The Blame the CIA Hoax is Working. This Can't Be Happening!

[Stevendsmith]

The evidence shows CLEARLY that the White House ignored the intelligence community's warnings of a weak case for war. Yet the press is echoing the White House line that BushCo is not at fault.

What the hell has happened to our country?

[Wetzelbill]

1. Yeah, but it is not wise to mess with the CIA, I expect

some former agents and analysts and whistleblowers to make some big noise this next year. Lots to get Bush one. WMD, Wilson-Plame. These guys will fight back.

[RobinA]

8. Maybe, But....

everybody said that when Tenet took the blame for the Niger connection being in the SOTU. That's now just one more forgotten episode.

[Wetzelbill]

22. it'll take time, plus timing for the CIA is imperative

Hammering Bush in Fall '04 is much more effective than say in the Summer of '03. From a marketing standpoint you don't sell a product in August. .......Andy Card's words coming out of my mouth. And, to think, I used to be such a nice guy.

Bush faces a tough election year. Lots of scrutiny. Lots of problems to exploit. Unfortunately he has lots of money to spin it with, but by and large, Americans are sick of the guy's bullshit. Right now, he has his psycho base's love but not much else.

[Imajika]

38. Not everybody said that...

"Maybe, But everybody said that when Tenet took the blame for the Niger connection being in the SOTU. That's now just one more forgotten episode."

I didn't say that.

Personally, I think the whole "The CIA is going to go after the Bush Administration" is a bunch of hooey.

The CIA, nor the military, are not going to turn on a Republican administration which is willing to pour huge amounts of money into their respective budgets.

If the CIA is blamed for intelligence failures, the people at the CIA know full well that Bush will propose even more funding. Democrats can never outspend the GOP on military and intelligence issues. If the Democrats propose raising the CIA budget 5%, the Republicans will promise 10%. Same usually goes for the military (though Gore did propose more funding for defense than did Bush). The same thing is basically true with tax cuts, the Democrats are not going to be able to out "tax-cut" the Republicans.

The bottom line, the military and intelligence communities are two of the GOP's biggest priorities. The Republicans don't have to worry much about setting part of the budget aside for social spending, because they really don't believe in that stuff anyway. The people in both the military and intelligence agencies are perfectly aware of this, and the majority of them will typically lean towards the party and candidate which generally promises the bigger budgets, increased salaries and fancy new equipment. Such is life.

The Democrats will never really win away the allegience of the military and intelligence communities from the Republicans - it just ain't gonna happen.

All this talk about the CIA turning on Bush is just a bunch of wishful thinking mixed with delusion. The reason it seemed like everybody here said the CIA would turn on Bush was because DU is like one big echo chamber. Any number of fanciful, yet silly notions get stated which appeal to the hopes and wishes of lots of folks here. Then these ideas get repeated over and over as if they were either a fact or reasonable prediction, when all along the very notion was bogus to begin with.

Imajika

[shooga]

30. Agreed ....

..... Dark CIA boyz make the Sopranos look like old grannies....
..... This will probably backfire.... hang in there.


http://www.fudgereport.net

http://www.fahrenheit911.info

[Fleshdancer]

32. I sure as hell hope so!

I can't believe I'm actually sympathizing with the CIA, but this administration treats the intelligence community like crap.

Even though the Clinton administration, the intelligence community, and possibly other countries warned Bush about the possibility of a big terrorist attack and the danger of OBL, the intelligence community was still blamed. And weren't the airlines also warned about possible hijackings months before 9/11?

And as for WMD's in Iraq...Wilson debunked the whole uranium lie and his intelligence wife got screwed for it. Blitz and Ritter didn't think Iraq had WMD, but because they were UN inspectors, they were pretty much ignored. The "intelligence" Powell took to the UN was embarassing...even Powell didn't use part of it because of how ridiculous it all was: "look, one day there are trucks at this location, another day, there aren't. See, the Iraqi's are moving thier WMD!"
:wtf:

We know this administration was hell bent on invading Iraq long before 9/11 occured and they used flimsy "intelligence" just because they grasped at anything that supported their chickenhawk cause.

