I'm not sure Woodward helps us (blames all on Tenet)

[Selwynn]

In the 60 minutes interview, Woodward is clear that Tenet fimly supported the Iraq link, advising that it was a "slam dunk." Woodward also says that it was largely because of Tenet's confidence that he acted as he did...

Now.. how exactly is that helpful? To me, its no wonder that the Administration gave woodward access: he's saying what they would want to be said...

That's just a theory, but it worries me.

[physioex]

1. But....

It cleary says Cheney is the one in back pulling the strings. Chimp is just along for the ride.

[ComerPerro]

2. Yeah, but the people don't care about that

They are so fucking obsessed with the Chimp that they don't care that he is just a puppet.

[atre]

3. Two things to consider

1) There were many sources for this book, even Bush himself. It would not shock me if Condi or Bush himself were sources for that particular exchange.

2) It's possible that Tenet was playing both fields, letting Clarke know he was skeptical of the Administrations plans while also playing his role as the "company man," doing whatever he can to please his bosses. Picture Cheney grabbing Tenet's arm before this meeting in the hallway outside the Oval Office, telling him to toe the company line... Can anyone else explain why he has taken the fall for what has happened?

People here want to think that it was Tenet who leaked to the press that he wanted action taken for the leak of Valarie Plame's name... What if it wasn't?

I'm just playing mind games with respect to the second "thing to consider." I'm not sure anyone can piece together all the puzzles of the quixotic George Tenet.

[shockingelk]

4. Intelligence does not deal in facts

... but guesses. Ie, the phrase "It's called the National Intelligence Estimate, not the National Intelligence Factbook".

Tenet did not tell Bush* to attack Iraq. Even if Tenet was grossly wrong, the final vetting responsibility on the assumptions under which war was declared lie in the Oval office - not the CIA.

Going to war on best guesses is a bad idea. Always has been, always will be.

[Selwynn]

6. Life is not based on reality, but the perception of reality....

...the public will hear, tenet gave bush bad intel, made it seem like a sure thing, not a best guess, a sure thing. People will hear that the head of CIA told the president this was absolutely certain, and the president acted on that.

That's what will be heard. It doesn't matter what you think is a "guess" or not. That's the message that Woodward conveyed.

[shockingelk]

10. partially agreed

But there are people (other than DU members) who will "hear" that message and deem it hogwash.

Certainly Americans are generally incurious like Bush* - buy generally, people who are above "incuriosity" are also the ones who vote.

I guess my overall point is that trying to popularize the truth is never a bad idea. And at this point, I honestly believe than the untruths and half-truths coming out of the administration are only serving to slow the rate at which support for the Bush cabal wanes.

Absent a new war, it's been decreasing fairly consistently.

[dennis4868]

17. I agree.....

the average person on the street does not know that neither Tenet and the CIA never stated that Iraq had nuclear weapons, that we could be attacked in 45 minutes, mushroom clous, unmanned aerial drones that could reach the USA, uranium from niger, aluminum tubes, 911 connection. All of this was stated by Bush and his thugs even though there is no proof of it...Tenet and the CIA (NIE) disagreed with all of this. The average person will not know that ENTIRE intelligence agencies were questioning the evidence Bush was relying on to go to war.

The average person will just hear what Tenet told Bushit and say, "okay, so Bush did not lie."

REALLY MAKES ME MAD!

:-(

[aquart]

5. Doesn't matter who Woodward favors.

$700,000,000 embezzled, misappropriated, whatever. BUSHCO stepping on the toes of Congress. Very entertaining.

700 American soldiers dead. Not entertaining and an election is coming up.

NOFOR document shown to Saudi. A Saudi!

Saudi informed of Iraq War ahead of Secretary of State.

And God has given George a mission.

Gonna be a fun week for anyone not actually under fire.

[Selwynn]

7. I bet we barely hear anything about it..

[leftyandproud]

8. WOODWARD is an IDIOT!!

There, I said it...someone needs to say it. Anyone who has read his last book will realize it. I don't care whether he is on our side our not. He may say some things that make Bush look bad, but any credibility he has goes out the window eventually as you plod through his stuff. Woodward has the 'AMAZING' ability to transcribe private, two person conversations between Bush and Cheney...Bush and Powell/Rice/Rove, etc. I got halfway through his last book then realized...what the hell am I reading? It's like a well written fictional book...full stories he creates in his head, only he uses real characters, and publicly known facts to tie his novel together and make it seem like reality. For those who don't know, Woodward sometimes writes entire dialogues between two individuals...as if he actually heard private conversations, or has recordings of private oval office meetings between Bush and his top people. What really got me was when he was talking about Condi at one point in a book...What he did was amazing. Woodward proved that not only does he have the oval office bugged, but he is also a PSYCHIC!!! Yes! He nows exactly what someone is THINKING in their own head, without hearing a word from them.

"Condi stood at the window, overlooking the White House lawn. She was thinking about what Bush said a minute ago...thinking about da da da"

WHAT THE F*CK BOB!! Your credibility goes to 0.00% when you write shit like this. Don't pretend you hear private conversations...and don't pretend you know where Condi was standing and what she was THINKING at a particular moment in time...ugh...you lose all credit at that point. You are a good writer...Stick to the facts..add your opinion in when you want, but don't make shit up.

