George Tenet, able Clinton appointee corrupted by the vicious cabal now in the White House, quits for ‘personal reasons’. I sincerely hope that he can now dish the dirt on the Bush Administration’s Big Iraq WMD Lie and contribute to the downfall of this repugnant, semi-literate thug and his sadistic henchmen masquerading as leaders of the free world. I hope that this is the first sign of major cracks appearing in the Bushit administration. Fingers crossed…
[i]"The thousand injuries of Fortunato I had borne as I best could, but when he ventured upon insult, I vowed revenge. You, who so well know the nature of my soul, will not suppose, however, that I gave utterance to a threat. AT LENGTH I would be avenged; this was a point definitively settled – but the very definitiveness with which it was resolved precluded the idea of risk. I must not only punish, but punish with impunity. A wrong is unredressed when retribution overtakes its redresser. It is equally unredressed when the avenger fails to make himself felt as such to him who has done the wrong.
It must be understood that neither by word nor deed had I given Fortunato cause to doubt my good will. I continued as was my wont, to smile in his face, and he did not perceive that my smile NOW was at the thought of his immolation."[/i]
-Edgar Allan Poe, “Cask of Amontillado”, 1846
[quote=“The New York Times”]
President Bush Cites ‘Personal Reasons’ in Announcement
WASHINGTON - CIA Director George Tenet, who weathered storms over intelligence lapses about suspected weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, has resigned, President Bush said Thursday.
“I will miss him,” Bush said. …
nytimes.com/2004/06/03/inter … NE.html?hp[/quote]
As a result of Tenet’s resignation (for who knows what reason; given this administration*, current events in Iraq, and the upcoming US election, the timing seems significantly odd, imo - worthy of EA Poe, even), the opportunity exists during confirmation hearings this summer (for a new CIA director) that American voters will be treated to a transparently thorough - within reason - examination of intelligence failures under Bush.
The intelligence failures that we know about (there are likely many more) include:
[ul]-Intelligence failures regarding 9/11
-WMDs in Iraq
-Prospects for establishing a pro-UN democracy in Iraq quickly
-Ability to accurately describe Iraqi infrastructure in 2001-early 2003 (e.g., Iraqi natural resources ability to pay for the US war effort there}
-The Plame Affair
-Chilabi’s alleged spywork for Iran (US secrets given to Tehran by Chalabi)
-Pakistan’s long-standing nuclear proliferation program
-N. Korea’s rush to acquire nuclear weapons with help from Pakistan[/ul]
Perhaps we will learn if/how the intelligence failures listed above are related to the following trends under Bush:
[ul]-Internecine warfare between DoD and the CIA, including the need for DoD to bypass CIA and establish its own intelligence agency, the OSP, prior to the preemptive attack on Iraq by the US
-Internecine warfare between DoD and the US State Department
-A sharply retarded American ability to develop effective coalitions in Europe
-A widening divergence between the US and its historic allies
-The appearance of a growing dysfunction in US leadership, which has allowed these trends to strengthen rather than abate[/ul]
All of these topics and more may get a thorough vetting, via a confirmation hearing for the next DOI (Director of Intelligence, Tenet’s current title as head of the CIA), before Americans cast reasoned and informed votes in November.
Through Tenet’s resignation the opportunity to signicantly strengthen US national security in the short term by honestly examining the failures and halting the trend progress, via a timely confirmation process, has presented itself. In effect, a softball has been pitched to the Bush administration (or, if you like, a grooved fastball - equally easy to swat given a Republican Senate).
Then again, imo, the smart money says that the CIA will labor under interim direction until December or so - and this enormous and important opportunity (to strengthen US national security in the short term by nominating and confirming a new DOI as soon as possible) will be sacrificed to Bush’s putative reelection.
My bet on the Bush team’s response to Tenet’s resignation: whiff! on that softball.
*-Here’s another example of a “personal reasons” resignation from within Texas culture:
“I am resigning for personal reasons. I want to thank Ken Lay for his understanding of this purely personal decision, and I want to thank the board and all of my colleagues at Enron.”
