"The Stovepipe" - Seymour Hersh gets it right again...

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
The Stovepipe by Seymour M. Hersh (The New Yorker, Oct 27).



Amazing account of the conflicts between the Bush administration and the intelligence community.

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 16
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Aren't you in violation of the posting guidelines?
  • Reply 2 of 16
    Quote:

    By early March, 2002, a former White House official told me, it was understood by many in the White House that the President had decided, in his own mind, to go to war. The undeclared decision had a devastating impact on the continuing struggle against terrorism. The Bush Administration took many intelligence operations that had been aimed at Al Qaeda and other terrorist groups around the world and redirected them to the Persian Gulf. Linguists and special operatives were abruptly reassigned, and several ongoing anti-terrorism intelligence programs were curtailed.





    The idiocy and power lust of the administration knows no bounds.
  • Reply 3 of 16
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by keyboardf12

    The idiocy and power lust of the administration knows no bounds.



    Fortunately, we have Seymour Hersh to explain what boundaries the Bush Administration crossed. Does anyone defend the administration here?
  • Reply 4 of 16
    bungebunge Posts: 7,329member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by Scott

    Aren't you in violation of the posting guidelines?



    Not any more.
  • Reply 5 of 16
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Dear lord, Ship of Fools.



    So, in short, Cheney (and Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld) is confident in the intelligence he received because he made sure that that intelligence was totally uncorroborated.



    Notice how the report makes it seem as if this all occurred below and beyond POTUS. One could say, "Gee, the poor fellow has no idea what is being fed to him." Or one could say, "Man, Cheney really is Willie Tyler to Dubya's Lester."





    Screed
  • Reply 6 of 16
    scottscott Posts: 7,431member
    Too many unnamed sources for my taste.
  • Reply 7 of 16
    moogsmoogs Posts: 4,296member
    I don't need sources or a guy named Seymour to convince me there is something decidely wrong with the Bush Administration.
  • Reply 8 of 16
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    It's a bad thing when an administration decides it can do a better job with raw intelligence information than the CIA can. And then they turn around and blame the CIA when that info doesn't say what they want.



    Analyzing intelligence is a difficult and tedious job. And it rarely gives you concrete answers... that's why analysts write long detailed reports about the information.



    This administration misused the public trust. I believe past administrations... both republican and democrat relied on the intelligence community for solid and reliable information so that they could make the right decisions. That's how presidents make wise decisions... this administration had already made up his mind... intelligence be damned.
  • Reply 9 of 16
    I heard the writer on NPR. His sources are ones he has know for dozens of years. He has more cred then all the people of Faux news, and hate radio combined.



    I swear to god. If george bush JUNIOR went up and bit some people on the ass, they would turn around and say the "liberal" planted his lying set of chompers on their tookus.



    And the fools would believe him...



    There is no one here or in any thread defending this admin's actions since they are undefendable.



    And yet. most of these people seem to have more of a problem with a blow job in the white house then all the "president's" men manufacturing a reason for war that has killed hundreds of americans, thousands of civillians, and costs us hundreds of billions in dollars and untold currency with our allies...



    Nope. But what do some people rally against instead?



    The "liberal" media...
  • Reply 10 of 16
    Seymour Hersh is the guy who uncovered the My Lai massacre, Kissinger's secret bombing of Cambodia, the CIA's illegal surveillance of domestic organizations, the CIA's involvement in the overthrowing of Salvador Allende, Israel's stealing of classified US intelligence (via convicted spy Jonathan Pollard) and the US role in Israel's nuclear proliferation.



    Hersh's not very popular with right-wingers (Richard Perle referred to Hersh as "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist" on CNN earlier this year). To be honest, I'm amazed he hasn't met with some kind of 'accident' long before now?
  • Reply 11 of 16
    shawnjshawnj Posts: 6,656member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kneelbeforezod

    Seymour Hersh is the guy who uncovered the My Lai massacre, Kissinger's secret bombing of Cambodia, the CIA's illegal surveillance of domestic organizations, the CIA's involvement in the overthrowing of Salvador Allende, Israel's stealing of classified US intelligence (via convicted spy Jonathan Pollard) and the US role in Israel's nuclear proliferation.



