NeoCons Go Ballistic on Iran NIE
By Larry Johnson on December 4, 2007 at 9:57 PM in Current Affairs
“How can you trust the intelligence community to get it right on Iran? They got Iraq wrong in 2002 and now this?” The “this” is the NIE on Iran and its search for nukes.
That in a nutshell is one of the prevalent reactions of neocons and Bush true believers. But wait, there is more. John Bolton told Wolf Blitzer that the NIE was the handiwork of exiled State Department officials hell bent on undermining Bush and this country.
Well, I think it’s potentially wrong. But I would also say many of the people who wrote this are former State Department employees who, during their career at the State Department, never gave much attention to the threat of the Iranian program. Now they are writing as members of the intelligence community, the same opinions that they have had four and five years ago.
This is one of the neocon talking points. Check out the ravings of Norman Podhoretz, a senior statesman of the neocons. The Pod Man wrote:
I must confess to suspecting that the intelligence community, having been excoriated for supporting the then universal belief that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, is now bending over backward to counter what has up to now been a similarly universal view (including as is evident from the 2005 NIE, within the intelligence community itself) that Iran is hell-bent on developing nuclear weapons. I also suspect that, having been excoriated as well for minimizing the time it would take Saddam to add nuclear weapons to his arsenal, the intelligence community is now bending over backward to maximize the time it will take Iran to reach the same goal.
But I entertain an even darker suspicion. It is that the intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again. This time the purpose is to head off the possibility that the President may order air strikes on the Iranian nuclear installations. As the intelligence community must know, if he were to do so, it would be as a last resort, only after it had become undeniable that neither negotiations nor sanctions could prevent Iran from getting the bomb, and only after being convinced that it was very close to succeeding. How better, then, to stop Bush in his tracks than by telling him and the world that such pressures have already been effective and that keeping them up could well bring about “a halt to Iran’s entire nuclear weapons program”—especially if the negotiations and sanctions were combined with a goodly dose of appeasement or, in the NIE’s own euphemistic formulation, “with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways.”
This blog was one of the first to report that the NIE was being delayed for political reasons. George Bush tried his moron act again today (i.e., “I didn’t find out about this until last week.”) but this time the turd ain’t floating. The news that Iran ended its nuclear program in 2003 was briefed to George Bush in the Presidential Daily Brief. He has known about this, I am told, for at least one year. George Bush is lying when he insists he had no inkling, until last week, that the intelligence community believed Iran halted its nuke program in 2003.
This is the kind of earthshaking intel that analysts rarely get to see. What is remarkable about the NIE is the consensus in the intelligence community about the validity of this info. Compare this to the execrable 2002 NIE on Iraq. There was no consensus in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to acquire nukes. The”true believers” held the day and their position was prominently featured in the final draft. Dissenters–State’s Intelligence and Research Bureau and the Department of Energy–were relegated to footnotes and comments separated from the claim.
When you do an NIE it is incumbent on the writers to clearly state whether there is consensus or dissent. And if there is disagreement then that should be reflected in the text. In the case of the October 2002 abortion, the NIC editors should have noted that there was disagreement in the intelligence community about Iraq’s efforts to rebuild its nuclear program. They should have written something like, “analysts at the CIA and DIA believe Saddam is trying but analysts at INR and DOE believe the evidence points to non-nuclear activity”. Instead, the NIC editors let stand the misleading notion that Iraq was rebuilding a nuclear weapons program even though all agreed that Iraq was not trying to acquire yellowcake uranium from Niger. The senior NIC officials failed to do their duty in 2002.
Not the case today. The NIC stepped up and refused to budge despite repeated efforts by Dick Cheney and his minions to gut the effort. This happened thanks to the convergence of several factors. First, most of the Bush neocon ideologues are gone–Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton, Wurmser, Libby, etc. Second, the Democrats control the House and Senate Intelligence committee and were receiving reports from analysts about the bullying by Cheney and others who were trying to sandbag the conclusions. Third, senior intelligence officers learned the lesson of 2002 and returned to the tradition of telling the President the truth, no matter how unpopular or unpalatable. And finally, this Administration’s days are numbered and the analysts can read the tea leaves. They know there is no percentage in pandering to power by serving up half-truths and wishful thinking.