Here's what REALLY pisses me off though....Americans don't seem to care. Do we need a big colorful chart with bullet points summarizing all the bullshit for them to read what's going on? Do we have to tack on a half naked woman just to get people to pay attention? I feel like I'm living in a twilight zone. For any DU'ers that lived through Vietman, is this what it was like? My impression of that time was that more people were aware and mad than today. I think the apathy of the American people scare me more than Cheney or Ashcroft does.

[mac56]

2. This tactic has the seeds of its own disaster.

Pissing off the CIA is a tactic that cannot succeed over time.

[stepnw1f]

6. Polls are ok....

But because of many variables such as timing, mood, demographics, and all the non-voters finally voting, I would have to say Bush's numbers are lower.

[Homer12]

3. Maybe for the short term; just keep your ears open...

...for more leaked documents.

Bushco is in a corner on this.

If some americans can't see by now that bushco tries to slime its way out of everything, they can go down with them for all I care.

[Wetzelbill]

15. Right, the strength in this tact will crack over time

There is nowwhere to go but downhill.

[Loonman]

4. CIA won't stand for this

After they told the WH over and over again that the evidnece they're looking for just isn't there.

[Skidmore]

5. I tell you that we need to get it to stick that they have a

sizable share of the blame. That secretiveness and lies and Rummy's little private intelligence gathering group and Cheney's bullying tactics are key to this. Regardless, it was a POLITICAL DECISION they made to go to war.

[Stevendsmith]

7. No Disrespect

but the "don't mess with the CIA" argument is no longer persuasive with me. We've been saying that quite a bit since the Niger hoax and we've gotten nothing. Sorry, but I'm not counting on the CIA to help bring down Bush. I'm too cynical. Can you blame me?

[montanacowboy]

18. You are sooooooooo right!

Don't count on the spooks to come to their own defense. We have seen Tenent take it time and time again - and what happens? Nothing. They will continue to fall on their swords for the misleader - remember what the name of their building is.... the George Bush Center for Intelligence/????????

[desi]

27. We forget that Poppy headed the CIA

and that Woolsey, a Neo-CON, also had a short two year stint there during Clinton. If Tenet were not willing to approve of the "Bush/Neo-CON Doctrine" he would not have been retained. Tenet appeared quite happy to be sitting behind Powell and next to Negroponte during Powell's show and tell at the UNSC selling the world the bogus Bush war.

[FaxBot228]

39. Just another shift change

The CIA has more (deputies) changing positions then a third shift at a 7-11.
As follows:
William H Webster: Apt. by Reagan first then President elect Bush May 26 1987 to Aug 31 1991
Deputies Robert Gates from 5-87 to 3- 89
Richard Kerr: 3-20-89 to the end of Judge Websters tenure
Mr. Kerr served as acting director after Webster until Dr Gates is sworn in as Director 2 months later.
This is just a small sample of who moves around in these offices.
Oh and anyone that says they don't know what the other offices are doing is trying to pull the wool. These people went back and forth between the CIA and the FBI office's it continues to this day.
You simply can't tell me they don't share information thats Bull.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

31. They have been working it already...

Months ago, we had already started to see massive leaking to the print press from the CIA about WH pressure and the agency's attempts to tell the WH the info was flimsy.

After the Plame incident, the leaking only got worse, and we started to see ex-CIA on television condeming what happened.

As the WH continues to put the blame on them, we'll see much, much more.

[grytpype]

9. I posted a diary about this at dailyKos

http://grytpype.dailykos.com/story/2004/1/30/54952/7949

[Stevendsmith]

13. Great Post

I conccur 100% Something has got to give. Or does it?

[grytpype]

17. I read a good comment on Atrios...

... the number of holes in the dike is rapidly exceeding the number of available fingers, and the whole thing is going to give way.