    Hersh's not very popular with right-wingers (Richard Perle referred to Hersh as "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist" on CNN earlier this year). To be honest, I'm amazed he hasn't met with some kind of 'accident' long before now?




    And now... what exactly happened in terms of how the administration's estimates were so wrong. Do you think he'll win another Pulitzer for this?
  • Reply 12 of 16
    chu_bakkachu_bakka Posts: 1,793member
    Just saw this quote over at mediawhores...





    "The people can always be brought to the bidding of their leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."

    - Hermann Goering
  • Reply 13 of 16
    giantgiant Posts: 6,041member
    Quote:

    Originally posted by kneelbeforezod

    Seymour Hersh is the guy who uncovered the My Lai massacre, Kissinger's secret bombing of Cambodia, the CIA's illegal surveillance of domestic organizations, the CIA's involvement in the overthrowing of Salvador Allende, Israel's stealing of classified US intelligence (via convicted spy Jonathan Pollard) and the US role in Israel's nuclear proliferation.



    Hersh's not very popular with right-wingers (Richard Perle referred to Hersh as "the closest thing American journalism has to a terrorist" on CNN earlier this year). To be honest, I'm amazed he hasn't met with some kind of 'accident' long before now?




    And his work for the new yorker for the past couple years has been amazing. Anyone that hasn't read these articles should do a search and spend the next month reading them.
  • Reply 14 of 16
    screedscreed Posts: 1,077member
    Hersh is interviewed about his article:



    Quote:

    [Q:]Do you think that the world is a safer place than it was a year ago?



    [Hersh] No. It?s much more dangerous. There?s no question now. We?ve now drawn a line in the sand, no pun intended, with 1.2 billion Muslims. We?re really disliked. Americans have always been liked, whether or not the country has been. But now there?s really an animosity toward Americans, and we?re going to have to go a long way to correct it.



    "We're boned." -- Bender



    Screed
  • Reply 15 of 16
    midwintermidwinter Posts: 10,060member
    God, Sy Hersh is amazing.
  • Reply 16 of 16
    more proof GWB's White House and Intelligence don't belong in the same sentence



    <searches for photo of three monkeys>



    I recall early accusations that the GWB admin hawks had "planned Iraq war since 91" and that the Office of Special Plans was set up with the express intent of manufacturing "supporting intel" that somehow wasn't coming from the actual professional intel sources of the CIA, Pentagon, etc (now we understand why).

    I recall these stories being dismissed by some members of the choir as "liberal media smears". hmmmm.



    removing agents from the war on terrorism (found that 6'5" Dialysis Patient with a limp yet?) to "drum up some OMG WMD! news, not this actual news" in order to justify a prior hardon for Saddam sounds bad.



    and if I'm reading Hersh's follow up interview right, it's not "Bush lied" so much as

    "Bush stuck his fingers in his ears and yelled LALALALALALA whenever anything less than 'Saddam fries soft fluffy puppies in banned nucular barbeques' *cough* 'intelligence' *cough* arrived from the Chalabi Repertory Theatre Troop via Cheney's Office"



    remind you of that Kuwaiti Official's Daughter fabricating stories about "babies tossed from incubators"?



    propaganda is to be expected at some level, but please.



    Hersh didn't even detail how bad the forged documents were...

    signatures from guys who had long left office (sometimes offices they never held) on the wrong letterhead...

    childlike and easily spotted according to european reports.



    if the brits termed their info massaging as "sexing up the dossier"

    GWB's version starts to look and sound like a cadre of fluffers.





    meanwhile, the countdown to the "Smear Sy" campaign begins.



    will an "unnamed White House official" suddenly out Sy's family as undercover CIA agents



    less energy seems to be spent finding the last leaker than GWB's pen

    (great NYT cartoon to that effect last Sunday)
Sign In or Register to comment.