It is partly a campaign document, a product of the Republican strategy
of scaring Americans into allowing the G.O.P. to retain control of
Congress this fall.
It fits with the fearmongering we’ve heard lately -- like President
Bush’s attempt the other day to link the Iraq war to the 9/11
terrorist attacks.
From a New York Times editorial, 8/25/06:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/25/opinion/25fri1.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin
Wanted: Scarier Intelligence
The last thing this country needs as it heads into this election
season is another attempt to push the intelligence agencies to hype
their conclusions about the threat from a Middle Eastern state.
That’s what happened in 2002, when the administration engineered a
deeply flawed document on Iraq that reshaped intelligence to fit
President Bush’s policy.
And history appeared to be repeating itself this week, when the
chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Peter Hoekstra of
Michigan, released a garishly illustrated and luridly written document
that is ostensibly dedicated to "helping the American people
understand" that Iran’s fundamentalist regime and its nuclear
ambitions pose a strategic threat to the United States.
It’s hard to imagine that Mr. Hoekstra believes there is someone left
in this country who does not already know that.
But the report obviously has different aims.
It is partly a campaign document, a product of the Republican strategy
of scaring Americans into allowing the G.O.P. to retain control of
Congress this fall.
It fits with the fearmongering we’ve heard lately -- like President
Bush’s attempt the other day to link the Iraq war to the 9/11
terrorist attacks.
But even more worrisome, the report seems intended to signal the
intelligence community that the Republican leadership wants scarier
assessments that would justify a more confrontational approach to
Tehran.
It was not the work of any intelligence agency, or the full
intelligence panel, or even the subcommittee that ostensibly drafted
it.
The Washington Post reported that it was written primarily by a former
C.I.A. official known for his view that the assessments on Iran are
not sufficiently dire.
While the report contains no new information, it does dish up
dire-sounding innuendo, mostly to leave the impression that Iran is
developing nuclear weapons a lot faster than intelligence agencies
have the guts to admit.
It also tosses in a few conspiracy theories, like the unsupported
assertion that Iran engineered the warfare between Israel and
Hezbollah.
And it complains that America’s spy agencies are too cautious, that
they "shy away from provocative conclusions."
Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker, put it even more bluntly in
explaining some Republicans’ dissatisfaction with the C.I.A. reporting
on Iran:
"The intelligence community is dedicated to predicting the least
dangerous world possible."
All in all, this is a chilling reminder of what happened when
intelligence analysts told Vice President ***** Cheney they could not
prove that Iraq was building a nuclear weapon or had ties with Al
Qaeda.
He kept asking if they really meant it -- until the C.I.A. took the
hint.
It’s obvious that Iran wants nuclear weapons, has lied about its
program and views America as an enemy.
We enthusiastically agree that the United States needs every scrap of
intelligence it can get on Iran.
But the reason American intelligence is not certain when Iran might
have a nuclear bomb is because the situation is so murky -- not
because the agencies are too wimpy to tell the scary truth.
If the Republicans who control Congress really wanted a full-scale
assessment on the state of Iran’s weapons programs, they would have
asked for one, rather than producing this brochure.
The nation cannot afford to pay the price again for politicians’
bending intelligence or bullying the intelligence agencies to suit
their ideology.
_____________________________________________________
Tell that to the Bush Crime Family. As far as they're concerned, the
scarier the better.
Harry
.
|