I agree with that, totally. All the evil Bush has done is finally coming back to him.

[HootieMcBoob]

10. David Kay did his job

:puke:

[Postman]

11. I'll tell you why.....

Because in all probability this is probably not the first time intellience was cooked to support an agenda of "regime change", "communist threat" or any other bogus excuse to justify spending the peoples money on what Eisenhower called the military-industrial complex.

If there isn't a boogeyman somewhere, all that money would have to be spent on social programs. That is a no-no when it comes to imperial-capitalism and the alleged "free-enterprise" we like to call socialism for the rich.

[GreenPartyVoter]

12. We can still use it to our advantage

Keep the intel investigation alive and you keep the fire burning under the iraq WMD issue.

The Dems on the Hill aren't going to let this go quietly into the night. Ted Kennedy is already on Bush's case over it.

Contact Repub senators and get them to break the ranks like McCain.

More here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=1068924

[desi]

14. "What the hell has happened to our country?"

Paul Krugman asks the same basic question today.

"Still, the big story isn't about Mr. Bush; it's about what's happening to America. Other presidents would have liked to bully the C.I.A., stonewall investigations and give huge contracts to their friends without oversight. They knew, however, that they couldn't. What has gone wrong with our country that allows this president to get away with such things?"

I emailed him and told him that he needs to look at his profession and the Republican dominated Congress for the answer to his question.


http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/30/opinion/30KRUG.html?th

[Skidmore]

23. Americans love to be distracted by bright and shiny objects...

just dangle a juicy celeb story, obnoxious reality show, or scandalous trial in front of them and they can suitably mollified while blatant thievery and murder takes place in front of them. You won't hear a peep or murmur of dissent from most of the public. They'll only take notice if you are able to change the channel or turn off the electricity.

[SOS]

24. The American Prospect

published an article in the current edition which goes a long way in answering this question. Simply put, we now live in a one party state, where traditional checks and balances are being stripped away.

[info being]

41. Americans are weak and pathetic

One attack on our country, 2 1/2 years ago, and we abandon what makes us who we are. Pathetic chicken-shits.

[K-W]

16. All of thier subterfuges work to some extent

They say something, the media takes its marching orders, people start to repeat it. This will always happen, its happened with much less belevability than this case. We just need to keep up the pressure with all our means.

What happened to our country is the the elites have found new ways to control people and can issue a full assault on liberalism in order to try and put off the inevitable economic bust for just a little bit longer.

[LostInTheMaise]

19. Why not defund the CIA

Will Kerry help to eliminate the CIA after he is sworn in? I know he supported defunding efforts in the past. Maybe as POTUS he can succeed?

[Loonman]

20. Defund the CIA?

Whatever you're smoking, give me some.

[K-W]

25. I suppose we can all dream.

The CIA and the pentagon should both lose massive amounts of money. But an assault on the military industrial complex like that would probably bring about an assasination.

[KansDem]

28. Defund the CIA?

They'll just go into business for themselves. Remember, CIA="Cocaine Into America."

[Aries]

21. "Closed orders and secret societies"

One wonders exactly what Kay meant by this. Was he speaking metaphorically or literally? Maybe it's time to break out those Project Paperclip and MK-ULTRA files.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/28/international/middleeast/28CND-WEAP.html?hp

...Under pointed questioning by both Democrats and Republicans on the Senate panel today, Dr. Kay said an independent review was necessary.

"We've got enough history to understand that closed orders and secret societies, whether they be religious or governmental, are the groups that have the hardest time reforming themselves in the face of failure without outside input," he said.

He told the Senators that an "outside inquiry" would "give yourself and the American people the confidence that you have done it."....

[Warren Stuart]

29. Is Skull and Bones to Blame?

Secret Societies and all that, not for the first time do I wish that Kerry hadn't been a member of that organization.