But let’s not celebrate too strongly. It is clear from the Bush presser today that he is not backing off an inch from his delusion about the Iranians and his commitment to do something about them. Fortunately, the release of this NIE hems him in a bit and limits his options for using military force. It also reminds the American people that serious threats can be resolved with diplomacy rather than rely on testosterone laden military fantasies. If political pressure can keep Iran from building nukes then that is the course we should pursue above all others. Eat that one Mr. Podhoretz.
John Bolton was stark raving mad on CNN’s Wolf Blitzer. Today Bush said Iran “was, is and will continue to be dangerous”. Come on these warmongering fucks mean business, Iraq is the example. Over a million dead, who knows how many injured, 4 million refugees, the NIE will not stand in the way of their regime change agenda.
People should be out on the streets tonight in protest of the Bush administrations continued refusal to face the facts. Instead many Amricans have their pedals to the metal driving to the mall to buy shit from China for their children to open up on Christmas morning. While Iraq has been reduced to rubble and 4 million Iraqi people have been run out of their homes. How ludicrous, how criminal.
Iran never was, is not now and almost certainly never will be dangerous - unless, of course, they are attacked, in which case they have every earthly right to be as dangerous to their attackers as they can manage to be.
I agree that this administration is full of a bunch of lunatics and I’ve spent countless hours writing letters to my elected officials. Unfortunately my elected officials were not elected by me, so I’m sure my letters ended up in file 13. However, I’m always curious when other people criticize Americans for their complacency, so my question is… besides posting your thoughts on the web, what have you done to stop the lunacy?
The neocons such as Bolton were so spot on on their predictions of the duration and cost of the Iraq fiasco. Seems to me they don’t have a leg to stand on.
To illustrate my point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/tom-tomorrow/what-they-said_b_46907.html
Leave it to you to get it wrong. It actually
illustrates the opposite point.
We’ll get Tom Tomorrow over here to spell it out for you, you poor kid.
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/04/right-claims-iran-
nie-a-cia-plot-against-bush/
Crooks and liars has quite a few clips about the NIE
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2007/12/04/hardball-biden-repeats-his-threat-to-bush-invade-iran-and-youll-be-impeached/
Joe Biden, D-Delaware, appears to be very fed up with George Bush, and rightly so and probably even MORE so than any other Senator. I can’t say I blame Joe Biden one bit.
Oh, by the way. Nick Berg’s father happens to be from Delaware, as well as some other “interesting” native Delawareans who oppose Bush.
Oh, I just LOVE it! I really DO!
Handsome guy, that Joe Biden. I like his accent. It sounds just like mine.
Nick Berg’s dad is amazing. What an incredible man.
Tomorrow morning the Diane Rehm show focused on the NIE report
Call in with your questions or statements
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/07/12/05.php#18230
“… the then universal belief that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction…”
I just love that line!
As I am sure you recall, Larry, the unclassified National Intelligence Estimate—released many months prior to the launch of the attack on Iraq—said nothing of the sort. Instead, the consensus conclusions included that claim that Iraq did not have a robust and sophisticated program for the production of chemical, biological or nuclear weapons, that it had no long-range missile delivery system, that its efforts to develop more effective short and long range missiles was ineffective, and that it posed no near-term term threat to the United States and our European allies, and only a limited threat to its neighbors. Even the discussion regarding ’suitcase’ nuclear delivery systems and any possible alliance with rogue states or stateless terrorist organization was largely dismissive.
I wish I could find myself more polite in discussing both Podhoretz and Bolton, but I rather find myself unable to resist the temptation to classify both as they can plainly and reasonably be seen: complete whack-jobs! Then, and now. (At least they are consistent in that respect.) For either to make the claims they do is ridiculous on its face.
I thought that Ambassador Bolton came essentially unhinged during the War Room interview. Strangely, I imagine that being on CNN’s poorly named War Room broadcast is actually the closest that Bolton has every come to war. And, that’s apparently closer than most of his associates and co-conspirators have ever come…
Michael,
An excellent point worthy of a broader dissection. Their false claim about the 2002 NIE is just one more lie in their vaudeville act. Thanks for pointing that out.
