Scapegoat Tenet at your MORTAL PERIL, Mr. Bush

Tenet knows where the bodies are buried...

PITT: On September 26 2001, George Bush II went down to the CIA, put an arm around Tenet, and said that he had a “report” for the American people, that we have the best possible intelligence thanks to the good people at the CIA. We’ve come a fair piece down the road since then, and if you read through the news these days, you get the definite sense that the Bush administration is attempting to lay blame for the fact that no weapons of mass destruction have been found in Iraq, to lay blame for that at the feet of the CIA. Furthermore, by all appearances, the months of reports the administration put out about Iraq’s weapons capabilities are not turning out to be accurate. To no small extent, it appears that there is a scapegoating process taking place here. What is your take on this?

McG: It is interesting that you would go back to September 26, because that was a very key performance on the part of our President. Here was an agency that was created expressly to prevent another Pearl Harbor. That was why the CIA was created originally in 1947. Harry Truman was hell-bent on making sure that, if there were little pieces of information spread around the government, that they all came to one central intelligence agency, one place where they could be collated and analyzed, and the analysis be given to policy people.

So here is September 11, the first time since Pearl Harbor that this system failed. It was worse than Pearl Harbor. More people were killed on September 11 than were killed at Pearl Harbor, and where were the pieces? They were scattered all around the government, just like they were before Pearl Harbor. For George Bush to go out to CIA headquarters and put his arm around George Tenet and tell the world that we have the best intelligence services in the world, this really called for some analysis, if you will.

My analysis is that George Bush had no option but to keep George Tenet on as Director, because George Tenet had warned Bush repeatedly, for months and months before September 11, that something very bad was about to happen.

PITT: There was the August 6 2001 briefing…

McG: On August 6, the title of the briefing was, “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in the US,” and that briefing had the word “Hijacking” in it. That’s all I know about it, but that’s quite enough. In September, Bush had to make a decision. Is it feasible to let go of Tenet, whose agency flubbed the dub on this one? And the answer was no, because Tenet knows too much about what Bush knew, and Bush didn’t know what to do about it. That’s the bottom line for me.

Bush was well-briefed. Before he went off to Texas to chop wood for a month like Reagan did in California, he was told all these things. He didn’t even have the presence of mind to convene his National Security Council, and say, “OK guys, we have all these reports, what are we going to do about it?” He just went off to chop wood.

...more...

http://truthout.org/docs_03/062603B.shtml

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

And I'm certain that if he should die in a fiery crash of a small aircraft, the button is pressed automatically.

They either turn up floating in a river due to a "boating accident" or develop a sudden brain tumor.

Guess what happens when you spook the spooks.

On another note, could you imagine what would happen if more 9/11 stuff drips out - either as a result of this "explosive" commission report, or through making Tenet the fall guy; and the RNC still goes forward with New York and the 9/11 anniversary for their convention?

Wouldn't you just love to see that backfire in their face?

Kinda like the Dems being able to use the tailhook landing photo-op in THEIR commercials, instead of Bush?

if Tenet has received any threats against his family.

...if he's going to be offered a nice, high-paying job somplace far from Washington, New York, or LA.

seems to work quite effectively

and how they so thoroughly F#cked up field reports about possibility of terror attacks.

Let's keep the light shining on several paths at once. Writing to the big media folks will stay important in the coming days.

The only thing that will really motivate your congressmen and women is to contact them directly too.

THey need to hear from you.

I agree. I think that Tenet can bring the whole cabal down and bush know's it.

I also believe that Tenet has more integrity than that entire cabal put together.

So far has loyalty has been to his career, not the United States.

Not the American people.

I'm waiting to be impressed.

if they weren't pretty sure they'd get away with it? Maybe they had a "little chat" with Tenet, to make sure they were seeing "eye to eye?"

...either take the bullet, or watch the CIA get broken up.

After the 9/11 report comes out, and there's a lot of talk about intel failures, and what we need to do better, I expect a proposal to completely restructure the Intel community, including breaking up the CIA. A new structure, reporting through DoD instead of directly to the WH, will be proposed. Stephen Cambone, a Rumsfelc creature, is already in as Undersecretary of Defense for Intellegence. Expect him to be at the top of the new structure.

The CIA has never (for good reason, mind you) been in good odor on the left, so such a proposal would gather signficant bi-partisan support.

So here's the pitch to Tenet: either take the heat for both 9/11 and WMD, or you're the last Director of the CIA....

