Hi Neocon; Re: "Those were leaks, not by intelligence analysts, but of retired military brass, questioning the policy implications of intelligence. It is not at all the same thing as saying "The Administration is fabricating intelligence". Please, stick to the point at issue."
No one accused the White House of "fabricating intelligence". Hell, I've said that Bush is a moron and couldn't fabricate intelligence if his life depended on it, LOL.
What he's accused of doing is peddling bullshit. For example, that story that Iraq was buying uranium from Africa. These kind of stories, with no hard evidence to back them up and coming from known liars, were doubted by "intelligence analysts", but the Bush administration put full trust into them.
In other words, what Bush did was take over the job of interpreting intelligence and turn it over to a bunch of amateurs with no experience in the field, and not too bright to boot. The result was a standard left wing stupidity folly, with grown men cowardly running around afraid of sounds in the dark.
Intelligence analysts talked to reporters and told them that there wasn't any evidence that Iraq was a threat. But as usual, they talked to them mostly on "deep background", so that they mostly couldn't be quoted directly. The reporters then duly reported this in the papers, but nobody gave a damn. Here's an example from a "pentagon analyst":
BusinessWeek Online, September 26, 2002
Stan Crock
For veteran defense analysts, the debate over whether to invade Iraq has a familiar ring. In Pentagon parlance, it's called gap-ology. Time and again in military preparations, fears are raised that later prove unfounded.
...
This time around, the gap is between what Saddam Hussein might be capable of doing in the future and America's ability to deter or defeat it. Whether a gap really exists is unknowable. But it puts critics in the unenviable position of having to prove not one but two negatives: "That something unknowable will not exist, which is logically impossible," says Pentagon analyst Chuck Spinney.
Some skeptics go even further and compare the current debate to the Soviet war scare of 1948. These experts believe the Truman Administration's calculated talk about a Soviet invasion of Germany was intended to win the election, boost the defense budget and the economy, and persuade Congress to pass the Marshall Plan. Intelligence at the time clearly indicated the Soviets had no intention to invade.
...
Note that the above article does indicate that the administration was "fabricating intelligence" in the sense of raising unfounded fears. Here's another:
Newsweek, February 7, 2003
...
Whom to believe? President Bush must ask himself that question on a regular basis. His intelligence agencies often disagree on the most basic questions. At the Pentagon, a special intelligence-analysis unit set up by the hawkish Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz claims to have evidence showing that Saddam has ties to Al Qaeda and a vast and vigorous WMD program. Top spooks at the CIA, however, are skeptical. In not-for-attribution conversations, they routinely cast doubt on tips and analyses emanating from the Pentagon hard-liners. While the president seems to credit the dire scenarios presented by the hawks, he cannot just dismiss the cautions of the professionals at Langley, one of whom is his good buddy, CIA Director George Tenet.
...
The best-known purveyor of intelligence about Saddam's Iraq is Ahmed Chalabi. The head of a London-based exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, Chalabi is elegantly dressed, charming and well connected. One of his chief sponsors in Washington is Richard Perle, an influential hawk who is close to Wolfowitz and other Pentagon hard-liners. Perle?s patronage may have helped Chalabi obtain audiences with Vice President Dick Cheney, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and national-security adviser Condoleezza Rice. Defectors presented to the Bush administration by Chalabi's INC have been a major source of intelligence about Saddam's alleged terror links and WMD programs.
CIA officials regard Chalabi as a snake-oil salesman. ... Burned repeatedly in the past, the CIA is wary of intelligence that comes from defectors, who are often seeking visas, cash, revenge or all.
...
#reply-18549197
-- Carl |
