> all Tenet fault.
> http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040709/D83NB0AO0.html
The article you linked is a bit sparse on details. I don't doubt that
the CIA did indeed bungle things, and Tenet's resignation was probably
appropriate. The explanation of the findings that it was all the CIA
and Tenet's fault is coming from the chair of the committee,
Republican Senator Pat Roberts. That's fine. He's the chair of the
committee and he _should_ be the one to explain it. What's interesting
though is that democrats on the committee have said there is evidence
that the CIA was being pressured to dig up dirt on Saddam.
In the article you linked, the side bar mentions:
" Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., during a news conference on Capitol Hill
Thursday, July 8, 2004, holds a copy of a CIA report which finds "no
credible information" of a meeting between Iraqi intelligence
officials and Mohammed Atta, one of the Sept. 11 highjackers. Levin
said the finding "demonstrates that it was the Administration, not the
CIA, that exagerated the relations between Saddam Hussein and
al-Qaida.""
Also, in another article about the findings, "It faulted Tenet for not
personally reviewing Bush's 2003 State of the Union address, which
contained since-discredited references to Iraq's attempts to purchase
uranium in Africa."
http://www.channel3000.com/news/3510389/detail.html
However, if you've been following this whole thing closely you would
know that they did indeed remove that from the President's speech
saying that it could not be substantiated and that the President chose
to put it back in.
Like I said, I don't doubt that the CIA messed up. But there's enough
dissension about the compilation of facts in the report that I have to
give both side's explanation of it a jaundiced view.
-Kevin
p.s. I do want to give props to Larry who used exactly the term "group
think" in describing the WMD allegations before the war.
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
