RUMSFLED "FLIP FLOPS" ON THE VALIDITY OF INTELLIGENCE
By now most people are aware of the leaking of a U.S. Intelligence report concerning terrorism in Iraq. In a nutshell, it concludes that the Iraq War has succeeded in creating MORE terrorists and anti-American sentiment in the Muslim world. Many people wondered how Bush Administration officials would react to such news. After all, they've sold us on the whole "fighting terrorists over there, so we don't have to fight them here" argument ever since the whole "WMD rationale" fell apart. Does the phrase "Winning the War on Terror" sound familar to anyone?
Which brings us to Donald Rumsfeld's official reply. In an article written by Reuters, Rummy decides to (big surprise) cover his eyes and scream, "I don't see you!" to the information in the report.
From the article:
and...
Here's some quotes from Rummy in the wake of our invasion of Iraq. See if you can identify his even-handed view of U.S. Intelligence:
At what point can we run these guys out of town on a rail?
Which brings us to Donald Rumsfeld's official reply. In an article written by Reuters, Rummy decides to (big surprise) cover his eyes and scream, "I don't see you!" to the information in the report.
From the article:Asked about a U.S. intelligence report that concluded the Iraq war had spread Islamic radicalism, Rumsfeld said intelligence could be faulty and sometimes "flat wrong."
and...
"Are more terrorists being created in the world? We don't know," he said.Which would be fine if Rumsfeld and others in the Bush Administration were ALWAYS so skeptical of such intelligence.
Here's some quotes from Rummy in the wake of our invasion of Iraq. See if you can identify his even-handed view of U.S. Intelligence:
"We have seen intelligence over many months that they have chemical and biological weapons, and that they have dispersed them and that they're weaponized and that, in one case at least, the command and control arrangements have been established."The equasion is pretty easy to figure out here. If the intelligence "fits" with what the guys want to do, it's SOLID. However if it refutes their empty rhetoric, it's FLAT WRONG.
"the area... that coalition forces control... happens not to be the area where weapons of mass destruction were dispersed. We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat."
At what point can we run these guys out of town on a rail?


0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home