Author Topic: The spies who pushed for war (Read 610 times)

10Bears · « **on:** July 18, 2003, 02:15:33 PM »

Quote

This time the implications are far more damaging for the White House, which stands accused of politicising and contaminating its own source of intelligence.

According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior members of the administration created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency. The agency, known as the Office of Special Plans (OSP) was set up by the defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, to second-guess CIA information and operated under the patronage of hardline conservatives in the top rungs of the administration, the Pentagon and at the White House, including Vice-President Dick Cheney.

The ideologically driven network functioned like a shadow government, much of it off the official payroll and beyond congressional oversight.

snip

Quote

The president's most trusted adviser, Mr Cheney, was at the shadow network's sharp end. He made several trips to the CIA in Langley, Virginia, to demand a more "forward-leaning" interpretation of the threat posed by Saddam. When he was not there to make his influence felt, his chief of staff, Lewis "Scooter" Libby was. Such hands-on involvement in the processing of intelligence data was unprecedented for a vice-president in recent times, and it put pressure on CIA officials to come up with the appropriate results.

Another frequent visitor was Newt Gingrich[/COLOR], the former Republican party leader who resurfaced after September 11 as a Pentagon "consultant" and a member of its unpaid defence advisory board, with influence far beyond his official title.

Newt eh...
(snip)

Quote

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad - a highly professional body - was prepared to authorise.

"None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms.

The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party.

[/FONT]

Globalsecurity

MrLars · « **Reply #1 on:** July 18, 2003, 02:28:01 PM »

I read this yesterday....

Even that darling of the right, Bill O'Reilly, hates the secretive nature of Cheny, this type of secreitve government action is exactly what he hates about him.

I just wonder if Bill will run with this story in the interest of being 'fair and balanced' as his network endlessly spouts....but I doubt it will happen.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #2 on:** July 18, 2003, 09:00:35 PM »

If this is true I dont like it - but AFAIK The Guardian is a more left wing newspaper and frankly 10Bears you know hopw you might react if somebody posted a similar type piece supporting the war from a right wing source.

Torque · « **Reply #3 on:** July 18, 2003, 09:56:42 PM »

I think someone just realized how his over the top rantings made him look like a brainwashed fool.

The boys from Enron might pay the price now, Martha didn't work.

john9001 · « **Reply #4 on:** July 18, 2003, 10:22:07 PM »

poor saddam should go to the UN and complain about the way the USA stole his country and demand to get it back.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #5 on:** July 18, 2003, 10:22:38 PM »

Torque I fully support the removal of Hussein, it made perfect sense in the aftermath of 911. And yes, you dope

, I too dont belive he was involved.. Its much better without him..

However if this is true I dont like the side stepping around CIA...

So dont get overzealous about what I posted..

10Bears · « **Reply #6 on:** July 19, 2003, 01:03:12 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
poor saddam should go to the UN and complain about the way the USA stole his country and demand to get it back.

So John finds out the Intel came from Newt Gingrich his answer is .....

So What....

Nash · « **Reply #7 on:** July 19, 2003, 01:52:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ

However if this is true I dont like the side stepping around CIA...

Oh, yeah it's true alright. Some of the civvies in the Pentagon didn't feel that the existing intel apparatus shared the requisite enthusiasm for the job. If the CIA couldn't find any dirt, by God these guys would.

Syzygyone · « **Reply #8 on:** July 19, 2003, 08:31:28 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by 10Bears
So John finds out the Intel came from Newt Gingrich

The statement that that intel "came from Newt" seems a stretch 10Bears, even for you. I don't like Newt either but that is over the top I think. You have a valid discussion going and then you throw out some garbage statement like that. Why?

Now, having been raised to believe that you should not complain about a problem unless you also offer a solution, let me ask you this question, about this so-called "shadow government" which was established to review the intel given to administration leaders.

