NYT: Acting (CIA) Chief Insists Agencies Aren't at Fault in War Debate

[DeepModem Mom]

INTELLIGENCE
Acting Chief Insists Agencies Aren't at Fault in War Debate
By DOUGLAS JEHL

Published: July 15, 2004


WASHINGTON, July 14 - The country's new acting intelligence chief said Wednesday that American intelligence agencies should not be blamed if there was inadequate debate about the decision to go to war against Iraq.

Those comments, by John E. McLaughlin, were aimed at the Senate Intelligence Committee, which issued a report last week that portrayed American intelligence agencies as having exaggerated the evidence that Iraq had illicit weapons. But THE COMMENTS ALSO WERE AN IMPLICIT RETORT TO ARGUMENTS THAT THE CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY, NOT PRESIDENT BUSH, WAS PRIMARILY RESPONSIBLE FOR SENDING THE COUNTRY TO WAR.

The Senate panel dissected the intelligence behind a National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002. That document included flat assertions that Iraq had chemical and biological weapons and was reconstituting its nuclear program, statements that the Senate committee called unfounded and unreasonable.

But to treat the document as a pivotal element in the march to war would be "an oversimplification of the situation,'' Mr. McLaughlin said on CNN, in one of a series of interviews intended to counter the sharp criticism of the agency, adding, "If there wasn't sufficient debate about these issues, it wasn't the fault of the people who prepared this estimate.''

The document included some qualifications and dissents, and Mr. McLaughlin suggested that these might well have given rise to more vigorous debate than was heard about the degree to which Iraq posed a threat to the United States.

The 30-minute television interview put Mr. McLaughlin on the public stage in a way that his predecessor, George J. Tenet, who left office Sunday, and most other directors of central intelligence have shunned....Before the war, White House officials reached beyond the assessments spelled out in the intelligence reports. But in his appearances, Mr. McLaughlin demurred when asked whether the White House had exaggerated the intelligence....


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/15/politics/15inte.html

[radfringe]

1. just asking

yesterday's Crossfire: The woman on the "right" defended the WMD "intel" -- sortof -- by listing Clinton, other countries, and the UN as believing the intel and pointed to "..resolution after resolution..." being passed by the UN and therefore invading Iraq was the right thing to do

ok -- according to the recent report -- it was determined that the "intel" was wrong.

soooooooo---if you pass resolution after resolution and then invade and it's all based on ERRONEOUS INTEL -- does it still make invading Iraq the "right" thing to do? Just asking....

then she launched into "...infiltrating suicide cells is difficult and dangerous..." excuse

ummm---isn't doing the difficult and dangerous part of an intel's agent's job? just asking.....

Meanwhile -- just how accurate is the current intel that Ridge uses to determing terror levels? just asking.....

[Spinzonner]

2. Why is the upper echelon filled with moral cowards

unable or unwilling to put their jobs on the line and say something instead of 'demurring'

Damn It, say Yes or No and back it up. If they fire you because you're not a lapdog, at least you have some self respect and the country's interests at heart - not your damn career's.

The first loyalty is to the United States of America, not some damn office holder.

[Zorra]

3. Yeah. Come on CIA - if the Bu$h administration is a bunch of traitors

then be patriotic Americans - tell us the facts.

Please - we want to save our country too.

[wolfgirl]

4. At least it's

a start...I'm praying that more of the CIA folks begin to come out of the dark a bit and start pointing the fingers at the real bad guys. I know they have to be cautious, but they took an oath and I believe they will do the right thing.

Of course, the media has to be open & willing to expose their own misdeeds as well...or it's going to be left entirely up to us to
get the truth out. It's there...but it's been locked away and the key is in the hand of the traitors!

[DeepModem Mom]

5. It is a start, and that's my hope, too, wolfgirl n/t

[Rose Siding]

6. Ruh roh. Agent off leash

Shot fired. Now what? Will he be whisked quietly into obscurity?

[DeepModem Mom]

7. Seems a cinch he won't be named permanent head; from the article --

"Intelligence officials have said that Mr. McLaughlin should not be ruled out as a candidate for the permanent post, but his name has not been mentioned by White House officials, who say that Mr. Bush intends to nominate a successor soon, though almost certainly not this week.

Mr. McLaughlin has said that he will stay on as long as Mr. Bush likes and that he is willing to help any new intelligence chief."

[UpInArms]

8. IIRC there was no "war debate"

there were only drummers and message pushers and speeches that told the citizens that there would be "mushroom clouds" and unmanned drones dispersing chemicals all over their cities if they didn't get on the war wagon.

Those treasonous protesters in the streets were "liberal" un-American commie treehugging pieces of flying flotsam that were forgetting how SH had plotted and carried out the 9/11 attacks.

Although I remember Kucinich's and Byrd's speeches, IIRC they were delivered to empty chambers where no debate would be had.

So WTF are they talking about: Debate?

When, where and who had a "debate"?

:nuke:

[Rose Siding]

9. kick

for what sounds a little like the truth

[hansolsen]

10. I don't blame CIA analysts as much as I blame George Tenet and Shrub

Sure some of the individual analysts who claimed the aluminum tubes were nuclear related, for example, were dead wrong, and it would be good to know if this was idealogical or not. But the real crime is what George Tenet did, and he was the head of the CIA.

Tenet knew better than anyone, the great disconnect between the CIA accumulated hard facts, and the hyped message being put out, based on those facts. It was the Grand Canyon of disconnects, and he knew it.

When Tenet sat behind Colin Powell at the U.N. and smiled like a cat eating shit, while Powell passed on all the lies, that was one of the absolute low points in American history. That was an act of treason on his part. He should hang for it.

I say the same when Tenet sat in the joint session and listened to Bush make the 2003 State of Union message trumpeting all the WMD lies, and did not come out the next day, hold a press conference to announce his resignation, and tell George Bush to go to Hell. His silence on that day, will go in American history as one of the most cowardly acts by a high official ever perpetrated.

Cowardice and treason at the very highest levels of the CIA, there is no denying that.