Author Topic: Cooked intel?  (Read 2207 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Cooked intel?
« on: February 09, 2007, 12:44:15 AM »
Posted on Thu, Feb. 08, 2007

Pentagon office produced `alternative' intelligence on Iraq

By Jonathan S. Landay

McClatchy Newspapers

(MCT)

WASHINGTON - A special unit run by former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld's top policy aide inappropriately produced "alternative" intelligence reports that wrongly concluded that Saddam Hussein's regime had cooperated with al-Qaida, a Pentagon investigation has determined.

The Department of Defense Inspector General's Office found that former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith and his staff had done nothing illegal or unauthorized.

But Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., who requested the investigation, called the findings "devastating" because senior administration officials, particularly Vice President Dick Cheney, used Feith's work to help make their case for the 2003 U.S. invasion of Iraq.

"We went to war based on the argument of the administration . . . that there was a link between al-Qaida and Saddam Hussein and that Saddam Hussein could give al-Qaida and other terrorist groups weapons," Levin said Thursday in an interview with McClatchy Newspapers.

The findings "are about as damning a statement as one can hear, and I think the American people will be absolutely furious," Levin continued. The lawmaker is a longtime critic of the administration's use of exaggerated and erroneous intelligence to justify the invasion and a leading voice for U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

Feith, who resigned from the Pentagon in 2005 and now teaches at Georgetown University, said that he'd been exonerated.

"The policy office has been smeared for years by allegations that its pre-Iraq war work was somehow `unlawful' or `unauthorized' and that some information it gave to congressional committees was deceptive or misleading," he said in a statement. "The inspector general's report has now thoroughly repudiated the smears."

But Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, said in a statement that he'd review whether Feith may have violated the 1947 National Security Act.

The act "requires the heads of all departments and agencies of the U.S. government involved in intelligence activities `to keep the congressional oversight committees informed,' " Rockefeller said. "The IG has concluded that (Feith's) office was engaged in intelligence activities. The Senate Intelligence Committee was never informed of these activities. Whether these actions were authorized or not, it appears that they were not in compliance with the law."

The Pentagon investigation focused on the Policy Counter-Terrorism Evaluation Group, which Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz created shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks to look for state sponsors of terrorism, according to a Pentagon response to the inspector general's report. The unit then began probing for possible links between Saddam's regime and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network.

The Pentagon response from Eric Edelman, Feith's successor and a former aide to Cheney, said Wolfowitz asked Feith's analysts to ignore the intelligence community's belief that the militant Islamist al-Qaida and Saddam's secular dictatorship were unlikely allies.

Feith's unit gave three different briefings on its findings, according to Edelman's response. The one for Rumsfeld, in August 2002, cited "one indication of Iraqi coordination with al-Qaida specifically related to 9/11." One the same month for senior CIA officials cited "one possible indication of Iraqi coordination with al-Qaida specifically related to 9/11." The third version, given to the White House in September 2002, cited "some indications of possible Iraqi coordination with al-Qaida specifically related to 9/11."

None of the versions, however, was an "assessment of any sort," as the inspector general concluded, the DOD rebuttal says.

According to the rebuttal, the counterterrorism unit was one of three offices that received intelligence on Iraq as the Bush administration made its case for ousting Saddam.

An Iraqi exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, fed one unit, the Office of Special Plans, exaggerated and bogus claims that Saddam was hiding illegal nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and was training Islamic terrorists, several investigations have found. The INC funneled the same claims to Cheney's office and to selected members of the press.

Acting DOD Inspector General Thomas F. Gimble was to present the investigation's classified findings Friday to the Senate Armed Services Committee, which Levin chairs.

Levin and Rockefeller disclosed the conclusions of an unclassified summary of the probe's findings in advance of the session.

"The inspector general's report makes it clear in plain language that the actions of the Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Policy were inappropriate," Rockefeller said. "Individuals in that office produced and disseminated intelligence products outside of the regular intelligence channels."

Feith's Policy Counter-Terrorism Evaluation Group examined raw U.S. intelligence reports and post-Sept. 11 CIA assessments. Although there were intermittent contacts for about a decade, there was no operational cooperation between Iraq and bin Laden, the CIA assessments stated.

