Tenet’s just the latest in a long, continuing line of media whores.

It’s his story, and he’ll stick to whichever version makes him the most money and media appearances.

flipflop on April 30, 2007 at 9:24 AM

Am I forgetting something major here? I’m really pretty sure Cheney never said Iraq had nuclear weapons.

see-dubya on April 30, 2007 at 9:11 AM

This was my question too. meanwhile 2007 or 9? Well then gee what’s the big rush? Our intel was wrong on Iraqs nuke program in 1991 and we werent exactly on top of the AQ Khan thing either. I understand this is tough stuff to figure out but damn, 2007 or 2009 is pretty imminent.

Dash on April 30, 2007 at 9:28 AM

Oh, well, if they weren’t going to haven them until 2007…

Wait. What year is this????

amerpundit on April 30, 2007 at 9:41 AM

See, then, why invade in 2003? It would’ve been a good 3-4 years later, before they had weapons that could wipe entire countries off the face of the earth. What was the big rush?

/sarcasm

amerpundit on April 30, 2007 at 9:44 AM

Did I see it?

I don’t watch TV.

I’m not one of those militant No TV! nuts; I would watch it, butthere’s just nothing on I can’t get through the internet or DVD. (Most of the Malkin clips and the good stuff from FNC end up here. And I’m not going to get cable just for Red Eye.) I waste as much time as most people do watching TV, I just do it surfing the web. And blogging.

see-dubya on April 30, 2007 at 9:46 AM

Tenet gives faulty intelligence to the pres and congress, the MSM rips him a new one and calls for his head on a platter.

Tenet writes a book laying the blame on Bush and Cheney, and the MSM all of a sudden loves the guy, landing him an interview on the crown jewel of Bush-bashing news programs, 60 minutes.

I wonder if they had make-up sex.

fogw on April 30, 2007 at 9:51 AM

Tenet claimed in the interview that on Sept 12, the day after the attack, he ran into Richard Perle at the White House. Tenet claims that Perle said that Iraq needed to pay for 9/11. Tenet said he was incredulous because he was holding the manifests that showed that it was al Qaeda and not Iraq.

Richard Perle was in France on Sept 12, unable to get back into the US.

JackStraw on April 30, 2007 at 10:00 AM

Tenet is anxious to get aggressive with al Qaeda. He makes his case with the action person, Condi Rice. But Tenet does not make the case with GWB in his nearly daily briefings. That’s the way it works in Washington, don’t you know.
Despicable.

thegreatbeast on April 30, 2007 at 10:01 AM

Who is worse in this tawdry exhibition, Tenet or Pelley?

thegreatbeast on April 30, 2007 at 10:10 AM

Everyone should read: (i) Victor Davis Hanson’s column “Find Caches of Weapons of Mass Destruction, Absolutely” posted at the National Review Online; (ii) Andrew McCarthy’s “Tenet Does 60 Minutes” posted on National Review Online; (iii) the column by the National Review Editors “Imperfect Storm” posted on National Review Online; and (iv) William Kristol’s column “George Tenet’s Imaginary Encounter” posted at The Weekly Standard Online.

Tenet is pathetic, and the “manstream media” is worse than pathetic in treating Tenet’s current words with anything but contempt.

Phil Byler on April 30, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Let this be a lesson to the next GOP president who wants to “reach across the aisle”. When you take the White House, fire every single holdover (this includes 99% of the current chowderheads). Fire them, fire anyone they know, fire anyone they helped get a job, fire all their first cousins, fire their neighbors….

reaganaut on April 30, 2007 at 8:58 AM

This is what I have been saying since day one of Bush’s tenure. I figure that there are more Clinton moles left in the government than non-moles. The biggest mistake that Bush has made is not firing all the Clinton left-overs and putting about half of them in jail.

This Tenet is a total incompetent ass who should have been fired for the bad CIA info – but what happens – he gets the effing Medal of Honor. GO figure!

Well I’ve got my blood pressure up to 200 over 110 so I guess it’s time for another Silver Bullet!!