LJ
I have been stating through the day that this still assumes a “weapons” program. yet, do we have proof of such a program, or will this lend agreement to a fraud on top of fraud on top of fraud?
I’ve only ever heard from Iran that they want nuclear power. I haven’t seen substantial evidence to the contrary.
(and yet my goddamn shelf is full of Cheney threating us..ain’t that sick)
over
I am confounded by the short piece written by Robert Baer in Time:
http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1690696,00.html
“…there is also no doubt that the Bush White House was behind this NIE. While the 16 intelligence agencies that make up the “intelligence community” contribute to each National Intelligence Estimate, you can bet that an explosive, 180-degree turn on Iran like this one was greenlighted by the President.”
Huh? All right: that passage simply makes my head hurt. And, frankly, makes no sense.
I always understood analysis to be more about intuition and insight, than about briefing from a catalog of ‘facts.’ Generally, the trade craft to be more art than science, and the process reasonably isolated from political influence. The claim by Baer that the Oval Office directed the outcome of the latest unclassified National Intelligence Estimate difficult to fathom from the point of view of both strategic planning and tactical execution. Actual delivery seemed to catch this collection of idiots off guard, struggling for words and looking for believable phrases.
Such counter-counter-counter conduct seems too clever by half, and—if directed by a White House political operation—troubling, even if only a marginally accurate observation.
Now, Robert Baer is not Raul Gerecht, from whom I might have expected such apparent nonsense. Possibly, I have spent too little time observing disinformation campaigns…
Can you shed some light on this?
Ray McGovern on the NIE
http://www.antiwar.com/mcgovern/?articleid=12001
Aipac on the NIE report
http://www.aipac.org/
Micheal Rubin on the NIE
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDk2ODAyYmEwZDA3N2ZjNjViYzEwNThhZjhhMmZhM
Dk=
Micheal “faster please” Ledeen on the NIE
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjljZGNiZTc0NzhmM2UyYmFlMWQ4NjkwYWI
5MzUxNTM=
Elbaradei on the NIE
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/98352EE3-B5D0-4209-8ADB-79E8A3B45A72.htm
Al Jazeera on NIE
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/8CB95556-C45B-44B5-8B2A-9FF1EDA496C1.htm
Here’s the Rubin piece, Kathleen. The link didn’t work:
The Iran NIE [Michael Rubin]
I’m at a conference overseas and just got a chance to look through the highlights in the International Herald Tribune. A couple quick thoughts:
* The NIE appears focused on any indigenous Iranian program only. After the Syria episode, what does import of nuclear weapon-relevant technology do to the timeline?
* If Iran was working on a nuclear weapons program until 2003, what does this say about U.S. policy in the late Clinton period and European engagement? Is it fair to say that while Iran spoke of dialogue of civilizations, it was working on a nuclear weapons program?
* Iran has staunchly denied it ever had such a program. Will it now detail it? Will the analysts who agreed with Iran come clean and explain how they got it wrong?
* What role does the intelligence community place on ideology within the Islamic Republic and its decision-making? Talking strictly of costs and benefits in Middle East decision-making always falls flats, since so many regional decisions do not maximize benefits. Indeed, while Tehran can be pragmatic (both for good and for bad), its actions seldom maximize benefits for Iran and its strategic position.
* Many critics of sanctions and democratization policy said simply that there was no time to implement such policies. Doesn’t this NIE provide more time for comprehensive sanctions and civil society-building and support to continue, certainly alongside diplomacy?
* If pressure works, doesn’t it make more sense to have a third round of sanctions (which Condoleezza Rice had said would be completed by the end of last month) than relief from pressure?
I’ve seen it posted elsewhere that the Ford administration gave them the initial green light while the Shah was around, since Iran even then knew they had limited oil. Is there any way it could be checked out, since Rummy and Cheney were both in that WH team?
Thanks in advance.
I love the left (AKA the dem cong).
Their intellectual dishonesty will never cease to entertain me.
This NIE, about Iran, came from the same bunch that was wildly wrong on Iraq - and totally missed 9/11.
But now, they’re the greatest.
Why?
Because this same bunch of government pencil-necks is now agreeing with the left.
What’s really ironic is that that many of the employees of the “intelligence” agencies are drinking the same kool aid as the foaming left.
