Quote:
Originally posted by dig420
if that's so, then why is drudgereport, salon and EVERY MAJOR NEWSPAPER in the country carrying news of the hatred that the intel community has for the Bush administration for trying to blame them for bad intel? They told the truth all along, and when it didn't fit the agenda it was ignored.
Have you ever heard of Valerie Plame?
|
Every news media that I am aware of all have political bias and/or the need to distort information for the bottom line. I take them all with a grain of salt.
David Kay stated today that within the intel agencies...there is still disagreement about the intel assessments made prior to the invasion...but he personally believes that the "consensus" among the analyst's is that they were wrong. In case you missed it...but you probably just chose to ignore it...David Kay stated today that the British...French and German intel was in basic agreement with US intel prior to the invasion. In other words all of the intel agencies were wrong in their "consensus" assessments. That stated...David Kay also stated that intel analyst's usually are never in total agreement. He further stated that the political leaders must assess the intel analyst's assessments...and make decisions based upon their own assessment.
He pointed out...the intel provided to President Kennedy during the Cuban Missile crisis was that there were no nuclear warheads in Cuba. The President chose to ignore the intel and took the worse case position that there were in fact nuclear warheads in Cuba...and worked his strategy based upon that.
This is the option that every President has...and that is to assess the intel provided to him...and accept it at face value...or worse case it...or the opposite. Decisions have to be made...and I personally opt for a worse case scenario.