oldreliable67

While the "did they or did they not stop their nuke program" aspect has gotten most of the attention, there is another aspect of this NIE that is troubling. The allegations of political influence has been made, with three of the principal architects being labeled by the WSJ as "hyper anti-Bush partisans." Whether or not the political leanings of those three played a role or not, there was certainly a political element present in this NIE, something that, at least in theory, is not supposed to happen. Consider the following excerpt from the NIE, when it states that Iran's behavior:

This is a policy prescription, not an intelligence estimate. John McLaughlin, former CIA deputy director, wrote, "Because of their inherent uncertainties, estimates should not be seen as in any sense making policy, as many have assumed to be the case during the public furor over this one." Clearly, the authors of this NIE believed otherwise.

Furthermore, why would the President authorize the release of an NIE that is potentially damaging to the credibility of the US and its allies seeking to gain Iran's compliance with the NPT and its Additional Protocols? The answer can only be a fear that the NIE would surely be leaked, leading to accusations of "politicizing intelligence." But that, as one WSJ columnist observed,

That last is of course an exaggeration. But one can't help but wonder, given the spate of leaks and partisan political activity of the last several years originating in the IC in general and particularly the CIA, just how much of an exaggeration?

Simon W. Moon

Perhaps we would know more if someone int the Bush Admin hadn't relayed info to known Iranian agents that we had cracked one of the Iranian codes.
But, you know, at the time, the folks working with / for the Iranians were Bush Admin "friends". Some of those "looked into his soul" friends - like Putin.

That kind of crap has to piss off folks in the Intel Community. It must suck to realize that the security problem is with your bosses.

It also may have upset some in the IC that the Bush Admin took a lead role in spreading Iranian disinformation wrt Iraq.

Those guys can be sooo touchy about these sorts of things.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War

oldreliable67

Upset? Touchy? Too f***ing bad. When they learn to get it right, then they can be upset and get all touchy. I find myself more and more in agreement with the assessment offered by Christopher Hitchens:

Editing to add a quick summary of IC successes, courtesy of a couple of posters from here,

Clouseau-like indeed. Very much so. Just my opinion. YMMV.

Simon W. Moon

The Bush Admin reveals state secrets that hamper our ability to keep an eye on Iran's nuclear program and you say "too bad".
What a shame.

The Bush Admin promotes Iranian disinformation to the American public and you say, "too bad".
What a shame.

The Bush Admin puts a guy in charge of the Defense policy Advisory Board who tries to sell the the phone system that both the Fed Gov and US military(!) use to a known front for the Chinese military intel services against the objections of members of the IC and the military.
You probably say, "too bad" to that too, yes?


The Bush Admin is a serious, treacherous, untrustable security risk to the US.

Too bad.

What a shame.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War

Simon W. Moon

You should compare this with record of the Bush Admin folks for this to be meaningful.
Some of these same folks were involved in a group B exercise on some of these same issues during Ford's Admin because they didn't think the IC was doing a good enough job. The group B folks got it even MORE wrong than the USIC.
So, however bad you think the IC is, the Bush Admin's crew are much worse.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War

donc

I would imagine that outing a covert agent would also piss off the intel community.

Simon W. Moon

That's a subject that's already been subject to a fortified and hardened state of denial. No point in bringing that one up.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War

oldreliable67

Trying to divert attention from the issue by alleging faults of others? There is no doubt that the Bush administration has its faults and can be criticized for a number of failures. Indeed, there are many things for which the Bush administration simply cannot be rationally defended. We can devote a whole different thread to that, all on its own. But lets stick to the issue at hand in this thread: the IC in general and the CIA in particular has a shoddy, miserable record, which has culminated to date, in an NIE and a process that appears quite flawed and politically motivated.

Then thank goodness, its certainly great that we've got this really wonderful, ace IC to help save the country.

Seems to me that there is/was a very good reason that Cheney referred to the CIA intel product as "crap." This "crap" to which Cheney refers goes back long before the Bush administration came into office.

Simon W. Moon

Just pointing out that the "crap" is the best game in town and that the crap-callers have a much worse record and are even less reliable.

I thought that the Bush Admin had revamprd teh process in light of the 9-11 commission findings and in light of the past failures.
Did the Bush Admin **** up the revamping process too.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War

Simon W. Moon

Yes, that's exactly what the Bush Admin and it's backers are trying to do.

__________________
"The barbarous custom of having men beaten who are suspected of having important secrets to reveal must be abolished. It has always been recognized that this way of interrogating men, by putting them to torture, produces nothing worthwhile."
- Napoleon Bonaparte to Berthier 11 Nov 1798 Napoleon on the Art of War