Friday | October 25, 2002
Politicizing intelligence gathering
So you're a Bush Administration official looking for a reason -- any reason -- to invade Iraq (say, Donald Rumsfeld). You ask your intelligence agencies (CIA, DIA, NSA, etc.) for confirmation that Iraq has ties to Al Qaeda. The agencies mine their assets, review their data, train satellites and listening devices and whatever other exotic technologies they may have on the Iraqis and scattered Al Qaeda members.
And after analyzing everything, they conclude there are no ties between Al Qaeda and Saddam Hussein.
This is a setback. You can't give the real reasons for an Iraq invasion -- oil, political gain, and revenge for daddy's assasination attempt. You just HAVE TO HAVE evidence linking OBL to SH.
So what do you do?
Well, given that this admininstration is the most intensely political in the history of our fair nation, you simply follow from the Rove game plan -- you create a new "intelligence agency" and fill it with political appointees who will confirm whatever lies the administration spews.
The Pentagon's civilian leadership has ordered a small team of defense officials outside regular intelligence channels to focus on unearthing details about Iraqi ties with al Qaeda and other terrorist networks, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said yesterday.So to clarify, the CIA (and other intelligence agencies) gather the information. They then interpret it. But if the administration doesn't like that interpretation (e.g. Hussein and OBL hate each other and would never work together), the new agency can take a look at the info and arrive at a more "acceptable" conclusion (or in Rumsfeld's words, "assist policymakers in assessing the intelligence they receive").
The gods save us from this cabal.Posted October 25, 2002 08:17 AM | Comments (2)