Were fools-gold for the fool.

Did he just buy the agency time in order to get the CIA's ducks in a row? Agents that were information sources are no longer speaking to reporters. That could indicate either that an investigation is pending or that the CIA is moving into a protective stance before unloading on Bush & Co.

I have also considered that the silence now exhibited by CIA agents is one way to back-up Tenet.

I know that what we-out-here hear is what ex-CIA people are saying, not stuff that has to be anonymously leaked. Anyway, if you've read about this somewhere, do you have a link?

Sort of off the subject, but CIA-related---I've been wondering ever since the shock-and-awe stuff at the beginning of the attack on Iraq just what role the CIA was playing on the ground in Iraq. We got the idea that in Afganistan they were practically running the show, with their own airplanes even. No sense of that in Iraq. How do the CIA and Pentagon coordinate? Did CIA lose a lot of cred with the Pentagon and PNACers for failing to assassinate either Osama or Saddam? We tend to focus just now on intel, but I wonder if there's any dirt on the ops side that we should be paying attention to....

You know, the House/Senate report that supposedly spells out clearly all the warnings that * and his band of criminals did NOTHING about in the summer of '01 (check that, Ashkkkroft stopped flying commercial.) If this report can shift blame for 9-11 onto *, like it should, then you can bet your booties he'll rue the day he messed with The Company.

The time bomb is ticking--can Smirk and his defuse it before it's too late? Stay tuned, folks...

:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:

"The president did not knowingly say anything that we knew to be false. ... We wouldn't put anything ... knowingly in the speech that was false."

on edit: more Condi'scension: "If the CIA -- the director of central intelligence -- had said, 'Take this out of the speech,' it would have been gone," Rice said.


http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/11/sprj.irq.wmdspeech/index.html

"If the CIA -- the director of central intelligence -- had said, 'Take this out of the speech,' it would have been gone," Rice said.

"it"? By "it" she obviously means the director. :eyes:

A full Congressional investigation seems warranted, don't you think?

LOL, Tahitinut!

before making this accusation against him.

The FIX is in....

He might end up like the ENRON guy they found shot in the car in Texas!(Mr Joe Sutton)

Speaking of the now wormeaten x Enron manager Joe Sutton, he did have a sense of humor and loved a good SKIT! Check this out, LMAO and mad as hell at the same time!

Feds Want To See Enron Videotape
President Bush Also Takes Part In Skit

snip

Joe Sutton and Rebecca Mark, the two executives credited with leading Enron on an international buying spree, did a painfully awkward rap for Kinder, while former Enron Broadband Services President Ken Rice recounted a basketball game where employees from Enron Capital & Trade beat Kinder's Enron Corp. team, 98-50.

"I know you never forget a number, Rich," Rice said.

President George W. Bush, who then was governor of Texas, also took part in the skit, as did his father.

At the party, the younger Bush pleaded with Kinder: "Don't leave Texas. You're too good a man."

The governor's father also offered a send-off to Kinder, thanking him for helping his son reach the governor's mansion.

http://www.click2houston.com/money/1840050/detail.html

We Want The Truth, The Whole Truth and Nothing But The Truth, About EVERYTHING! Bush sez he never had much to do with Enron! Did the CIA tell Bush to lie about Enron too?

After all, the CIA relies on mere "information" while the Busholinis have "revelations." :eyes:

Pope Mickey Mouth, Cardinal Limp Dick, and Defender of the Faith Rumsferatu are dealing with Galileo Tenet in the way all heretics are dealt with: excommunication and incineration.

BushCo has really picked the wrong enemy this time!!

George Tenet = John Dean on steriods!!!

He knows where the bodies are buried. Tenet is going down to save the BFEE, plain and simple.

Tenet was appointed by Clinton, why was he left in charge of the CIA? Clinton made a hell of a lot of intell misteps based on wrong info or outright infiltration. So if we have been getting lousy intell since 1997 when Tenet took over, how could Clinton NOT know about plans for 9/11?? Bush had been in office 9 months Clinton had been there for years. I am begining to think that is part of the reason the comprehensive report is not forthcoming. Hillary is on the commitee so if there was a smoking gun there why wouldn't she be running it to the press? Will info in the report hurt the "Clinton legacy"? Tenet was presented in 1997 as a good man but not qualified to run the CIA maybe DSHS. Maybe he has been over his head. Just wondering Will?!