You are part of an administration leadership, i.e. cabinet level or higher. In short, It's you watch! Your country has just been hit with the largest terrorist attacks in its history. Over 3,000 of your innocent citizens have just been slaughtered. Everybody and I mean every news source and pundit and talking head and policitician of both parties identify a massive intel failure of the CIA and FBI. Is it unreasonable to be least a little suspect of the vailidity of CIA and FBI intel in the future. Isn't it a reasonable response to set up a method of reviewing that intel? How else would you have tried to insure that your administration was getting the best possible intelligence?

I'm not trying to defend anyone or anything here. I'm just curious?

Nash · « **Reply #9 on:** July 19, 2003, 09:18:07 AM »

But Syz, do you think it's the *Pentagon's* job to create that sorta thing? (It was Rummie's gig).

Torque · « **Reply #10 on:** July 19, 2003, 09:23:29 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
Torque I fully support the removal of Hussein, it made perfect sense in the aftermath of 911. And yes, you dope , I too dont belive he was involved.. Its much better without him..

However if this is true I dont like the side stepping around CIA...

So dont get overzealous about what I posted..

Grun i meant Bush not you, but....

10Bears · « **Reply #11 on:** July 19, 2003, 10:33:35 AM »

From Syzygyone

The statement that that intel "came from Newt" seems a stretch 10Bears, even for you. I don't like Newt either but that is over the top I think. You have a valid discussion going and then you throw out some garbage statement like that. Why?

Syzy, did you read the article?.. I’m as stunned as you are.. check this out.

Quote

Another frequent visitor was Newt Gingrich, the former Republican party leader who resurfaced after September 11 as a Pentagon "consultant" and a member of its unpaid defence advisory board, with influence far beyond his official title.[/b]
An intelligence official confirmed Mr Gingrich made "a couple of visits" but said: "There's nothing at all unusual about people both in and out of government coming here to engage in a dialogue and to exchange views on a range of subjects."
In that guise he visited Langley three times in the run-up to war, and according to accounts , the political veteran sought to browbeat analysts into toughening up their assessments of Saddam's menace.[/COLOR][/B]

One could make the argument that...... Newt[/COLOR][/B] ... had a strong influence in this whole process... and it figures.. did you ever read his book “1945”?

Quote

You are part of an administration leadership, i.e. cabinet level or higher. In short, It's you watch! Your country has just been hit with the largest terrorist attacks in its history. Over 3,000 of your innocent citizens have just been slaughtered. Everybody and I mean every news source and pundit and talking head and policitician of both parties identify a massive intel failure of the CIA and FBI. Is it unreasonable to be least a little suspect of the vailidity of CIA and FBI intel in the future. Isn't it a reasonable response to set up a method of reviewing that intel? How else would you have tried to insure that your administration was getting the best possible intelligence?

Oh that’s an easy one to answer.. I would lash out blindly at any perceived enemy. Bring in my own crew of ganstas to circumvent the Intelligence community in order to secure funding from Congress. I would alienate all our former allies and degenerate the UN... I would completely disregard any precepts of international Law.... or any rule of Law.. Law of Texas.. my guns bigger than yours..

In addition..

I would smash the crap outta any A-rab that said boo.. threaten to use nukes.. Round up any middle eastern American that had even the slightest furrowed brow.

But of course..

john9001 · « **Reply #12 on:** July 19, 2003, 11:53:31 AM »

admit it 10bears, you are pissed that the butcher of bagdad and his "battle hardened army" lost the war.

GRUNHERZ · « **Reply #13 on:** July 19, 2003, 01:25:34 PM »

Oh I see now 10Bears this is all about Newt Gingrich, the "Clinton" figure for left wing radicals like yourself...

10Bears · « **Reply #14 on:** July 19, 2003, 02:32:30 PM »

Oh yeah?.. well there's more

Quote

When George Tenet, the director of the CIA, testified before the Senate Intelligence Committee last week about dubious intelligence data on the Iraqi threat that made it into President Bush’s State of the Union address in January, he said an ad-hoc committee called the Office of Special Plans, set up Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz, Assistant Secretary of Defense for Policy Douglas Feith and other high-profile hawks rewrote the intelligence information on Iraq that the CIA gathered and gave it to White House officials to help Bush build a case for war, according to three Senators on the intelligence committee

Information Clearing house