Are you familiar with foaming, graywolf?
Who knows, foam surfing could become the hot new thing.
Well, if it isn’t one of the yokels Larry refers to at the top. Well, yokel, while I will not defend the left from the accusation of intellectual dishonesty, I’ll throw you in that mix because if you’re going to discuss intellectual dishonesty, then engage in it, you aren’t much better. And that makes you a hypocrite.
“This NIE” came from…
Was this the wildly wrong intel that said Saddam didn’t have WMD? Was this the same intel that was operated by now outed agent by traitors in the white house? Those folks said, NO WMD. Yet, the Steven Hadley connect with Gen. Nicholo Pollari was enough, que no?
Was this the same intel had already heard Marine Scott Ritter state clearly in Dec 1999 that Iraq was disarmed?
And then you make a classic leap of logic to, “NOW, they’re the greatest…because this same bunch…is now agreeing with the left.”
This doesn’t answer if they are correct, and it doesn’t answer how…Iran says it isn’t engaged in a weapons program, IAEA says they are not engaged in a weapons programs, and those of us who aren’t even in the intel service can see it is equally possible that Iran wants nuclear energy.
But if you’ve solidly concluded “IRAN=EVIL” then don’t think, just assume, always assume the worst. Always overamplify your enemy, the one you create by labelling them enemy.
Oh, and as an act of kindess, may I suggest you wipe away that blue stain on the side of your mouth..is that kool-aid?
Actually, the people who were wrong about Iraq, were the neo-cons (Wolfie and Perle in particular) the rightwingers (that’s you Greypup) the Republicans, and most especially, John Bolton, Douglas Feith (and his secret parallel “intel” operation) little Bushie, and above all, Secret President Cheney (Grand Intel Cherry Picker of the Universe!)
Now Greypup - you don’t even know who the personel are that comprises the NIE authors, other than McConnell (if you even know that)whom little Bushie, himself, appointed (with Secret President Cheney’s approval, of course.) You, Greypup, can’t even name one person, one author, one contributor, or one analyst with regards to the NIE. You have any basis to doubt the NIE, or the authors, you don’t have a single shred of evidence to contradict the NIE, and if you think you’re more of an expert on National Security than the authors of the NIE, and the Intel Community in general, than you are one deluded rightwingnut extremeist.
And if you have so much contempt for us, why do you come here?
But again, that 2002 NIE was not a broadly supported NIE. It was stovepiped and we know that the allegations of Iraq’s WMDs were vetted in fall ‘02 and that they had been determined to have been not supported by the facts….but yet were still recited by the Prez….and then again in the State of the Union a few months later…..but remember, that report was significantly classified and only select parts were de-classified to create the impression that Iraq was a threat. And really graywolf, since when have you ever cared about sufficient justification for military actions? I would imagine that you were not agonizing about the lack of intelligence supporting the claims that Iraq had WMDs back in ‘02.
Bolton going ballistic on Fox News in regard to the NIE
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/12/04/bolton-nie-iran/
It’s amazing how the very people who were/are publicly
wrong all along about Iraq, are the ones now saying they are right about Iran, and that’s Bolton to a tee.
It’s also Orwell to a tee.
thanks for checking Larry I apologize. It is so disturbing that facts just do not matter to this group. They will make up their own.
Ledeen on the NIE
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjljZGNiZTc0NzhmM2UyYmFlMWQ4NjkwYWI5MzUxNTM=
Again
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NjljZGNiZTc0NzhmM2UyYmFlMWQ4NjkwYWI5MzUxNTM=
Interesting
http://www.amconmag.com/2007/2007_12_03/cover.html
Elbaradei has been telling us for four years that there was no hard evidence to back up the claims being repeated by the “cakewalk” zealots about Iran. Now the NIE backs that up.
Would Iran be more willing to consider giving up their uranium enrichment (legal under the Iaea) if the U.S. and Israel would sign an agreement stating that they would not pre-emptively strike Iran. Would Iran be more willing to consider giving up their uranium enrichment capabilities if Israel would sign the Non Proliferation Treaty?
“Would Iran be more willing to consider giving up their uranium enrichment (legal under the Iaea) if…”
Why should they give up a perfectly legal program that will 1) reduce domestic use of oil, allowing them to export more of it, 2) possibly put them in a position to export energy once the oil supplies begin to run out?
