The Blamestorming Begins
George Tenet, Director of the CIA made a courageous speech today, defending the intelligence produced by the CIA and then used by the Whitehouse to justify the invasion of Iraq. Courageous in that he chose to use an address at his Alma mater Georgetown university to explain his agency. There he faced a highly professional, experienced set of political journalists that asked probing questions.
George Tenet, Director of the CIA made a courageous speech today, defending the intelligence produced by the CIA and then used by the Whitehouse to justify the invasion of Iraq. Courageous in that he chose to use an address at his Alma mater Georgetown university to explain his agency. There he faced a highly professional, experienced set of political journalists that asked probing questions.
Not. He spoke to a set of kids. The only questions allowed to be asked (sanctioned and chosen by the Dean of the Foreign Service School, Robert Gallucci) were by students, many identifying themselves as freshmen, with demonstrably little or no experience of the machinations of the CIA or its history.
Even in that climate (being savaged by lambs), he still received two worthwhile questions – the first being the role of the Office of Special Plans, a secretive Pentagon department set up by Douglas Feith, a close associate of Cheney, deliberately to channel certain intelligence from the CIA and DIA. These revelations come from Lieutenant Colonel Karen Kwiatkowski (hear her in interview) who resigned in protest at this misuse of intelligence (see also the documentary Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War).
Tenet made the claim that he reported intelligence to the President six days a week, adroitly covering his backside. Not addressed was the charge that the OSP was used to cherry-pick the intelligence in direct meetings where Cheney was present. So we have two channels of intelligence reaching the Whitehouse, the sanctioned channel, Tenets briefings of the President, and Cheney’s behind the scenes selections and “sexing-up” (using the term used by the late Dr. David Kelly) of less scrutinised intelligence drawn from a wider range of sources (CIA, DIA and other Pentagon departments).
If President Bush is allowed to hand pick the “independent” investigation committee into the intelligence failures, we can be assured the terms of the committee will be set to not investigate the OSP, Cheney’s visits and exactly which sources (CIA briefings vs. OSP derived intelligence) were used when putting together the 2003 State of the Union address, Colin Powells U.N address and other statements. In short, the intelligence poured into the Whitehouse from multiple channels and was mixed behind closed doors where it will stay hidden from scrutiny on the claim of Executive security.
The second probing question by another student concerned the involvement of the son of the Malaysian Prime minister in a nuclear technology black market. Tenet swatted off the question which specifically asked whether the head of Georgetown university had shares in the implicated Malaysian company!
CNN ran the broadcast live (CSPAN has it on RealPlayer format), yet there has been only little commentary so far. It will be interesting to see if major papers (i.e Washington Post, NYT) raise the questions. Perhaps I am being too damning, perhaps deeper questions will be asked by the corporate media? Not.