Senate "Report" White-Washes "Bad
Intelligence" Story for the White House; Former
CIA Director Tenet Set Up as "Patsy" as Media Ignore Real
Culprits.
By Mike Hersh
- OpEdNews.Com
The Senate Intelligence Committee "Report" that
white-washes the "Bad Intelligence" story for the White House
is quickly becoming the only accepted version of reality. The media rush
to rubberstamp this story -
"Report: War Rationale Based on CIA Error" - while ignoring
the Office of Special Plans and its role producing "bad
intelligence."
What error did the CIA make? The AP tells us, "In the
unanimously approved report, senators concluded that the CIA kept key
information from its own and other agencies' analysts; engaged in
"group think" by failing to challenge the assumption that Iraq
had weapons of mass destruction; and allowed President Bush and
Secretary of State Colin Powell to make false statements."
From this, it seems the CIA schemed to trick the Bush and his
administration into misleading Americans and the world in order to
scare us into attacking Iraq. Is this true? Of course not. Bush, Cheney
and other top Bush officials planned to attack Iraq early in 2001, long
before the 9/11 attacks. Before we debunk this facile cover story, let's
consider the other key Senate Intelligence verdict, from the same AP
story:
Following release of the 511-page review Friday, the panel's top
Democrat, West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, said three-quarters of
senators would not have voted to authorize the invasion if they had
known how weak the intelligence was." See:
"Report blames 'group think' for CIA failures on Iraq,"
Associated Press, July 10, 2004:
Bush, Cheney and others evaluated the "bad" intelligence,
which supposedly came from the CIA. Then, these two and the entire Bush
national security rushed us in to war. Didn't the Bush team seek a
second opinion or even a third before claiming they knew Iraq had
weapons of mass destruction? Of course they did. But they ignored the
warnings from the CIA and others.
They ignored Joe Wilson - the former Bush I Ambassador to Iraq - who
told them their "intelligence" claiming Iraq sought
"yellow cake"
uranium from Africa was wrong. Even Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice
concluded Iraq represented no threat to the USA. How is the CIA to blame
for this or for buffaloing a purportedly reluctant warrior Bush and the
ostensibly peaceful Cheney into this rash and tragic mistake? The CIA
isn't responsible, so who is? Consider this report from Mother Jones
magazine:
The reports, virtually all false, of Iraqi weapons and terrorism ties
emanated from an apparatus that began to gestate almost as soon as the
Bush administration took power. In the very first meeting of the Bush
national-security team, one day after President Bush took the oath of
office in January 2001, the issue of invading Iraq was raised, according
to one of the participants in the meeting -- and officials all the way
down the line started to get the message, long before 9/11.
Indeed, the Bush team at the Pentagon hadn't even been formally
installed before Paul Wolfowitz, the deputy secretary of Defense, and
Douglas J. Feith, undersecretary of Defense for policy, began putting
together what would become the vanguard for regime change in Iraq."
See: "The Lie Factory" by Robert Dreyfuss and Jason Vest in
which "Late last year, a special Mother Jones investigation
detailed how, only weeks after 9/11, the Bush administration set up a
secret Pentagon unit to create the case for invading Iraq [for] the
inside story of how they pushed disinformation and bogus intelligence
and led the nation to war. Mother
Jones magazine, Jan. - Feb. 2004 -
The entire public-relations basis for Bush's rush to war came not
from the CIA, but from a hand-picked flock of Neo-Con chicken hawks. If
the media were left-leaning, they would have picked over the Bush/Cheney
rationale leading up to war rather than stepped into formation to
cheerlead for war.
Now that even the Republicans on the Senate Intelligence Committee
agree Bush rushed to war without justification, this information should
get at least as much attention as Monica Lewinsky. It didn't and still
hasn't.
On the day the Senate Intelligence Committee issued a white-washed
"report" blaming the CIA for "bad intelligence," the
media leave unmentioned the "Office of Special Plans."
The mass media won't tell us about this Pentagon panel established
specifically to concoct marketable bases for an Iraq War Bush/Cheney
planned long before 9/11/01. The OSP bypassed the CIA and helped plot
the war in earnest while the WTC wreckage still smoldered.
The Bush administration rushed into war killing nearly 1000 Americans
in uniform (and counting), wounding 1000s more (and counting), costing
100s of $BILLIONS (again, and counting) based on their own made-to-order
"intelligence" not on any "bad intelligence" from
others. This is not just according to Mother Jones or the (majority
Republican) Senate Intelligence Committee. Bush's Secretary of State
Colin Powell, the same once-trusted official designated to make the
fabricated case to the UN and the world, admitted information he used
was "inaccurate."
This is one of the stories of the century. Yet all of the networks -
broadcast and cable news alike - ignore the real culprits. Why would a
"liberal media" help the Bush team place all blame on the
outgoing CIA Director and not even mention the OSP? It's not like no one
reported on the OSP. In addition to Mother Jones, Seymour Hersh (no
relation) reported about this in-house White House "bad
intelligence" factory in
detail:
[A]ccording to former and present Bush Administration officials,
their operation, which was conceived by Paul Wolfowitz, the Deputy
Secretary of Defense, has brought about a crucial change of direction in
the American intelligence community.
These advisers and analysts, who began their work in the days after
September 11, 2001, have produced a skein of intelligence reviews that
have helped to shape public opinion and American policy toward Iraq.
They relied on data gathered by other intelligence agencies and also
on information provided by the Iraqi National Congress, or I.N.C., the
exile group headed by Ahmad Chalabi.
