Democrats Sign Off On Bogus Senate Report--And No One Kissed Them Before They Got Plugged in the Bum
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Analysis: The Senate report on Iraq intelligence
"The Democratic members of the Senate intelligence committee were persuaded to sign a report containing a central finding they disagreed with - that senior administration officials did not pressure CIA analysts to produce assessments that would support a war.
In return, the Democrats would be allowed to pursue the question of the White House's role in the intelligence fiasco in "phase two" of the investigation. The only catch is, that phase two will, in all probability not be finished until after the election.
Asked why he had agreed to sign the report, the leading Democrat on the committee, Jay Rockefeller, said that he accepted the bulk of the report, slamming the CIA for chronic timidity, lack of any actual spies where they were most needed, and its lack of intellectual rigour in challenging its own assumptions.
The John Kerry presidential campaign is unlikely to thank him. The headlines from the report are likely to come from lines such as: "The committee found no evidence that the [intelligence community's] mischaracterisation or exaggeration of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities was the result of political pressure."
That was, however, not what the Democrats on the commission believed, nor is it necessarily what the investigation proved. In the body of its report the senate committee reported that the CIA ombudsman had talked to 24 CIA officers about pressure from administration officials.
The ombudsman told the committee that about half a dozen mentioned "pressure" from the administration; several others did not use that word, but spoke in a context that implied it."
Link...
(Well, c'mon. What did you expect from J Rockefeller? Courage?)
"The Democratic members of the Senate intelligence committee were persuaded to sign a report containing a central finding they disagreed with - that senior administration officials did not pressure CIA analysts to produce assessments that would support a war.
In return, the Democrats would be allowed to pursue the question of the White House's role in the intelligence fiasco in "phase two" of the investigation. The only catch is, that phase two will, in all probability not be finished until after the election.
Asked why he had agreed to sign the report, the leading Democrat on the committee, Jay Rockefeller, said that he accepted the bulk of the report, slamming the CIA for chronic timidity, lack of any actual spies where they were most needed, and its lack of intellectual rigour in challenging its own assumptions.
The John Kerry presidential campaign is unlikely to thank him. The headlines from the report are likely to come from lines such as: "The committee found no evidence that the [intelligence community's] mischaracterisation or exaggeration of the intelligence on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities was the result of political pressure."
That was, however, not what the Democrats on the commission believed, nor is it necessarily what the investigation proved. In the body of its report the senate committee reported that the CIA ombudsman had talked to 24 CIA officers about pressure from administration officials.
The ombudsman told the committee that about half a dozen mentioned "pressure" from the administration; several others did not use that word, but spoke in a context that implied it."
Link...
(Well, c'mon. What did you expect from J Rockefeller? Courage?)
posted by A. J. Franklin @ 11:07
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home