OBX Pete on April 30, 2007 at 10:20 AM

Iraq wouldn’t have had nukes until 2007 or 2008?

I thought they had nothng at all? Isn’t that what Democrats and anti-war leftinistras have been saying?

LewWaters on April 30, 2007 at 10:30 AM

I wonder if they had make-up sex.

fogw on April 30, 2007 at 9:51 AM

hahahaha. I think he is following the Richard Clarke playbook.

Mallard T. Drake on April 30, 2007 at 10:47 AM

Okay, I realize this post is about Tenet’s miserable failure on 60 Minutes to show he is competent in something, … anything.

But on the “Cheney said” thingie, funny they don’t show Cheney saying it. They just show a picture of Cheney in front of a microphone and state he said it. What statements was Pelley relying on to make the assertion.

It’s been so long since the press has had a hook to beat this dead horse, please remind me if they were talking about an occasion other than a Meet the Press interview, IIRC, in which he stated “nuclear weapons program”, like, two times and then one time didn’t say programs.

Dusty on April 30, 2007 at 11:08 AM

Well Michael F. Scheuer, head of the CIA’s bin Laden unit, read Tenets book and is not having any of it. I urge you all to read what he has to say about Tenet.

He comes right out and says it is Tenets fault that we did not kill Bin Laden even when we had the opportunity.

On why the missions were stopped:

But Tenet did care. “You can’t kill everyone,” he would say. That’s an admirable humanitarian concern in the abstract, but it does nothing to protect the United States. Indeed, thousands of American families would not be mourning today had there been more ferocity and less sentimentality among the Clinton team.

ScottyDog on April 30, 2007 at 11:21 AM

see-dubya on April 30, 2007 at 9:11 AM

This ‘make up the history as you wish’ stuff is an outrage.
If I’m not mistaken, the Clintons made this a fine art, starting in ’92 and continuing to this day…(in Washington- in Arkansas/Chicago it started way earlier)

I guess for some now it’s more important how they look today, than the actual safety of 300 million Americans and our future. Is the entire left, dems included, on a mission that destroys America? It sure looks that way to me.
We’ll hear arguments now about what AQI has, had , wants, etc . and all the while AQ will be plotting our destruction…laughing at our in-fighting that distracts us from their evil intent.

shooter on April 30, 2007 at 11:26 AM

Unfortunately, what’s true about any of this is not important.
People will see and believe what they saw on 60 Minutes.

unamused on April 30, 2007 at 12:28 PM

“You can’t kill everyone,” he would say. That’s an admirable humanitarian concern in the abstract, but it does nothing to protect the United States. Indeed, thousands of American families would not be mourning today had there been more ferocity and less sentimentality among the Clinton team.”

And now we have a member of the team trying to regain entry to the White House.

Wake up America, or you will find yourself asleep ….. permanently.

fogw on April 30, 2007 at 1:17 PM

The issue is not if he had them but that he was working on them and would have used them once he did. I mean if a guy says he’s going to buy and gun and shoot you, you call the police right then. I’m certainly not going to call 7 days later (or whatever it is) after the waiting period is over.

- The Cat

MirCat on April 30, 2007 at 2:13 PM

Wake up America, or you will find yourself asleep ….. permanently.

fogw on April 30, 2007 at 1:17 PM

fogw, you might have coined one of the 2008 slogans. Great one too!

Entelechy on April 30, 2007 at 2:21 PM

When this clown was given the Medal of Freedom, I expressed my dismay and astonishment to my conservative friends. They roundly scolded me for not seeing how this was a brave move on the part of Bush.

They no longer want to talk about this for some reason….next up: Paul Bremer. He also has been whining about being the Administration fall guy for Iraq. Oh hell, take a number.

honora on April 30, 2007 at 4:44 PM

Tenet looks more like a sloppy cross between Rodney Dangerfield and Sheckey Green than the potential head of the CIA.

God help us all that this clown ever andangered us all.

Shame on you for not firing this buffoon on 9/12/2001 George.

profitsbeard on April 30, 2007 at 9:38 PM