Friday, April 01, 2005

NYT Wonders Where the Intelligence Failure Lies

And why the lies were allowed to be published with little concern for investigating their veracity. Looks to me like Judith Miller is still working for the NYT. They could ask her. Right.

A Final Verdict in Prewar Intelligence Is Still Elusive says a Times headline. How hard did the headliner laugh as he or she selected this title? Or is the NYT that clueless? Maybe the Times should hire the kids who play Where in the World is Carmen Sandiego?!

(The Report) found no evidence that intelligence had been politically twisted to suit preconceptions about Iraq's unconventional weapons programs, and made no formal judgments about how top policy makers had used that intelligence to justify war. Yet in its own way, the presidential commission on intelligence left little doubt that President Bush and his top aides had gotten what they wanted, not what they needed, when they were told that Saddam Hussein had a threatening arsenal of illicit weapons.

It is hard to deny the conclusion that intelligence analysts worked in an environment that did not encourage skepticism about the conventional wisdom," the commission said. But that understated indictment is about the extent of the commission's effort to explain the responsibilities of the nation's highest officials for one of the worst intelligence failures of modern times.

So the latest and presumably the last official review of such questions leaves unresolved what may be the biggest question of all: Who was accountable, and will they ever be held to account for letting what amounted to mere assumptions "harden into presumptions," as Judge Laurence H. Silberman, chairman of the commission, put it.

My dear Mr. Silberman, sorry to bother you, the intelligence failures plaguing Bush stem from the dear boy's own brain stem. This is called "the buck stops here". Instead we have "the bullshit never stops".

Wondering who strongarmed the CIA into going along for the ride lies in the lap of the guy driving us into a disasterous war. The man in the driver's seat is Bush. He got there by hook and crook and he is the sole cause and mover of events like going to war. He used his bully pulpit to broadcast lies and he changed his excuses for invading each time the lies were refuted. Even so, he failed to bully the UN into endorsing his obvious lies and now that there are no WMD, thus making our war utterly illegal, he and his minions try to bambooze everyone into thinking, "we couldn't know the facts so no one is responsible".

Imagine saying that at the Nuremburg trials. Being clever men, the Nazis were careful to insulate each other from "knowing" what was really going on. The courts refused to fall for this obvious dodge and convicted them. The Bushes specialize in being "out of the loop". This notion is so great, many corporate executives, when caught breaking the law, claim "I was the last to know, I don't have any idea of how my own company is being run!" Yeah, right. So why am I not the head of a great corporation? Why am I not the President? Do I know too much?

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home