According to all the evidence Iran is not doing anything in its nuclear program that it is not entitled to do. It makes perfectly good sense for Iran to be developing nuclear power technology. In fact, some of the very characters who are screaming the loudest now were, a few decades ago, encouraging Iran to develop nuclear power.
Why on earth should Iran give up a program that threatens no one, and makes perfect sense for it to be pursuing?
Larry,
isn’t the ‘world of bush-think’ just wunnerful? lights on, shades up, and nobody home in their upstairs. ‘real’ air-heads to the maxx.
Now we await what form GWBush-style presidential spite will take.
Excellent post.
You’re the best on subjects like this.
Thanks.
Predicted a couple of years ago:
http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2006/11/27/061127fa_fact?printable=true
month before the November elections, Vice-President Dick Cheney was sitting in on a national-security discussion at the Executive Office Building. The talk took a political turn: what if the Democrats won both the Senate and the House? How would that affect policy toward Iran, which is believed to be on the verge of becoming a nuclear power? At that point, according to someone familiar with the discussion, Cheney began reminiscing about his job as a lineman, in the early nineteen-sixties, for a power company in Wyoming. Copper wire was expensive, and the linemen were instructed to return all unused pieces three feet or longer. No one wanted to deal with the paperwork that resulted, Cheney said, so he and his colleagues found a solution: putting “shorteners” on the wire—that is, cutting it into short pieces and tossing the leftovers at the end of the workday. If the Democrats won on November 7th, the Vice-President said, that victory would not stop the Administration from pursuing a military option with Iran. The White House would put “shorteners” on any legislative restrictions, Cheney said, and thus stop Congress from getting in its way….
more
Well, the igit in chief may have broken Sadr’s ceasefire:
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,22866754-5005961,00.html
Ooops, There it is.
Call me at troll; call me a shithead if you want…but before you do ask your self are you so sure that all is well in the land of NOD? Because of an NIE???
So I am listening to Bush say he does not want Iran to have the knowledege of how to build a Nuke.
sorry cats out of the bag.
I google “How to build a nuclear weapon”…and got
2,130,000 hits…OK? I know! ….it is a very difficult thing to do…so is climbing Mt. Denali. But it has been done and lives have been lost in the effort.
I’m sure that world wide espionage is always “full speed ahead” regarding WMD and the next time Cheney sends a letter, it won’t be from Italy.
So when the new engine designs for the space shuttle get hacked from a NASA computer, at a loss of billions of dollars in R&D (you name what ever high tech designs you want) it is amazing that we assume joining the club can’t be done by a country with educated intelligent people such as Iran.
It blows my mind that people think an NIE, no matter how much it exposes the Bush dictatorships’ lies, will stop these end timers from doing exactly what they want.
Hell’s Bells!! They are going to kick this Iran can down the road to the next admin as well. I know our Intel folks deserve much in recognition and public support but if anyone disagrees with me then explain why they outed Valerie and god knows what else. Bottomline is they dont give a damn ’cause they are doing it anyway.
Sorry 60 votes don’t mean jack at the moment. Nor does an NIE. Especially because there were no disenting views…nothing occurs in a vacumn as the Michael Rubin artical implies.
Nasa hack:
http://www.computerworld.com/industrytopics/defense/story/0,10801,73305,00.html
Chinese hack: W-88
http://books.google.com/books?id=ok8uPPI11DAC&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=stolen+mark+88+weapon&source=web&ots=2DwduY8ZjW&sig=25BIqSN6-nhr4_KWoZXJY3hi3W0
Actually, there are dissenting views, but not dissenting conclusions.
And no one here is saying all is well in the land of nod.
Also, 60 votes in the Senate, and two thirds of the house is the only thing that will effect any change, and it will mean a darn lot.
OT:
http://nuralcubicle.blogspot.com/2007/12/prisoner-flow-to-us-prison-camps-in.html#comments
Yeah, well it sucks, doesn’t it. But it’s off topic. However, you should start your own blog on the subject.
[...] CIA analyst Larry Johnson: This blog was one of the first to report that the NIE was being delayed for political reasons. [...]
Thanks could not remember where I had read that.