Now instead of "Clinton did it too," we are going to hear "Well, Kerry belonged to them also."

[Aries]

34. Maybe he knows where the bodies are buried...

and if he does, maybe he will share that information with the rest of us...you think maybe?

http://www.cia-on-campus.org/yale.edu/henwood.html

"...The CIA's Yale is the Yale of secret societies, like the infamous Skull and Bones, whose alumni fill the Agency. As far as I know, these secret societies are unique to Yale. They are housed in large, windowless sepulchers scattered around the Yale campus. Every year, each society taps a dozen juniors to join their upscale fraternity, where they recount their sexual histories, perform strange rituals, and prepare for a life among the ruling classes. (Secret society members living and dead include Dean Acheson, Cyrus Vance, William Sloane Coffin, William F. Buckley, Henry Luce and several Tafts and Whitneys.) Bones is considered the cream of the crop; it allegedly has ties to those staples of conspiracy theorists, Freemasonry and the Illuminati. Members reportedly get $15,000 on selection, and are guaranteed a lifetime of remunerative employment. They even have a secret number 322...All this ritual secrecy would seem hopelessly adolescent if its ethic didn't pervade the highest levels of our society...."

[soothsayer]

26. they'll prolly beef up the cia's budget as a result of this, as payola

and tell the sheeple that they need billions more to improve their intelligence gathering abilities, obviously

it's a win/win for the coverup

[Brotherjohn]

33. Wait until the polls start to roll in after Kay's admissions.

Bush had already lost his poll bounce from capturing Hussein (and surprisingly quickly; some polls even gave him little to no bounce at all).

Of the 50%-55% or so who still rated Bush positively, I'd guess that most of them have been taken aback by the now acknowledged fact that Iraq did NOT have WMDs. Sure, WE knew it. But as for the rank-and-file, they generally just listened to their leader and the media, and the CW was that Iraq at least had SOME WMDs.

But these people are now busy trying to make what is now known, and has been widely reported -- that Iraq did NOT have WMDs -- jibe with all of the repeated assertions by the Bush administration that they DID have them. They also realize that the reason most of them supported the war has now been unequivocally shown to be false. With the Kay and O'Niell revelations coming back-to-back, the American people have now, more than ever, been given reason to believe that the trust they placed in their leader in a time of crisis was misplaced.

Sure, Bush will never lose the core support of his 30%. But for the remaining 20-25% still "on his side", his welcome is beginning to wear mighty thin.

Watch those polls. In the next few weeks, Bush will be polling below 50% in several of them.

[Malva Zebrina]

37. I think so also, although they may never admit it in public

some of them have to be going through some cognisant dissonance at this point. They seem angry also, at least from the call ins I heard this morning and further some will not be able to give up the support of Bush, even if he killed members of his own family--I think many are still fighting and hating "Clinton" and to admit Bush is worse than anything Clinton could have or did do, is anathema and drives them bonkers. They cannot let go of that Clinton hatred, it seems, so they will stubbornly, beyond all reason, support Bush. On a poll, anonymous, they may just betray that loyalty.

[DrBB]

35. Fight back: Factual Ammunition HERE

American Progress has a handy run-down of the whole chronology:

"Neglecting Intelligence, Ignoring Warnings:
A chronology of how the Bush Administration repeatedly and deliberately refused to listen to intelligence agencies that said its case for war was weak"

Here's the link

Spread it far and wide, use it in LTTEs and other discussion boards.

And thanks to DUer Carl21014 for turning this up.

[NoKingGeorge]

36. Wait, I suspect the media are slow readers.

When the OSP starts to appear in print ,maybe the CIA will even have a hand in pointing out the difference between Intelligence Agencys and Special groups, the fight will be joined. (Although I think purging this cabal may come from the deep throats who were Patriotic enough to be worried about those committing Treason in the government.)

[jpak]

40. GOP - the party of personal responsibility

yeah - right

[dansolo]

42. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain (OSP)

n/t