Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (3450)	7/10/2004 5:45:44 PM
From: Thomas M.	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 35834

In reality, it is simply the "opinion" of a CIA Ombudsman Yes, exactly. The CIA Ombudsman's job is to provide informed opinions on precisely such a matter. That's who he is. That's what he does. Quoting from p456 of the report: <<< According to the CIA Ombudsman's charter, this individual serves as an "independent, informal, and confidential counselor for those who have complaints about politicization, biased reporting, or the lack of objective analysis." >>>

To: Thomas M. who wrote (3450)	7/13/2004 4:48:26 AM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 35834

Apparently you did not completely read my reply. This was an "opinion" from the last section of the report in a segment titled, "Additional Views". It was not considered part of the report itself. This "opinion" was based on interviews with about two dozen analysts and managers. Of this small group, the "opinion" was based on the Ombudsman's personal "feelings" of several analysts who "gave the sense they felt the constant questions and pressure to reexamine issues were unreasonable". That is hardly proof of anything nefarious, let alone a "money shot" that proves misdeeds by the Bush Admin, no matter how ideologically inflexible your POV may be. Here is another reasonable POV on the lack of any credible evidence of "pressure", political or otherwise, on the analysts & the "Additional Views" attachment to the report..... The Senate Intelligence Committee & the links between Iraq and al Qaeda; Saddam & Terrorism.... <font size=4> ....Oh yes, about all that pressure ... It has likewise become something of a centerpiece of anti- war mythology that the CIA was deliberately pressured by the administration into manipulating intelligence data with respect to the nature of the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda. According to the findings in the report on p. 358, not only did no cooking the books occur but it was not once even attempted! The questioning of analysts on the Iraqi connection to al-Qaeda was, as the ombudsman investigation revealed, quite reasonable under the circumstances. In other words, nobody changed their analysis to conform to administration policy and nobody in the administration ever even sought for them to do so. Feith's office was likewise completely innocent on this count, according to p. 361-375, and apparently the intelligence folks who were present at the meeting in August 2002 in which they suggested additions to the draft of Iraqi Support for Terrorism all stated to the Committee that Feith's people all contributed to discussion, which is rather far cry from Josh Marshall's claim that what they said "didn't pass the laugh test" during his effort to shoot down the Feith memo when it got published in the Weekly Standard. Unfortunately, the final conclusions of the committee on what the people in Feith's office added to the discussion have all be classified so we don't know anything more than this except to say that they weren't involved in politicizing intelligence or pressuring analysts. Also, from p. 366-370, we learn that everything that Powell said at the UN Security Council with respect to Iraq and al-Qaeda was vetted through CIA and nothing he said differed very much from anything that the broader intelligence community was saying at around the same time. No doubt apologies will be forthcoming from all those who have accused the administration and the people in Feith's office of engaging in any number of deplorable behaviors ... The Additional Views I'll be quite honest and say that most of these strike me as rather polemical in nature and seems more or less designed to set up the next phase of Washington politicking, with both Republican and Democratic senators making claims that, truth be told, are not supported or are in certain cases directly contradicted by the actual text of the document in question. I'll be quite honest and say that if one reads simply the additional views but not the body of the report that they're going to be left with an extremely skewed view as far as what the report actually says or the conclusions that were reached within it on a number of key points..... <font size=3> windsofchange.net