Absolutely excellent, Larry. Damn you’re good.
from 1watt’s link…lyrics anyone?
We don’t need your planes and tanks. We don’t need your policy and your interference. We don’t want your democracy and fake freedom. Get out of our land.”
I’m wondering is somebody in the military didn’t help this get leaked to head off a potentially suicidal venture into Iran.
Joe Biden in response to Bush’s comment that he just learned last week that Iran had stopped it’s program in 2003:
“That’s not believable”. “I refuse to believe that”. “If that’s true, he has the most incompetent staff in modern American history and he’s one of the most incompetent presidents in modern American history”.
Friends, in January 2000, I had been living in Austin, Texas for nearly ten years. I remember going home to Delaware to my father’s funeral and telling my cousin, at the wake, that George Bush and the entire gang from Congress Avenue is incompetent! I bet now my cousin is looking back and thinking, “WOW, she was right on”.
Who can possibly believe little Bushie when he said yesterday the his hand picked NIE director told him several months ago that there was “new information” about Iran, but that little Bushie wasn’t told, and little Bushie didn’t consider it important enough, or interesting enough to ask the obvious question…what new information is that? This from the leader of the free world!!!! He might as well have said that the dog ate his homework, when he said that he only found out last week, just what that info was.
What’s even more incredible is that no one in the press busted him on it.
My question to that is what is in the redaction’s of said report!? It would be interesting to be a fly on the wall in said committee’s of congress trying to unredact this and figure out what the hell is really going on.
A wounded animal is twice a dangerous. I would not let my gaurd down until this President no longer has access to the football. While some might choose to rejoice in victory, it will be short lived.
Iran is a threat and not because GW says so, because as Kathleen pointed out, Valerie said so. Is Valerie Wilson incorrect? So please please someone on this site tell me why we won’t ,as Chis Matthews but it, we won’t wake up one morning and have GWS tell us he pulled the trigger anyway. Props to Larry but eating crow is not something GW does well as Valerie and Joe found out.
All this NIE proves is that a part of our broken government is working again. That is not enough.
Agree.
And thank you for referring to Mrs. Wilson as Valerie Wilson, because, that is, in so far as I know, her name, and most people, in so far as I know, prefer to be addressed, or referred to, by their name.
Mudkitty
In her book she said she preferred to be addressed as Valerie Wilson…I feel awkward using their first names not having met them.
Bush is out there babbling about Iran having two choices…come clean or else….What a hockey puck…
Now that I have calmed down from the last 48 hours of being shown how badly the emperor has no cloths, I am still stuck on someone’s of Joe Bidens experience saying what he said on hardball and driving in to work the person after person was saying they had no trust. I fear Bush will act like a NYC subway rat…
Lot’s of women prefer to have the same last name as their children. Is that so shocking?
I, myself, since I married late in life, and have no children, don’t have the same need, or desire.
I don’t know how you read what I typed as I might find it shocking. I am rather “old fashioned” on the ediquite thing…And no I am not shocked…
On the other “get real” comment…
1) She also talked about the next threat to U.S. interests in the troubled Middle East: Iran.The threat is real, said Plame, who had been working for the CIA on nuclear proliferation issues before her career ended after she was “outed.” Vieira asked her, “Given what you know, are we headed toward war in Iran?”
“There’s no doubt Iran has intent and it’s malevolent,” Plame said of that country’s nuclear aspirations, a topic of intense scrutiny by the Bush White House and debate around the world.
Vieira then asked if the administration is capable of twisting intelligence again to rush into war in Iran.
“I do,” said Plame.
Ihave very strongly held views just most folks on this site do…and I am the first to admit I don’t know Jackshit. but I DO know how to survive in this echo chamber that is uniquely American . Honestly how can you be so sure of yourself?
Do you read anywhere that “but is overstated”
in her comments? Do you see why I want clarification?
Transcript from Countdown October 23:
You have dealt with intelligence. You’ve dealt with Iran. What should we be looking at professionally? What are the questions that we be asking that we haven’t been asked yet about this topic?
WILSON: There is no doubt that there is malevolent intent on behalf
of Iran, that they are seeking nuclear weapons. There’s no question about
that. But we are a great country and I believe that as a great country, we
can afford to speak to everyone, even our enemies. And the idea of not
using every single tool that we have available to us, primarily diplomacy,
and it is unfortunate.
