FLASHBACK from 6/2003: Cheney's CIA visits pressured us: analysts

[wicket]

Will we ever learn the truth of what Cheney was doing at the CIA???

http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/06/05/1054700335400.html?oneclick=true

Multiple visits to the CIA by the United States Vice-President, Dick Cheney, created an environment in which some analysts felt they were being pressured to make their assessments on Iraq fit with Bush Administration policy objectives, intelligence officials said.

They said Mr Cheney and his chief of staff, "Scooter" Libby, questioned analysts studying Iraq's weapons programs and alleged links to al-Qaeda.

Mr Cheney took the lead in the Administration last August in advocating military action against Iraq by claiming it had weapons of mass destruction.

The visits "sent signals, intended or otherwise, that a certain output was desired from here", one agency official said.

Other officials said they were not influenced by the visits from Mr Cheney's office, and some said they welcomed them.

But the disclosure of his unusual hands-on role comes on the heels of mounting concern from intelligence officials and members of Congress that the Administration may have exaggerated intelligence it received about Iraq to build a case for war.

[rodeodance]

1. Ray McGovern--did a great job on Cheney yesterday==wonder if

Cheney's ears were/are ringing?? --or is his nose itching--someone is talking about you.

[CoffeeCat]

2. Excellent point...I remember those visits.

Also, I remember * making multiple visits to the CIA, during the months leading up to the war.

I remember hearing on CNN that * made 9 trips to the CIA. The report said that no president in history made that many trips to the CIA.

Something was going on. It's these little pieces in the puzzle that put together a very obvious picture.

In addition--in my opinion the PNAC memo to Bill Clinton--urging him to go to war with Saddam is a MAJOR smoking gun. That memo (which p*sses me off to no end!) confirms that these gouls were shopping around the idea of an Iraq war--long before they obtained power. Then they obtained power and got their war.

Furthermore--George Tenant's revolting medal--given to him by BushCo is certainly suspect. Tenant lauds over the CIA when the agency is being blame for erroneously sending us to war...and he gets a medal? That medal was for services rendered. Tenant never said, "Slam dunk." He took the fall for BushCo and hence...the medal from BushCo.

Pigs!

There are so many pieces to this sleazy puzzle.

These warmongering, fascist, PNACer scum may be evil and power hungry--however they aren't too bright. They left an obvious trail of bread crumbs.

Now, if only a reporter with the guts to pick up those pieces and expose this story--would get their butt in gear!

[KatieBloom]

3. Great Find

Thanks for posting.

[wicket]

4. kick

:kick:

[goclark]

5. And why did Poppy visit Cheney in the WH on 9/10

that is what I want to know.

[zulchzulu]

6. Scooter Libby and Cheney are PNAC signatories

What else needs to be said.

Follow the PNAC trail and you'll find the same people who needed a "new Pearl Harbor" to happen to win the hearts and minds of Americans to attack Iraq are the same that performed treason by lying about starting this war and having the blood on their hands.

They will pay for their crimes. And it's not going to be pretty.

[Ouabache]

7. Clinton mentioned THIS on Letterman's show

the other night. Letterman asked Clinton about the DSM. Clinton brushed that off and instead mentioned all of Unka Dickie's visits to the CIA and DOD in the run up to the Iraq War. Something to the effect that he (Cheney)wasn't there for coffee and to "catch up".

Clinton caught a lot of flack here for claiming he hadn't read the DSM, which we know he has. But I thought it extremely telling that he focused on the Dickster's role in all this. He knows who the personification of PNAC really is. It's Cheney. PNAC and Cheney are unilateralism, domination, and pre-emptive, illegal war all rolled into one fat glob of neo-con glue. No teflon at all.

It's a tell on the weak spot. IMHO.