The Bush crew came in not giving much of a damn about anti-terrorism work or foreign policy. They had a whole slate of domestic agenda issues they wanted to get done, and left Tenet where he was because they didn't want to go through the hassle of vetting and picking and nominating a new CIA Director.

And then 9/11 happened.

already pretty well larded through with PNAC types who DID have vital interests in foreign policy, and in using terrorism threats as part of their machinations?

and if it were damaging to Clinton the GOP would've already released it, believe me.

According to a December 2001 Robert Novak column, Poppy persuaded W to keep Tenet.

"Indeed, the Bush transition team's consensus a year ago deemed the CIA a disaster area, with Tenet sure to be tossed. But George H.W. Bush, himself a former DCI, had been briefed by Tenet as a former president and was impressed. Bush's son soon shared that opinion, becoming Tenet's strongest backer. The president and the DCI meet every morning in Washington to survey the world."

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/robertnovak/rn20011220.shtml

This is what Poppy had to say about Tenet in April 1999:

"And when it comes to the mission of CIA and the Intelligence Community, George Tenet has it exactly right. Give the President and the policymakers the best possible intelligence product and stay out of the policymaking or policy implementing except as specifically decreed in the law."

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/1999/bush_speech_042699.html

If he doesn't, someone else will. These f'ing neo-con bastards have made many enemies in the intel community by playing fast and loose with intel. I believe someone at the CIA will squeal and tell us where the bodies are buried, so to speak. IF it's Tenet great, but someone will. The dripping we now hear will become a full blown flood soon. This war was a Ponzi scheme built on lies to justify a war for oil. American soldiers being killed everyday now because of lies will finally wake the people up.

Hell, the CIA headquarters is named the 'George Bush Center For Intelligence'! Bush Snr is an ex-director, not to mention being an agent of some kind since before the Kennedy assasination.

If you ask me, the reason Clinton was lead up the garden path so many times by the CIA is due to this (ie the Sudanese Pharmaceutical factory attack), so it would not surprise me if Tenet was also owned by the BFEE, or at least controlled by other CIA officials who are.

I also believe that the Bush family knows everything there is to know about scandals such as Iran/Contra, CIA drug running, the October Surprise, the assasinations of the 60's (Kennedys, MLK) and probably a WHOLE LOT more.

So if anyone thinks the CIA will bring down the Bush family, they better think again. It would be M.A.D. (mutually assured destruction) if they tried.

There has never been an invulnerable family in history. The Bushes are no different. The CIA is bigger than the Bushes. But I don't think it's going to come down to a war between the agency and the family. This is between Tenet and the Bushists in power.

Furthermore, there may even be a split between the Georges. Just think of how the present Bushists have ingrained in the public mind that George II is trying to learn from the "mistakes" his father made, is determined not to make the "same mistakes his father made."

I said that the CIA wouldn't be the source of their downfall. The fact is, the CIA as a whole, and especially individuals within it, are just as vulnerable as the Bushes, and I believe that as a whole the organisation would simply decide that "for the good of the nation" it would be better to protect themselves by protecting the Bushes.

No, it won't be the CIA that brings down the Bushes... But the FBI? Now there is an organisation that may decide to get involved. After all, it seems they have the least to lose, and being able to take down the Bushes AND the CIA at the same time must be awful tempting to many in the Bureau.

Remember, the FBI is the agency that is actually responsibe for counter-intelligence and counter-terrorism within the US, so it seems to me, if anyone has evidence that the Bushes let Sept. 11 happen it would be them, and I believe that nothing short of that could bring the Bushes down.

The political/diplomatic side, where Poppy comes from, and the operative, career spook side. The analysts usually fall with the spooks. When things get political and the heat or light goes on, it's the appointees like Tenet that take the hits.
Poppys from the political side, and his little cabal within the CIA is too.

I'm sure Tenet is getting a sweet deal.

It seems my prediction came true faster than even I expected. The Bushes must have some real dirty secrets that no one wants to see revealed...

he'll most certainly also be blamed for the failures of 911. Public disgrace would be a hard thing to live with for the rest of his life and I don't think he is going to take this without fighting back.

It'll be very suprising to see Tenet fight back.

...for not supporting the pRez, and he doesn't even have to sell out on the Nigerian uranium thing. He can take the heat for that one, as he's doing now, and then simply make sure the right people have the right, well-covered-up info on Dumbya.