And obviously our international credibility, moral authority has been severely eroded in the debacle in Iraq.
This remark of Bush’s is mystifying. Come clean about WHAT?! All the evidence so far would appear to indicate that Iran has been telling the truth.
What an Alice in Wonderland world we are living in!
Shirin; we left that world awhile ago and are now in Toon Town… did you not see that sign post up ahead?
Just sent both of these questions to the Diane Rehm show this morning they will be focused on the NIE this morning.
This morning the Diane Rehm show will be focused on the NIE.
This question is for Kenneth Pollack
On Oct 25 2005 the Jewish Telegraphic Agency reported that you said “I believe I am USGO1″ (United States Government official) in the six times delayed and upcoming Aipac espionage trial. Most of the classified intelligence that was allegedly passed from Larry Franklin to Rosen and Weismann had to do with IRAN. This investigation and the upcoming trial have basically taken place under the MSM ’s radar, another indication of the power of the Israeli Lobby. Most Americans are completely in the dark.
Will the newly appointed Attorney General Mukasey dismiss this upcoming trial? Will the American public ever find out about the Iranian classified intelligence that was “allegedly” passed to Israel?
Diane will you be doing any shows about this very serious investigation and trial?
JTA articlehttp://jta.org/cgi-bin/iowa/news/article/20050829ProminentMideastan.html
Or
Iaea’s director Elbaradei has been telling us for four years that there was no hard evidence to back up the claims being repeated by the “cakewalk” zealots about Iran. Now the NIE backs that up.
Would Iran be more willing to consider giving up their uranium enrichment (legal under the Iaea) if the U.S. and Israel would sign an agreement stating that they would not pre-emptively strike Iran. Would Iran be more willing to consider giving up their uranium enrichment capabilities if Israel would sign the Non Proliferation Treaty?
reply
Send or call in your questions drshow@wamu.org
1-800-433-8850
http://wamu.org/programs/dr/
[...] NeoCons Go Ballistic on Iran NIE (by Larry Johnson at No Quarter) “How can you trust the intelligence community to get it right on Iran? They got Iraq wrong in 2002 and now this?” The “this” is the NIE on Iran and its search for nukes. That in a nutshell is one of the prevalent reactions of neocons and Bush true believers. But wait, there is more. John Bolton told Wolf Blitzer that the NIE was the handiwork of exiled State Department officials hell bent on undermining Bush and this country. And Bolton told Fox News that Congress should investigate those traitors. [...]
the devil is building a special wing in hell for Bolton, Bush, Cheney and the Zion, Theo, Oil Cons.
sure hope there is a hell for these warmongers who are responsible for a massive amount of death and destruction.
Nick Bergs dad
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2006/06/08/snow.zarqa
wi.berg.reaction.affl
What gets me about all this is the other axis of evil North Korea made nukes and actually tested them yet there was no beat of the war drum on them. There is no proof Iran is making nukes, so why the beat of the war drum on them? That is the question and the answer isn’t nukes, it is something else.
does North Korea have oil or gas? Don’t think Israel has its sites set on North Korea
There was an article a few months back which suggested that perhaps N.K. was not very successful in building a weapon. The radiation released by their test wasn’t high enough for a fully functional nuke. Perhaps Kim Jr. pulled a fast one to get the results he wanted.
Not holding my breath for results from the US inspectors.
No oil or gas, and as a bonus PR o’ China next door. The CCF already joined into a war in Korea once, no reason to think they wouldn’t do it again. Lots of blood for no real gain at this point if we started something. Defense of the ROK is another matter, of course.
Lost in the discussion is nuc acquisition, since we still don’t have access to AQ Khan who is the known proliferator that our “ally” has been protecting, and who is responsible for the DPRK program among others. That would be worth a topic on its own and I wonder how much Valerie Wilson found out about that part of the puzzle before the traitors outed her. I would expect it to be the principal threat scenario, and don’t think the NIE handled it.