The CIA's findings have been substantiated by a number of investigations, including that of the independent Sept. 11 commission.

Feith's unit, however, found that there were "multiple areas of cooperation" between Iraq and al-Qaida, "more than a decade of numerous contacts" and "shared interest and pursuit of WMD (weapons of mass destruction)," the Pentagon response said.

The unit cited as its strongest evidence a purported April 2001 meeting in the Czech capital of Prague between a senior Iraqi intelligence officer and Mohamed Atta, who led the attacks on the World Trade Center and Pentagon several months later.

At the time, the CIA had doubts about reports of the meeting, and the agency and the FBI subsequently concluded that it never took place.

As late as January 2004, Cheney called Feith's findings, which also were leaked to the conservative Weekly Standard magazine, "the best source of information" on links between Saddam and al-Qaida, even though the Pentagon and the CIA had disavowed the conclusions of Feith's office.
McClatchy Newspapers correspondent Warren P. Strobel contributed to this report.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/politics/16656221.htm
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #1 on: February 09, 2007, 09:30:00 AM »
Quote
"Shortly after Cheney asserted these links, Bush contradicted him, saying: "We've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with the September 11th." But Bush added: "There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties."

 
 
In January, Cheney repeated his view that Iraq was tied to al Qaeda, saying that "there's overwhelming evidence" of an Iraq-al Qaeda connection. He said he was "very confident there was an established relationship there."


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A47812-2004Jun16_2.html

Such a strange concept ,that president Bush and Vice Presidet Cheny could possibly be wrong about anything!

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #2 on: February 09, 2007, 11:06:34 AM »
<<WASHINGTON - A special unit run by former Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld's top policy aide inappropriately produced "alternative" intelligence reports that wrongly concluded that Saddam Hussein's regime had cooperated with al-Qaida, a Pentagon investigation has determined.

<<The Department of Defense Inspector General's Office found that former Undersecretary of Defense Douglas Feith and his staff had done nothing illegal or unauthorized.>>

I found it extremely interesting that the report says absolutely nothing about Feith's life-long association with the most right-wing and extremist sectors of the Zionist movement (the Jabotinksy movement has been referred to as Jewish fascists) and nothing about his membership in PNAC, the organization whose members, including Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle and Wolfowicz (and Feith himself) had signed a letter urging then-President Bill Clinton to attack Iraq and nothing about his authorship of a top-level security and policy guide for the Likud Party when it was in power in Israel.  Absolutely amazing. 

Anyone who wants to know a little bit more about Feith than the MSM reports of this latest intelligence manipulation scandal are deigning to reveal should just Google "Feith" and go straight to the Wikipedia article.  It's like the foreign policy of the U.S.A. is being manipulated by the right hand of Menachem Begin.  This is in the long run bad for America and very bad for Israel.

This certainly could tie in well with another thread, the lack of real information provided by the MSM in the US.

Brassmask

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2600
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #3 on: February 09, 2007, 01:57:40 PM »
I think everyone's waiting to see how Rush, Sean, Neil and the GOP respond to the PROOF that Feith and the OSP cooked intel.

Meaning they LIED.

Michael Tee

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12605
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #4 on: February 09, 2007, 03:05:15 PM »
<<I think everyone's waiting to see how Rush, Sean, Neil and the GOP respond to the PROOF that Feith and the OSP cooked intel.>>

<<Meaning they LIED.>>

No, OF COURSE they didn't lie, they just had bad intelligence.  But they weren't the only ones fooled.  The "bad intelligence" also fooled the Russian, Chinese, German, French, Italian, Japanese, Spanish, Belgian,  Micronesian, Indian, Pakistani, Nicaraguan, Moroccan, Vatican City, Bhutanese and Sri Lankan intelligence services, in fact all the intelligence services on the planet and the Lyndon Larouche and Scientology movements' cult intelligence as well as the Sicilian Mafia, the Olympic anti-Doping Committee, the Robb-Silverman Committee, Cyril Wecht, Elie Wiesel, Raplh Nader, my Grade Twelve History teacher and every cabbie on the Manhattan - La Guardia airport run.  Only a communist lunatic like Tee would claim that Bush "manufactured" evidence that would also fool this sterling collection of all-seeing, all-knowing experts.  Only someone who hates America as much as Tee hates America could claim that THIS is evidence of lying.