- Jeffrey Skilling, Enron President and CEO, 14 August 2001
Tenet along with Enron and Worldcom all brought to you during the lovely anything goes vacation from history Clinton years. When were they prosecuted and removed? Bush years. Despite large donations to the Bush campaign, the Bush administration refused to lift a finger to help either Worldcom or Enron so what does this say about the Bush administration and its relations with large greedy corporations? Yup. There is none.
Fido: This isn’t a thread about bush’s relationship with greedy corporations, it’s about George Tenet being the fall guy for a morally corrupt administration. so stay on track here Smithy. Tenet probably quit because he was forced to find the questions to Bush’s fictitious answers. The world waits to see what he will say. Also, I note that Bush has consulted with a private lawyer regarding the outing of a CIA operative. This is much more serious than a prez getting a blowjob. The Bush administration is beginning to fall apart as it increasingly flounders in the web of lies and deceit woven by itself. 'Tis the beginning of the end for the most revolting government the Western World has seen in a long while. Bush is going down…down…down…down…HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!When he’s gone, the civilized world will be able to treat the US with greater respect rather than the derision you have brought upon yourselves.
:raspberry:
In that case, I would rather have your derision than your respect. I have little doubt however that you probably hold Carter in the highest esteem. More power to you. In the meantime, we will continue to do what we think is best. Sorry.
At least Carter contributed REAL peanuts to the world, unlike Bushfuck and and his S&M slaves. But your attempt to digress cuts no ice; are you secretly worried that your political raison d’etre is about to be turfed unceremoniously out of office. As time goes on, Mr. Smith, you are beginning to sound less and less convinced of the lily-white purity of your super-idol (idle?) Groggy W. Bushfuck. You fear that there is much mud about to be slung and that a lot may stick don’t you?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!
…Going Down…
:raspberry:
Au contraire Broon Ale:
Now that we have the upper hand in terms of security again in Iraq, any worries that I had during the twin insurrections are greatly relieved. Don’t hear much from the Sunni Triangle these days huh? I support Bush 100 percent. Tenet made too many mistakes. He should resign. He had several chances and he had successes as well as failures but reform is needed. I am sure that his decision was the right one. Why is it that you are so keen to ferret out “alleged” corruption in the Bush administration but are so silent to the corruption present in your own EU government? Look at Chirac in France and cough cough despite his being our ally Berlusconi in Italy. These problems are in your backyard. No need to look across an ocean to find something to rail against. Get busy, but look East my young man.
Fred, this thread is not about fuckup or corruption in europe, but about the resignation of Tenet and the political fallout that will come from it.
At least try and stay on topic, i appreciate it might be a little difficult for you after the frontal lobotomy that was a pre-requisite to idolising Bush, but i am sure you can at least try.
Some of us are getting tired at your hijacking of threads to suit your own cause.
So sorry Traveller to get in the way of yet another stream of anti-Americanism. Feel free to volley on. Yawn.
This is from the despicable Al Jazeera. Obviously this is concocted, don’t you think so?
english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/ … E4CB0B.htm
CIA: Pentagon lied in run-up to war
CIA director George Tenet has revealed that a senior defence official leaked a false intelligence report before the US-led invasion of Iraq, ignoring agency advice.
Answering questions before the Senate Armed Services Committee on Tuesday, Tenet confirmed that an article in November’s Weekly Standard was written by Undersecretary of Defence for Policy Douglas Feith.
The magazine claimed to have obtained a leaked top-secret document, but the CIA chief admitted the third highest Pentagon official wrote it specifically for publication.
Vice President Dick Cheney then cited the leaked unapproved document as “the best source of information” on cooperation between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.
Question time
Michigan’s Senator Carl Levin asked the CIA director: “Did the CIA agree with the contents of the Feith document?”
“Senator, we did not clear the document. We did not agree with the way the data was characterised in that document.”
“Senator, we did not clear the document. We did not agree with the way the data was characterised in that document”
Tenet added that the Pentagon had also disavowed the Feith document.
He had planned to speak to Vice President Cheney about the matter.
But in an hour of questioning, Tenet said other officials also chose to ignore agency advice.
Embarrassing revelations
Speaking to Senator Edward Kennedy, Tenet said there had been instances when he warned administration officials they were overstating the threat posed by Iraq.
Tenet had personally told the vice president he was wrong to say that two trailers recovered in Iraq were “conclusive evidence” that Hussein had a biological weapons programme.
