Don't blame the CIA, blame Bush

[muriel_volestrangler]

To preempt today's Senate report on prewar Iraqi intelligence, let's look at what was said about Iraq and WMD at the start of the Bush administration, courtesy of the invaluable Memory Hole site:

Colin Powell, 24 February 2001:

We had a good discussion, the Foreign Minister and I and the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors.

Colin Powell, 15 May 2001:

Senator Bennett: What's our level of concern about the progress of Saddam Hussein's chemical and biological weapons programs?
Powell: The sanctions, as they are called, have succeeded over the last 10 years, not in deterring him from moving in that direction, but from actually being able to move in that direction. The Iraqi regime militarily remains fairly weak. It doesn't have the capacity it had 10 or 12 years ago. It has been contained. And even though we have no doubt in our mind that the Iraqi regime is pursuing programs to develop weapons of mass destruction -- chemical, biological and nuclear -- I think the best intelligence estimates suggest that they have not been terribly successful. There's no question that they have some stockpiles of some of these sorts of weapons still under their control, but they have not been able to break out, they have not been able to come out with the capacity to deliver these kinds of systems or to actually have these kinds of systems that is much beyond where they were 10 years ago.

Condoleezza Rice, 29 July 2001:

But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.

Note how these assessments are remarkably similar to what the Bush administration is claiming now. And note how unsimilar they are to the wild claims of 2002 and early 2003 - that they knew he had weapons; that they could be launched in 45 minutes; that we couldn't wait for mushroom clouds over American cities; that Donald Rumsfeld knew exactly where these weapons were.

So what changed between early 2001 and 2002? Well, it wasn't the CIA personnel - they don't suddenly all lose their jobs. It wasn't 9/11 - we all know (including even the President - well done George, you've caught up well with the rest on this, I think you deserve a gold star for extra effort, don't you all, class?) that there was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11 at all.

The answer is simple - the new Bush administration put steady pressure on the CIA and other intelligence agencies (including the specially created, and Orwellian-sounding, "Office of Special Plans") to distort, exaggerate, and on occasions just plain lie, so that George Bush could have his war of conquest, and the PNAC their Fortresses of Power on top of the Middle East's oil reserves.

The CIA was weak - they didn't stand up to the administration. But so was Congress, and the media, and other governments around the world. Most of the people were ignorant and careless - and that includes me. I just thought Bush was a stupid oilman who only cared about profit. I don't think I once called him a sociopath in 2002. I will be more honest in the future.

But we know where the true blame lies. And what the American electorate must do in November to avoid catastrophes ten times worse than we have seen in the past four years. We have a slogan. Say it with me, because Bush has such an ego he can't bear to say it himself:

"Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me"

[joshdawg]

1. Nice post!

Too bad the "buck stops here" only with Democrats and not with Republicans. This resident of the White House does not know how to accept responsibility. Shucks, he's only CIC.

[gandalf]

2. It is such an obvious scapegoat move

It is scandalous that the media seem to accept the purported withholding of information by the CIA as a kind of apology for the administration.

Enough experts (Scott, Ritter, Blix, and other in the intelligence community) were highly skeptical of the WMD claims. That the administration even attempts to blame the CIA is ridiculous, and it is sad that a lot of people seem to accept this game.

[radfringe]

3. more from the "not my fault" department

It's pass the buck, scape the goat and pin the blame on the ass....

http://www.myrtlebeachonline.com/mld/myrtlebeachonline/news/nation/9103808.htm

----snippet----

Speaking on condition of anonymity because the report hasn't been released, the aide said that while the findings take aim at CIA analysts, they also fault Tenet for the defective assessment of Iraq's outlawed weapons programs.

While "we found a lot of problems with the analysis itself ... in the end (Tenet) is in charge," said the aide.

============

just my humble opinion -- bush* is in charge, he has the responsiblity and the power to determine when/if/how to go to war -- NOT TENENT

[cthrumatrix]

4. the CIA will not lose this game.... TPTB want * out....zero credibility

[lil-petunia]

5. no silly

It's not "Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice."

It's "fool me once, shame on er, er, shame on you, fool me, er, you don't get fooled again."

[G_j]

6. Boston Globe: "The CIA Failed, But The White House Misled"

The CIA Failed, But The White House Misled

The Boston Globe Editorial Board
Thursday 9:43 AM

In a political deal, the Senate Intelligence Committee agreed with the White House demand to put off assessing the White House's use of the Intelligence Community's pronouncements until effectively after the elections. That will allow the White House to blame the CIA for misleading it. The Boston Globe says that puts the cart before the elephant.
------------------
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/editorials/articles/2004/07/08/wrongly_blame_the_cia/

GLOBE EDITORIAL

Wrongly blame the CIA

July 8, 2004

..more..