Ex-cia Official Says Bush 'cherry-picked'

Welcome to Campfire Soapbox. We hope you enjoy your visit.

You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.

Join our community!

If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Pages:
1
2
…
5

Ex-cia Official Says Bush 'cherry-picked'; intelligence
Tweet Topic Started: Feb 10 2006, 06:25 PM (1,093 Views)
Colo_Crawdad	Feb 10 2006, 06:25 PM Post #1
Lowell Posts: 1,808 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: June 21, 2004	Quote: WASHINGTON (AFP) - A former CIA official who oversaw US intelligence on the Middle East accused the US administration of "cherry-picking" intelligence on Iraq to justify a decision it had already reached to go to war. Paul Pillar, who was the national intelligence officer for the Near East and South Asia from 2000 to 2005, delivered the scathing criticism in a lengthy article in the latest issue of the journal Foreign Affairs. "The administration used intelligence not to inform decision-making, but to justify a decision already made," he wrote. The Bush administration, Pillar wrote, "repeatedly called on the intelligence community to uncover more material that would contribute to the case for war," including information on the "supposed connection" between Hussein and Al-Qaeda, which analysts had discounted. "The greatest discrepancy between the administration's public statements and the intelligence community's judgments concerned not WMD ... but the relationship between Saddam and Al-Qaeda," he wrote. "The intelligence community never offered any analysis that supported the notion of an alliance between Saddam and Al-Qaeda. More included in SOURCE I wonder how long it will take the Right to begin their usual character assassination of Mr. Pillar? Let's see, do you suppose he is a "leftist," a "disgruntled former employee," just "looking to make money," or maybe an "American hater," or just a "Bush hater?"
	"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US." --- Pogo


silverfox	Feb 10 2006, 07:23 PM Post #2
Member Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #227 Joined: December 11, 2005	A lot of people are making wild eye accusations these days--- did the CIA official you describe have an agenda-- like anti-Bush? or did you bother not to find out because it fit your beliefs? Often the details behind the person making any statements these days are never evaluated and reported---



5thwheeler	Feb 10 2006, 07:25 PM Post #3
Get the message? Posts: 1,018 Group: Members Member #161 Joined: March 16, 2005	I guess i'll have to get out my old puke bucket and turn on Fox. Oh how the though sickens me...
	History 101: When a popular myth is believed to be factual, teach the myth. Its not possible to underestimate the intelligence of the voting populous. Hummm, after seeing the results of the 06 election, I may have to modify my perception of the voting populous and refer to them as "Late Bloomers".


cruiser	Feb 10 2006, 07:32 PM Post #4
Member Posts: 950 Group: Members Member #141 Joined: January 2, 2005	Colo, you were right on with your statement below. It sure did not take very long to smoke them out of the woods. I wonder how long it will take the Right to begin their usual character assassination of Mr. Pillar? Let's see, do you suppose he is a "leftist," a "disgruntled former employee," just "looking to make money," or maybe an "American hater," or just a "Bush hater?"
	Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from a religious conviction. Blaise Pascal (1623 - 1662)


cmoehle	Feb 10 2006, 07:36 PM Post #5
Chris - San Antonio TX Posts: 36,959 Group: Members Member #1 Joined: June 6, 2004	silverfox Feb 10 2006, 08:23 PM A lot of people are making wild eye accusations these days--- did the CIA official you describe have an agenda-- like anti-Bush? or did you bother not to find out because it fit your beliefs? Often the details behind the person making any statements these days are never evaluated and reported--- Are you saying you did find out? Or is what you say true of your statement as well?
	Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater


silverfox	Feb 10 2006, 07:48 PM Post #6
Member Posts: 252 Group: Members Member #227 Joined: December 11, 2005	cmoehle Feb 10 2006, 07:36 PM silverfox Feb 10 2006, 08:23 PM A lot of people are making wild eye accusations these days--- did the CIA official you describe have an agenda-- like anti-Bush? or did you bother not to find out because it fit your beliefs? Often the details behind the person making any statements these days are never evaluated and reported--- Are you saying you did find out? Or is what you say true of your statement as well? Yes i did find out, and I recommend that all find out so they know if bias is in play or not. I see many on this forum are quick to jump on any garbage that supports their belief system.



cmoehle	Feb 10 2006, 07:59 PM Post #7
Chris - San Antonio TX Posts: 36,959 Group: Members Member #1 Joined: June 6, 2004	silverfox Feb 10 2006, 08:48 PM cmoehle Feb 10 2006, 07:36 PM silverfox Feb 10 2006, 08:23 PM A lot of people are making wild eye accusations these days--- did the CIA official you describe have an agenda-- like anti-Bush? or did you bother not to find out because it fit your beliefs? Often the details behind the person making any statements these days are never evaluated and reported--- Are you saying you did find out? Or is what you say true of your statement as well? Yes i did find out, and I recommend that all find out so they know if bias is in play or not. I see many on this forum are quick to jump on any garbage that supports their belief system. So you found out what you wanted to hear. Like you say, lots of people doing that. I guess that's what I wanted to hear.
	Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater


Colo_Crawdad	Feb 10 2006, 08:14 PM Post #8
Lowell Posts: 1,808 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: June 21, 2004	Could it be that Pillar"s "agenda" was simply truth? That would surely be out of place with the current crowd in Washington wouldn't it.
	"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US." --- Pogo


cmoehle	Feb 10 2006, 08:37 PM Post #9
Chris - San Antonio TX Posts: 36,959 Group: Members Member #1 Joined: June 6, 2004	But even an honest man's word is insufficient. Need corraboration. And the statement is a conclusion drawn from facts. OK, the Bush Administration sought evidence of a Saddam/Al Quida link. It would have been imporant to know that, had it been true. That is a perfectly reasonable explanation.
	Politics is the art of achieving the maximum amount of freedom for individuals that is consistent with the maintenance of social order. --Barry Goldwater


justme	Feb 10 2006, 10:15 PM Post #10
Member Posts: 434 Group: Members Member #55 Joined: July 18, 2004	Colo_Crawdad Feb 10 2006, 09:14 PM Could it be that Pillar"s "agenda" was simply truth? That would surely be out of place with the current crowd in Washington wouldn't it. Could it be that Pillar has an agenda? He did write a book a while back explaining that our view of Terrorist "is simplistic" and were not a real threat. Of course that was before 9/11. To me he has no credibility and the media should point out who this so called un-biased CIA agent really is and should do a better job defining him. So don't give me the BS that this is a "simple truth" because it is a simple agenda which is a lack of credibilty.



bikemanb	Feb 10 2006, 11:06 PM Post #11
Liberal Conservative Posts: 3,259 Group: Members Member #4 Joined: June 6, 2004	I don't know who is more irrational the Bush "haters" that can see no good in the man or the Bush "lovers" that can't see his short comings. :spin:
	Bill, Rita and Chloe the Terror Cat For having lived long, I have experienced many instances of being obliged, by better information or fuller consideration, to change opinions, even on important subjects, which I once thought right but found to be otherwise. Benjamin Franklin


Colo_Crawdad	Feb 11 2006, 07:15 AM Post #12
Lowell Posts: 1,808 Group: Members Member #15 Joined: June 21, 2004	justme Feb 10 2006, 10:15 PM Colo_Crawdad Feb 10 2006, 09:14 PM Could it be that Pillar"s "agenda" was simply truth?� That would surely be out of place with the current crowd in Washington wouldn't it. Could it be that Pillar has an agenda? He did write a book a while back explaining that our view of Terrorist "is simplistic" and were not a real threat. Of course that was before 9/11. To me he has no credibility and the media should point out who this so called un-biased CIA agent really is and should do a better job defining him. So don't give me the BS that this is a "simple truth" because it is a simple agenda which is a lack of credibilty. I asked how long before the "right" began the smear campaign to attack his credibility through character assassination. Here is just one example. BTW, what he really said in that earlier article was not that the terrorists were no threat, but rather that we can never "win" a war on terror, what we can do is contain them. My final comment this morning is that folks like justme might want to examine their own "agendas."
	"WE HAVE MET THE ENEMY AND HE IS US." --- Pogo


Photobitstream	Feb 11 2006, 08:56 AM Post #13
Darron - Austin, TX Posts: 1,025 Group: Members Member #229 Joined: December 15, 2005	bikemanb Feb 10 2006, 11:06 PM I don't know who is more irrational the Bush "haters" that can see no good in the man or the Bush "lovers" that can't see his short comings. :spin: I'd say the Bush haters have more evidence to back their position than the Bush apologists have for theirs. How many former CIA and administration officials have to speak up before the people walking the middle of the road open their eyes to this administration's sins? "The only things in the middle of the road are politicians and dead armadillos." Jim Hightower
	"Their chief weapon, however, was their capacity to astonish. Nobody else could believe, until it was much too late, just how heartless and greedy they actually were." Kurt Vonnegut, Breakfast of Champions


justme	Feb 11 2006, 09:06 AM Post #14
Member Posts: 434 Group: Members Member #55 Joined: July 18, 2004	Colo_Crawdad Feb 11 2006, 08:15 AM BTW, what he really said in that earlier article was not that the terrorists were no threat, but rather that we can never "win" a war on terror, what we can do is contain them. My final comment this morning is that folks like justme might want to examine their own "agendas." So every one who disagrees with you are right wingers? Pillar has an opinion that the war can not be won-- some in the government believe that it can and must be won, but will take some time and the time spent would be worth it. My agenda is nothing more than determine what is real and what is not. His view of terrorism was summed up in an article he wrote for Security Management on line in May 2001, called �Is the Terrorist Threat Misunderstood?,� which argues that most terrorist acts are nickel and dime affairs: Terrorism, especially anti-American terrorism, is here to stay. Paul Pillar has a career interest and preference for negotiations as the way to solve conflicts. From his earliest book, he focused on situations where the outcome was not victory. Time and again, he has said that military solutions are not solutions. With regard to Iraq, whether it goes well or poorly, it goes poorly � if terrorism is the question. Clearly Mr. Pillar is not on board with George Bush�s fundamental premises in the Global War on Terror, so it should be no surprise that he is having secret meetings around the country criticizing US policy. Why did this fellow have a job at the CIA? I would think that we would want to win the war on terror rather than face the threat forever Pillar believes we are doomed to do so unless we follow HIS plan. You and many of the left wing agenda driven media seem to pick and choose you sources, while not identifying/defining them to justify YOUR opinion, but unfortunately others have different intellectual opinions--- so please stop the name calling.



justme	Feb 11 2006, 09:21 AM Post #15
Member Posts: 434 Group: Members Member #55 Joined: July 18, 2004	Photobitstream Feb 11 2006, 09:56 AM I'd say the Bush haters have more evidence to back their position than the Bush apologists have for theirs. How many former CIA and administration officials have to speak up before the people walking the middle of the road open their eyes to this administration's sins? That is not true unless the only source of information is from the media who seems to pick and chose sources that support an agenda. That is why voices need to be raised to demand that the media define their sources. The media is doing democracy a disservice by not doing so. How many times do you hear anonymous sources as another example. The simple fact is that the bush haters are more vocal IMHO

Create your own social network with a free forum. Learn More · Register for Free
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Soapbox · Next Topic »

Pages:
1
2
…
5