By last fall, the operation rivaled both the C.I.A. and the
Pentagon's own Defense Intelligence Agency, the D.I.A., as President
Bush's main source of intelligence regarding Iraq's possible possession
of weapons of mass destruction and connection with Al Qaeda.
As of last week, no such weapons had been found. And although many
people, within the Administration and outside it, profess confidence
that something will turn up, the integrity of much of that intelligence
is now in question. See:
"SELECTIVE INTELLIGENCE" by SEYMOUR M. HERSH, Donald
Rumsfeld has his own special sources. Are they reliable? The New Yorker
Magazine, 2003-05-12,
.
Yes, "experienced expert" Richard Cheney and all the other
top Bush national security officials relied on Ahmad Chalabi for
"intelligence."
The same convicted felon Chalabi (Jordanian law) currently suspected
of spying against America for Iran. Bush/Cheney not only undermine our
safety by "outing" our own agents, they actually pay enemy
agents and invite them to the White House to undermine our national
security!
The Bush team welcomed suspected spy Chalabi into their inner circle
and shared with him our most sensitive national security secrets. Not
because he offered any real or plausible information about Iraq. Just
because he eagerly told the Bush team the lies they wanted to hear and
needed to scare America into war. Cheney and the rest even sought to
install Chalabi as the new President of Iraq! And they brag of their
superior judgment and experience?
Who in the corporate media reports this "intelligence
failure" which had nothing to do with the CIA and everything to do
with lacking leadership by the Bush White House, Pentagon and State
Department? No one. How is any of this the CIA's fault? This is the
fault of Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, and Rumsfeld - the leaders
entrusted with making sound, valid decisions and who knew or should have
known the difference between "intelligence" - which can be
nothing more than rumor - and evidence.
Top Bush officials rejected sound evidence and advice that did not
fit their required template by supporting their rush to war against
Iraq. As Richard Clarke testified under oath, he told Bush and Rumsfeld
where to attack the al Qaeda enemies who attacked us, but they were
intent on attacking Iraq.
Even if the CIA intelligence reports contained errors - and this
isn't yet certain - the men and women Bush entrusted to keep us safe did
not make sound or sensible decisions. Their prejudice, failure and
ambition exacerbated any intelligence errors. Worst of all, and they
lied when they assured us they knew exactly where Iraqi weapons of mass
destruction were when they knew nothing of the kind.
Bush, Cheney, Rice, Powell, and Rumsfeld all lied to us about what
they knew as opposed to what they suspected. It worked well at first as
part of Karl Rove's public relations blitz to help Republicans win seats
in Congress. Then the invasion began and Americans started dying. 100s
of our troops died due to Bush/Cheney lies and errors. Americans are
still dying and top Bush/Cheney officials are still lying. Where is the
accountability? Nowhere. Not from the Congress, the 9/11 Commission or
the mass media.
It's no mystery how all this happened. Former Bush Treasury Secretary
Paul O'Neill confirms the Bush administration planned to attack Iraq
long before 9/11/01. Greg Palast uncovered evidence of detailed plans to
seize and sell Iraqi assets to Washington insiders and Bush campaign
contributors drafted mere weeks after Bush's tainted inauguration.
All these plans were in the works, and Former Bush Anti-Terror Czar
Richard Clarke testified under oath that Bush, Rumsfeld and others
pressed him to blame Iraq and Saddam for the 9/11 attacks even though
Clarke told them repeatedly al Qaeda was to blame. So Bush fired Clarke,
made a half-hearted stab at Osama bin Laden with 11,000 troops in
Afghanistan, and sent nearly 200,000 American to kill and die in Iraq.
This is especially damning: "According to the Pentagon adviser,
Special Plans was created in order to find evidence of what Wolfowitz
and his boss, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, believed to be true -
that Saddam Hussein had close ties to Al Qaeda, and that Iraq had an
enormous arsenal of chemical, biological, and possibly even nuclear
weapons that threatened the region and, potentially, the United
States." According to the Senate Committee, none of that was true.
Again see: "SELECTIVE
INTELLIGENCE"
Unfortunately the Senate Committee chose to blame the CIA and ignore
the Bush administration's hand-picked intelligence mini-agency, the
Office of Special Plans' active participation in this willful deception
- at least until after the November 2 election. How convenient. Now
reconsider the Senate "report" and the eager beaver media
cover-up in lieu of real coverage.
Bush and most of his top-level national security team are guilty of
manufacturing lies about Iraqi nuclear and other weapons programs to
frighten Americans into backing his war. Bush himself certified
dishonest "intelligence" under oath in his presentation to the
Congress.
This remains largely unreported, left to small magazines and
muckraking books. Not even Michael Moore's Fahrenheit 9-11 mentioned
these facts, and of course they have never seen the light of a cathode
ray tube. ABC, CBS, NBC and the "Clinton News Network" just
blithely blame the CIA and sit back as Bush and Cheney question others'
national security credentials.
Anyone who considers the media "liberal" is raving. Bush is
in office now - after getting away with his selection rather than
election and not impeached for high crimes before and after seizing
office - only because the corporate media protect Bush and his corrupt,
inept administration.
All while the mass media prevent the public from knowing the truth as
the press betrays the people.
By Mike Hersh (c) 2004 ( MikeHersh@MikeHersh.com
)
Mike Hersh is a writer, lawyer and activist living in
the Washington, DC area. He graduated from Cornell University and the
Washington College of Law, founded two small businesses, and then became
a full-time writer and activist. He is the webmaster of MikeHersh.com
and several political online communities. Originally published by OpEdNews.com