Nevertheless, Cheney made the assertion in a 22 January 2003 interview with National Public Radio.
Nearly all analysts now believe the “mobile biological-weapons facilities” were in fact used for making hydrogen gas to fill weather balloons.
All valid points Carlyle but do not let this get in the way of the one single most important fact. Everyone agreed that Saddam was NOT compliant with 17 UN resolutions nor the ceasefire agreement. The disagreement was about how to deal with his NON compliance.
I support reform of the CIA. Given the intelligence lapses, there are some serious questions that need to be addressed. If Tenet’s resignation furthers this, then you have a supporter in me. If it is just a political move to deflect heat from the Bush administration then I am less inclined to favor it. Let responsibility fall on whoever’s shoulders it should and that includes Bush in my book. But I do not see that this particular case has been made and given that I supported the Iraq war for a host of other factors, least among them the wmd argument, I am not losing any sleep over this particular issue. What worries me is that we do not have an intelligence service that is up to snuff.
Cut the crap. If that would be so why did the US ever “have to” make a claim that Saddam had WMD? Why did they claim “they knew”, stating quantities, when it was about verification only (same what TM keeps on arguing) or dealing with NON compliance?
And how to deal with Saddam was up to the UNSC, not the US, and it should have been based on the result of the last inspections (that never could be reached because the US got impatient to wait for less than a year).
Rascal:
Are you suggesting that American foreign policy is subject to the UN, your or any other crackpot’s veto? Sorry, we have an independent foreign policy as does Germany (except in World War II of course). We chose to exercise our right to act. You chose not to act. Fair enough. Whether our intelligence people were wrong is irrelevant. Yours were of the same belief. So, perhaps we were wrong. Fine. We will suffer from those mistaken assumptions not you. What is this to you? Are you suffering? paying taxes? sending troops?
If I want to blow my money on cigars and hookers you can admonish me as foolish, but it ultimately is not your right to determine how I spend my money. So what really is your point? That no one can act without UN approval? When Germany submits to such a condition first or any other nation for that matter, say Russia, China or France, then I am sure the US might be willing to consider doing the same. Until then, your real goal is to tie us down to your foreign policy goals and aspirations and sorry but we don’t want to do what is right for Rascal and Germany first. WE have our own citizens and our own interests.
Answer the question: why did the USG claim that Iraq had WMD if in your argument possession of WMD was not an important argument?
Do you really think that the USG would have been able to start this war without those claims?
So the USG was wrong. Big deal. If only the USG believed that Saddam had wmds, then you might have a point. But everyone else did too. The disagreement was over how to deal with that threat. But at the end of the day, what’s it to you? You aren’t being asked to help or deal with the problem so we made what appears to have been a mistake (if you take the argument as being only about wmds and not regime change), I can live with that. Why can’t you?
Comeone Fred, most other nations believed he did because of the same biased intelligence sources. Most of them got their info form the US
Not true Traveller:
All of these nations have independent intelligence agencies that do not rely on the US. In fact, the British which still stand by their claim that Saddam attempted to buy uranium from Niger stand by it. It was from a third country and many believe that country was France so no all of these were arrived at independently. In fact, US intelligence is probably the weakest of all the major intelligence services because of Carter do gooderism back during his administration.
Hans Blix also believed that Saddam was noncompliant and hiding something, though he was very skeptical of American “proof.”
Because it believed that Iraq had WMD.
Whether Iraq had or had not WMD was not an unimportant argument. I hope I have never stated the same.
However, whether Iraq had or had not WMD was a matter for Iraq to prove. It failed to do so. It is thus not relevant that the US or even everyone else was wrong regarding this matter. If we were wrong, Saddam should have proved that we were wrong, as per the conditions he agreed to in the cease fire agreement.
The question I have is why didn’t Saddam prove that he didn’t have WMD if indeed he didn’t?
I don’t know. I agree it would have been a much more difficult sell.
However, if it was known or believed that Iraq did not have WMD, then I think the Bush administration would have spent a lot more time trying to make a stronger alternative case for war. As it was, the WMD issue and Saddam’s failure to comply re the same provided a convenient justification, among other reasons, for invading Iraq.
“Convenience”, however, does NOT equate with “false” or “a lie”. It equates with the notion of expedience.