No Evidence CIA Slanted Iraq Data

[crawjo]

The Washington Post reports.

Key quote:

Congressional and CIA investigations into the prewar intelligence on Iraq's weapons and links to terrorism have found no evidence that CIA analysts colored their judgment because of perceived or actual political pressure from White House officials, according to intelligence officials and congressional officials from both parties.

[Gary Sisco]

I never thought they did, anymore than they normally do. It being an enormous bureaucracy (almost completely), I just automatically assume incompetence in these situations.

After all, it is the same CIA that failed to detect things like, um, the collapse of the USSR and the rest of the East Bloc; the Iranian revolution and collapse of the Shah; India and Pakistan's nukes until after they'd already touched them off; and etc. Their record of amazing intelligence failures is astounding, really, given that they have virtually unlimited -- and in unknown amounts -- resources at their disposal (thanks to a too generous people and their taxes). Their incredible, and murderous, bungling in Central America in the 80s in another amazing account of our secret cowboy's track record.

For example, very few Americans know or understand how Noriega went from longtime, highly paid "asset" and good buddy to Enemy Number One to the point of unprovoked invasion, almost overnight. What happened was, the Canal treaty called for certain monetary provisions that were to be paid on a timetable to Panama before the Canal was turned over. The Reaganists, being opposed to the treaty and the turnover in the first place, simply ignored the treaty (as the US is wont to do with treaties). Eventually, of course, Noriega got pissed off because there was, we can easily assume, a healthy chunk of that meat that would have gone into his own personal larder. So, he ordered the Panamanian navy (such as it is) to seize a vessel that had passed through the Canal and was on its way north off the west coast of Panama -- a vessel full of AK47's on their way to El Salvador, from where they were to be transferred to the CIA-directed "contra" terrorist army as a part of what was called the Iran-Contra affair, the hilarious part being that they'd purchased the AKs (with some of the secret profits derived from the illegal sale of missiles to Iran) *from the Polish Communists.* Given the Cold War fever of the time (which I never bought -- each side needed the other to keep its own people in line), both the US gov't and the Polish commies were falling all over themselves trying to explain why the Commies would sell the CIA a shipload of AK47s with which to arm their anti-commie terrorists in Nicaragua (ammunition for AKs being easier to obtain in the field at the time, when an AK was going for less than 200 bucks on the regular market in the US, less than that in Central America and the Caribbean generally, and also no paper trail of transfers of US rifles). The Commies tried to blame it on Solidarity (right, as if Solidarity could have got their hands on a shipload of AKs *and* loaded a freighter with them, without the secret police having any knowledge of such, a likely story). The CIA as usual refused to confirm or deny anything to do with it. The Reaganists were furious over the public exposure. The relationship between them and Noriega deteriorated for the purposeful embarrassment he'd caused, until finally Bush, Sr., invaded the place, arrested the cat, and imprisoned him in the US.

If the agency didn't have such an amazingly bloody record, it'd be a lot funnier than the Keystone cops.

• So, what that says is that the Bush regime did the slanting. Well, what else is new? There is a desperate effort under way to get the Bush thugs off the hook, but the American people (except for the ditto heads) have seen so much evidence of lies emanating from the White House/Pentagon that they are not buying it.
  
  Why do you suppose that Bush says he wants to know the truth while, at the same time, he and his thugs will not allow an independent investigation? How long will it take you to realize that these people--who weren't even elected--are playing a self-serving, murderous game with the American people--indeed with much of the world?
  
  And put to rest that tired old "Clinton did it" routine--it does not help your cause.

[Gary Sisco]

Chris -- You give these guys much more credit than they deserve. They're not smart enough to come up with the conspiracies people lay on them (and don't need to), and in the rare case where they do, they always get busted -- again, out of incompetence, as in Iran-Contra, and with the aid of a lapdog press that is more than willing to let a "story" fade into oblivion -- as they did with the AK tale above. Hell, as in the Gulf of Tonkin Non-Incident, for that matter, which they used to "justify" ten more years of incredible violence and slaughter in Southeast Asia. Or the "Mayaguez Incident," when they shot up an entirely wrong island and killed a bunch of Cambodian peasants who were and always had been just minding their own business, and had never heard of the Mayaguez, in all likelihood, never mind any "incident."

Their actual historical record, like that of any enormous bureaucracy, never mind one with unlimited resources, is much more a tale of idiocy and incompetence than it is one of any organized conspiracy. If anything, it's a disorganized nonconspiracy. Just your basic bungling and inability to understand the reality staring them in the face. The collapse of the "East bloc" came as no surprise to the people living there. It was only a surprise in DC.

"Chris -- You give these guys much more credit than they deserve."

• I think you are right, Gary. I also think that many of them, like Bush, have painted themselves into a corner and are simply trying to save face. A small stain on a blue dress did not escape their attention, but they don't seem to notice when Bush and his gang wreak major havoc, send hundreds of Americans and thousands of Iraqis to their grave, fill hospitals with wounded and permanently crippled Americans, lose millions of jobs for Americans workers, arrange to have the old and infirm give their saving to pharmaceutical corporations, give two giant corporations control of American media, and rob America's nest egg in the process.

[crawjo]

Originally posted by Chris A

• So, what that says is that the Bush regime did the slanting. Well, what else is new? There is a desperate effort under way to get the Bush thugs off the hook, but the American people (except for the ditto heads) have seen so much evidence of lies emanating from the White House/Pentagon that they are not buying it.
  
  Why do you suppose that Bush says he wants to know the truth while, at the same time, he and his thugs will not allow an independent investigation? How long will it take you to realize that these people--who weren't even elected--are playing a self-serving, murderous game with the American people--indeed with much of the world?
  
  And put to rest that tired old "Clinton did it" routine--it does not help your cause.

To be clear, Bush has said that before an independent investigation is launched he wants the Iraq Survey Group to finish its work.