Lanya

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3300
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #5 on: February 09, 2007, 03:29:45 PM »
LOL
Did you have to add Elie Wiesel and any cabbie in there?
The OLYMPIC Anti-Doping Committee?  hahahahah
Planned Parenthood is America’s most trusted provider of reproductive health care.

Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #7 on: February 12, 2007, 06:26:05 PM »
Correction to This Article
A Feb. 9 front-page article about the Pentagon inspector general's report regarding the office of former undersecretary of defense Douglas J. Feith incorrectly attributed quotations to that report. References to Feith's office producing "reporting of dubious quality or reliability" and that the office "was predisposed to finding a significant relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda" were from a report issued by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) in Oct. 2004. Similarly, the quotes stating that Feith's office drew on "both reliable and unreliable reporting" to produce a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq "that was much stronger than that assessed by the IC [Intelligence Community] and more in accord with the policy views of senior officials in the Administration" were also from Levin's report. The article also stated that the intelligence provided by Feith's office supported the political views of senior administration officials, a conclusion that the inspector general's report did not draw.The two reports employ similar language to characterize the activities of Feith's office: Levin's report refers to an "alternative intelligence assessment process" developed in that office, while the inspector general's report states that the office "developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community, to senior decision-makers." The inspector general's report further states that Feith's briefing to the White House in 2002 "undercuts the Intelligence Community" and "did draw conclusions that were not fully supported by the available intelligence."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802387.html

Amianthus

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 7574
  • Bring on the flames...
    • View Profile
    • Mario's Home Page
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #8 on: February 12, 2007, 06:55:33 PM »
Correction to This Article
A Feb. 9 front-page article about the Pentagon inspector general's report ...

Correction printed in fine print at the bottom of page D36, I assume?
« Last Edit: February 12, 2007, 06:57:22 PM by Amianthus »
Do not anticipate trouble, or worry about what may never happen. Keep in the sunlight. (Benjamin Franklin)

BT

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 16141
    • View Profile
    • DebateGate
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 3
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #9 on: February 12, 2007, 06:58:28 PM »
Quote
Correction printed in fine print at the bottom of page D36, I assume?

That is the way of the noise machine.


Plane

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 26993
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #10 on: February 13, 2007, 08:09:33 PM »
Quote
I think everyone's waiting to see how Rush, Sean, Neil and the GOP respond to the PROOF that Feith and the OSP cooked intel.

Meaning they LIED.


[][][][][][][][][]

Ok, this "proof" evaporates , your reaction Brassmask?
[][][][][][][][][]




Correction to This Article
A Feb. 9 front-page article about the Pentagon inspector general's report regarding the office of former undersecretary of defense Douglas J. Feith incorrectly attributed quotations to that report. References to Feith's office producing "reporting of dubious quality or reliability" and that the office "was predisposed to finding a significant relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda" were from a report issued by Sen. Carl Levin (D-Mich.) in Oct. 2004. Similarly, the quotes stating that Feith's office drew on "both reliable and unreliable reporting" to produce a link between al-Qaeda and Iraq "that was much stronger than that assessed by the IC [Intelligence Community] and more in accord with the policy views of senior officials in the Administration" were also from Levin's report. The article also stated that the intelligence provided by Feith's office supported the political views of senior administration officials, a conclusion that the inspector general's report did not draw.The two reports employ similar language to characterize the activities of Feith's office: Levin's report refers to an "alternative intelligence assessment process" developed in that office, while the inspector general's report states that the office "developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community, to senior decision-makers." The inspector general's report further states that Feith's briefing to the White House in 2002 "undercuts the Intelligence Community" and "did draw conclusions that were not fully supported by the available intelligence."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/08/AR2007020802387.html

sirs

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 27078
    • View Profile
  • Liked:
  • Likes Given: 0
Re: Cooked intel?
« Reply #11 on: February 13, 2007, 08:17:42 PM »
Quote
Correction printed in fine print at the bottom of page D36, I assume?

That is the way of the noise machine.

What a shocker        :-\
"The worst form of inequality is to try to make unequal things equal." -- Aristotle