Posted on 07/08/2004 8:14:00 PM PDT by Shermy
Pincus has an article up now at the Wash Post. He doesn't harp on the Prague issue, and is fair enough to Cheney, IMO.
In the fullness of time it has become clear that one of Dubya's biggest mistakes was in keeping this Clinton holdover on the job. He's been nothing but trouble for this administration. Frankly, I agree with the vice president that there was a meeting between Atta and the Iraqi official.
My take on this is that it is nothing more than Tenet trying to make himself look less incompetent by papering over at least this, the most glaring of all the intelligence failures during his tenure.
The CIA completely missed this and other obvious links, not merely between Saddam's Iraq and al Qaida, but to the very individuals that later carried out the attacks on 9-11.
Though Cheney in 2001 once said he thought it occured, at all other times he said he was effectively unsure. Just like Tenet said, until recently.
I myself was doubtful, but the extent of the disinformation denying the meeting was suspicious. The kicker for me was when Vaclav Havel's disclaimer of the meeting, reported in the NYTimes, ws shown to be a fabrication. I think the disinformers took a step too far in putting a name to the disinformation, it was too easily debunked.
Big Time.
The New York Times makes me ill. Thinking they're so clever, trying to paint a picture of conflict where none exists.
As to Tenet's statement, I'll wait to see the whole thing. I am dismayed but not surprised at the machinations and spinning--all coming from the left, as usual.
They are beneath contempt, but must be countered.
Yes, I wonder who they got to "hatch" that one? The same "Hatch" who framed Hatfill, perhaps?
"I wish the CIA would at least attempt a serious argument for their position."
In the absence of which, one is tempted to believe they don't have one...
I don't pretend to know exactly why the CIA is covering up -- whether it's for rank political purposes or to mask their own blundering incompetence. But I am now convinced they're desperate to sweep something under the rug. And it has nothing to do with "national security".
The Langley stables could stand a good shoveling out...
Tenet let Bush twist in the wind on the "16 words" and Niger, when as we know now the whole thing was a fake controversy. What would it have cost Tenet to speak up in the middle of that, to support the president when we now know that Bush understated the truth by an order of magnitude?
What Tenet did in remaining silent was to expose himself as politically compromised. Dishonest. Small.
I.e., a liberal.
Spinsanity.com (or is it .orgh ?) has a piece about the Iraqi-Atta connection.
It's looking more and more like some people at the CIA bet their careers on the "Saddam (secular) wouldn't work with AlQaeda (religious fanatic)" position. They ignore evidence that doesn't fit the hypothesis and cling to it all the more tightly. We need to erase that kind of stultifying culture.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.