[shockingelk]

12. Some writers write like that

I'm currently reading the Pulitzer Prize winning An Army at Dawn. One of the things I don't like about it is that it tries to get in people's heads - for instance a sentence claiming something like, "As Eisenhower walked out the door he put the conversation behind him, deciding whether to have a smoke or shave." Although that was probably not the thought Eisenhower had, it also probably got the intended sentiment across.

I don't like that writing style, but believe I can understand what the author is trying to say ...

Of course not having read Woodward's book, I am not defending particulars, but only the generalities you mention ... have you read the book BTW? Hell, I dunno, it may be 100% pro Bush ...

[RoyGBiv]

13. Just a Note

Woodward records his conversations with people when they will allow it or when they don't realize it, and he bases his quotes on those conversations. Sometimes he is reporting "quotes" as they were given to him by others, which is stretching things a bit, but not totally discreditable either. Hell, at least half of our perception of history is based on attributed quotes.

I personally think Woodward is a mixed bag, and his books and articles can be taken in different ways depending on your perception. But, he has proved that party loyalty, or whatever we want to call it, doesn't prevent him from telling the truth as he sees it. "As he sees it" may be an important point and one to be considered in all this. But I don't think writing him off entirely serves us well.

There are some potentially very damaging revelations in what we've seen from Woodward's book so far. It will depend on how the "powers that be" perceive those revelations and whether certain parties, the media and Democrats in Congress specifically, follow-up on them. I've seen Woodward accused of being a shill for Bush, but if that were the case, I very much doubt he would have bothered to include the tidbit about the diversion of funds appropriated for the war in Afghanistan. That's fairly direct and without rationalization from Woodward.

[emulatorloo]

14. he has tapes and transcripts of interviews he did, CBS confirms that

the people he interviewed told him the things he wrote in the book.

So if he quotes a two person conversation, he has a source for it. CBS was very clear that they listed to the tapes and what Woodward says is well documented.

[Gore1FL]

9. Still he provides unrefuted evidence

that Bush is insane or criminal.

[DeepModem Mom]

11. BS! Woodward doesn't go as far as we at DU would like...

but he's written a very damaging book this time, and has the full attention of the most important group of people in the country, the "mainstream" media, with no one questioning his credibility. Woodward has revealed an unconstitutional diversion of funds for secretly planning the Iraq war, a promise by Prince Bandar to lower gas prices in time for the election, the fact that Bandar was alerted to the war before the Secy of State, the gem that Bush does not consult his earthly father but acts on orders from his heavenly Father, and quite a bit more. I thank Woodward for his service to our nation.

[emulatorloo]

15. No he doesn't -

The point of the Tenet "slam dunk" is that Bush knew the case was bogus, Tenet said it is good enough to convince Joe Public, so they went w it.

Also you are ignoring the other things Woodward talked about:

Bush stole 700 million from the search for Osama to fund his secret plan.
Bush authorized showing Top Secret NOFOR docs to Saudi Arabia.
Bush is manipulating gas prices with Saudi Arabia to win the election.
Bush ignores the advice of his advisors in favor of talking to God.

[cap]

16. it doesn't matter, know why???

any attack on the CIA will be answered by one of their own... in one way or another whether its a public statement by a senior official or whether its a leak by mid level analysts to the press. Watch and see.

Woodward blaming Tenent is like throwing meat out to hungry dogs. Somebody is going to say something in a major way in defense of the agency. I think it is going to have to do with Cheney's visits to the agency. The CIA is not going to roll over for Bush. It may not be that Tenet defends himself but somebody will start saying things. Remember a lot of spooks got spooked by the outing of Valerie Palme.

I would not be surprised if Woodward knows this and is waiting to write his third book.

Patience, my pretties....patience.

[Jack Rabbit]

18. The blame should go to Bush and Tenet together

If one listened to the entire segment, then one realizes that the most incredible thing about Tenet's remark was that it came at the end of a briefing that demonstrated that the case against Saddam was weak in a way that even Bush could understand. "Is this all you have?" Bush asked, displaying a hint of better judgment than I or most other DUers give him credit for having.

Bush desperately wanted to believe that there was a solid case against Saddam and had just seen that there was not. Tenet told him not to worry, "It's a slam dunk," without presenting him anything more.

Bush simply accepted Tenet's assurances in spite of the fact he was given every reason to believe they were hollow.

Tenet should not have been so eager to please and Bush should have based his decision on the empirical evidence presented rather than the false hope that there was something more.

Bush should be defeated and Tenet replaced.

[Seldona]

19. What about the misappropriated 700 million?

Not to mention the fact that a Saudi prince was shown highly confidential material marked NOT FOR FOREIGNERS?

Or the oil production manipulation?

And cons were outraged Clinton lied about consensual adult sex?

[dennis4868]

20. Misappropriating....

the 700 million is a constitutional crime....did Bush and his WH ever hear of the checks and balances that is called for in some document called THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?


WHERE IS THE OUTRAGE by the media? This is very serious stuff!