SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : View from the Center and Left -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JohnM who wrote (11464)2/10/2006 11:42:53 AM
From: JohnM  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541162
 
Here is the link to the Pillar article in Foreign Affairs. It looks to be much too long to post here.

A summary first.

----------------------------

Intelligence, Policy,and the War in Iraq
Paul R. Pillar
From Foreign Affairs, March/April 2006

Summary: During the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, writes the intelligence community's former senior analyst for the Middle East, the Bush administration disregarded the community's expertise, politicized the intelligence process, and selected unrepresentative raw intelligence to make its public case.

PAUL R. PILLAR is on the faculty of the Security Studies Program at Georgetown University. Concluding a long career in the Central Intelligence Agency, he served as National Intelligence Officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005.

foreignaffairs.org



To: JohnM who wrote (11464)2/10/2006 11:45:24 AM
From: epicure  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541162
 
"We have become too tolerant a nation regarding official lies."

I think impeachment hearings are called for. Mr. Bush might escape impeachment, but I think the hearings themselves are called for. When the Dems get a majority in the next election, I hope we will have such hearings.



To: JohnM who wrote (11464)2/10/2006 3:50:02 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541162
 
Very possibly, the President has just sacrificed key sources or exposed some of our means in order to cover himself politically. ...This is just wrong and a serious violation of our Constitution.

Yes, only the New York Times is allowed to do this! Everybody knows that!

What's that old saying? Sauce for the goose...



To: JohnM who wrote (11464)2/11/2006 2:32:17 AM
From: KLP  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 541162
 
This sentence needs to be examined carefully. But Congressional investigators have now learned that an eyewitness account of the flooding from a federal emergency official reached the Homeland Security Department's headquarters starting at 9:27 p.m. the day before, and the White House itself at midnight

Now, we know that PM means NIGHT, and Midnight means just that...mid-night. And this would have been EST. Not LA time.

Were there any people out searching for what was wrong with the levys between 9:27 PM and daylight??????

Did the Feds have a signed statement that they could go in from the LA Governor by Tuesday morning?

Who did the LA Governor have checking out the levy's on Tuesday morning?

Who were the people trying to rescue people at the same time?

Perhaps we should examine the 9-11 Commission recommendation that we have an overall Homeland Security Head....We know that Bush wasn't in favor of creating this new Department to be head of so many agencies, and that Hillary and Liberman were strongly for it. But whatever it is, we should look at what humans do, and the turf they try to deal with, and in some cases, try to protect....All of it takes TIME, and time was in very short supply those few days.

There are many many questions that need to be answered here. We will have more disasters in the future, whether man caused disasters or nature caused disasters. We had better learn from this one, and also see what went right with the hurricanes in Florida just a few months before....

There are several timelines to be found....the top one is good, and the other two are extra for anyone who wants to know more. There are more in several places as well...

Message 21672066

Message 21674852

Message 21940915



To: JohnM who wrote (11464)2/13/2006 12:11:29 PM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 541162
 
Interesting comment, John.

I never thought that I'd witness the day when a liberal like you accepts without qualification the word of a CIA official. Wonders never cease.

I think it is best not to accept or at least throw a few pinches of salt on anything a former CIA guy has to say. Motives, ulterior and otherwise, permeate everything emanating from Langley.

C2@"slamdunk,Mr.President".com