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 (3533)	7/14/2004 9:28:38 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 35834

Thanks for being so "on topic" for this thread. Your reply certainly was evidence of a reality defying opinion lacking any basis in fact & lacking any credible evidence. IOW, <font color=blue>you continue to continue to pretend<font color=black>...... You said, <font color=blue>"Only the Republicans in the committee agreed with that conclusion. The Democrats did not agree. It is rather silly to take a Republican at his word when he is defending fellow Republicans. It was tribal behavior for the Republicans on the committee to dismiss the CIA Ombudsman's analysis."<font color=black> Now for a bit of reality using the report to discredit your factually flawed POV...... <font size=4> If nothing else, read the following..... and weep of course.... The Senate Intelligence Committee Report<font size=3> by Dan Darling at July 11, 2004 01:22 AM <font size=4> I spent the better part of Friday slogging through all 521 pages of the report and identifying the relevant sections of it for Michael Ledeen, which is something that I would seriously recommend that anybody who is genuinely interested in what went wrong on the subject of Iraq do as well. <font size=5> Even the partisan hacks. Especially the partisan hacks..... <font size=4>Read it all at the link. Game, set match..... <font size=3> Message 20304721 <font size=4><font color=blue> But wait! There's more....... <font color=black> ....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..... <font size=3> Message 20304979 <font size=4> The New Groupthink ....The 511-page Senate report concluded this: Nobody in the White House or the Pentagon pressured the C.I.A. to change an intelligence analysis to conform to the judgment that the world would be a safer place with the monstrous Saddam overthrown..... ....Strange, considering how the nation's interest is riveted on this week's report on our Iraqi intelligence mistakes, how little interest was shown in the Senate Intelligence Committee's extensive report on the terrorist attack on the U.S.S. Cole in October 2000, which cost the lives of 17 American sailors. The committee's staff director tells me that the 35-page document was disseminated to the intelligence community, but was never made public by Bob Graham, a Democrat who was chairman then. No reporter agitated for a copy until I just did. <font size=5> If the committee was sharply critical of the C.I.A. in 2002, why wasn't the public alerted to the failures that led to the Cole bombing — and why wasn't action taken to shake up the place then? Contrariwise, if the senators found nothing worthy of public correction at the C.I.A. and the F.B.I. at the end of the Clinton years, then political posterior-covering motivates their belated need to excoriate the agency they failed to oversee..... <font size=3> Message 20308603