Back on topic, the NIE is a repudiation that will force W to go it alone if he wants to shoot. The question is whether the military has learned of this. C&L observed that Fox hasn’t covered this very much at all, which tells me that AFRTS hasn’t either. It would be grounds in my view for rejecting the “fire away” order if the NIE was known in the forces, since the threat wouldn’t be proven.
cough cough oil, cough cough. Sorry, had a rough sore throat that suddenly kicked up there….sorry.
As a country, we appear near the edge on our ability to deal with reality. There are so many people that are paid to lie, some that volunteer, some that revere the liar so much they repeat it until it becomes a well known enough lie that it can be declared fact. We don’t have any mechanism for displaying facts. The instruments are there, but no one willing to simply print facts.
One must wonder from time to time if most americans simply can’t read or process information any longer. Not one of our news agencies is willing to simply put facts out without massive commentary by personality. Most of the blogs report the lie rather than facts that either support or conflict with the story. They don’t seem to care any longer.
Since denial is such a large part of life in the USA now, the crash is going to become really difficult for those of us that find our jaw’s on the floor when the bandini hits the ventilator. I wish you all success in your post apocalyptical planning. What has become clear to me, is that millions are going to perish because no “official” can talk about the problem they can’t fix. They ignore the questions. Do they too plan for any future?
What worried me before the invasion of Iraq was all of the old timers (older than me 55) who were really worried (Republicans, Democrats, Independents) about this crazed group of thugs in the White House. Jimmy Carter, Zbigniew Brezinski, General Zinni, General Clark, Madeline Albright, Robert Mcnamara, four of my uncles all retired engineers from Wright Patterson Air Force base, endless older WWII Vets that I talked with at the anti-invasion marches in Washington the fall of 2002 and in New York in Feb of 2003.
Besides hearing Scott Ritter, Elbaradei, retired CIA analyst and many more on the Diane Rehm show before the invasion, hearing the older timers saying the same thing sure had my ears on alert.
Plenty of warning if you were listening
LARRY, anyone,
two things that should be front and center of any conversation about NIE’s is:
1) how many times did cheney, perle (as head of def. advisory board), gingrich (member of same iirc), and scooter libby visit the cia? for the purpose of beating the snot out of the analysts? i want numbers and dates in the hands of msm reporters.
how often in the past had a vice president visited langley to do the same? (answer: none.)
2) also, TEAM B, c. 1975-76, needs to be discussed robustly. also, note well, that the same personnel, wolfowitz, et al, were involved then.
…
…
it has been delightful to see the coverage of this. yesterday’s ny times front page, above the fold, 3 column, photo (hadley defending the indefensible), graphics, size of the font on the headlines was simply incredible.
this story has major league traction on the internet.
couldn’t happen to a nicer crew.
EXACTLY on Team B! They should never have been allowed to get away with doing this again.
Also, people need to make it clear to Israel that if they attack Iran or provoke any kind of violent response from them or any Iranian allies, WE WILL NOT HELP!!
Read this comment from this ungrateful, arrogant piece of #@$!!
Last evening, I attended a forum with former General, Labor Party Knesset Member, and former Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh. In response to a question from the floor about the Iran NIE, Sneh said that the “report was a lie.” He asked “why would someone leak this now?”
http://www.thewashingtonnote.com/
Great points! Who else visited?
Amy Goodman
What did Bush know and when did he know it
http://www.democracynow.org/
Juan Cole on the NIE
http://www.juancole.com/2007/12/usg-open-source-center-surveys-iranian.html#comments
a change of pace. instead of bludgeoning your koolaid friends with another article, tell ‘em when a neocon from cheney on down peddles their bs to it reminds you of this song.
eurythmics. annie lennox. “would i lie to you?” about 5 minutes. first min. is setting it up, then 4 mins. of awesome music. (h/t libby spencer. whose blog escapes me.)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vl1UvbGkQAs
What troubles me most about all of this is our inability to keep the real issues in mind. That we may be less likely to go to war with Iran, and thus probably with Islam, is very good. But a lot of the discussion seems to miss the most important reason why. The most important reason is that we might then have the time and resources to do what actually needs to be done.
In Iraq there is ruin, and Cholera:
http://www.chris-floyd.com/Articles/Articles/Eating_Iraq%3A_Corruption_Rules_and_Cholera_Rises_While_Insurgents_Surf_the_Surge/
In Uganda, the ebola virus has evolve