You know, like where he was when he was AWOL from the Texas Air National Guard, and what the magical disappearing driver's records said, etc. Don't you suppose he's got some info that can REALLY hurt this smarmy idiot?

:kick:

kick. I love that airplane, Demo Tex.

What about the other lies and false information that Bush gave about WMD in his State of the Union speech? Who will fall on his sword for those?

Bush said that there was an Al-Qaeda connection to Iraq, a claim that has been thoroughly debunked. Who put that lie in the SOTU?

Bush also said that Iraq had:

1. 25,000 liters of anthrax
2. 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin
3. 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent
4. 30,000 chemical munitions
5. several mobile biological weapons labs
6. advanced nuclear weapons development program
7. a design for a nuclear weapon
8. five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb
9. high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production

Here is that portion of the speech that Bush gave:

In addition to the Niger yellow cake uranium lie, for which CIA Director Tenet just fell on his sword, there are other lies about WMD that Bush told in the State of the Union speech. Here is the portion of the White House transcript:

The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent. In such quantities, these chemical agents could also kill untold thousands. He's not accounted for these materials. He has given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

U.S. intelligence indicates that Saddam Hussein had upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents. Inspectors recently turned up 16 of them -- despite Iraq's recent declaration denying their existence. Saddam Hussein has not accounted for the remaining 29,984 of these prohibited munitions. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

As long as everyone's attention is focused on the 'Niger' question the WH will be able to sell the perception that this was the 'only serious error'.......and it wasn't even Bush's fault.....neat eh?

...despite being in control (well, kinda in control, as recent attacks have shown) of most of Iraq for three months now. You can bet all resources in Iraq are being employed in the search for WMD's (since the burden of proof has been placed squarely on the Bush cabal by opponents), yet nothing has been found (which means they probably won't be found at this point).

Of course, all of this begs the question: IF Saddam had any of these weapons, why didn't he use them against US troops when he had the chance? Because he didn't have them. There's the most logical answer to the entire WMD question...

Suppose that the pResident visits Tenet and offers a really great deal; in exchange for some heartfelt mia culpas on Tenet's part, many profitable things will happen.

Let's suppose that Tenet resigns and spends a year or so out of the public eye. Some lucrative private consulting gigs are arranged (Halliburton might need a review of their security arrangements - that sort of thing). Then, maybe you set up a book deal, a few speaking engagements. By this time, Tenet would have more money than he could spend.

And he could always be cycled through public service again so his reputation could be rehabilitated. If Kissinger can be brought back from the dead, surely Tenet could be.

Just a few dark thoughts to get your morning started.

since it means potentially fatal peril.

Perhaps you shoul prepare for a visit from the Secret Service or FBI? :(

The spin in the newspaper headlines this morning is full speed ahead for a an all-out "Blame the CIA" attack.


"CIA Chief Admits Mistake" screams the headline of the usually respectable Seattle Post-Intelligencer.

Fucking hell.

on this thread, you will note that I said that this would happen. The fact is that Tenet and the rest of the CIA has far more to lose by trying to bring down Bush than they have by just saying "Oops, we fucked up. Sorry!"

It all comes down to what I said in that previous post: M.A.D. Mutually Assured Destruction. I am sorry to have been proven correct so far (ie Tenet admitting "his" mistakes) but I am not in the least bit surprised.

If anyone is wondering why or how I came to this conclusion (that the CIA won't try to bring down the Bushes), the answer is very simple: I am a cynical bastard, and I believe that the CIA has a WHOLE LOT of skeletons it would prefer remained in the closet, some of which could make something as simple as the Kennedy Assassination seem trifling.

It may be that the CIA fears that a violent backlash against them and the ruling elites may occur if some of those secrets were to be revealed.

The agency is going to start to talk. I don’t believe that they will take the fall for the Bush family like so many others have done in the past. The pResident is going to start bleeding from the cuts of a thousand leaks. The career officers have seen this before, with Nixon, Reagan and Bush(I), they know that people have had their lives destroyed when they are hung out by the right.

that I think that Condi and Bush pointing fingers at the CIA for the Niger evidence in HIS SOTU address and then Tenet taking the blame is the most disgusting thing I can think of my political lifetime (outside the witch-hunt and impeachment of Bill Clinton)!

This REEKS! It is soooooooo transparently an attempt to cover *'s ASS when HE should take the blame for his own SPEECH!

WHY does the CIA sign off on the SOTU in the first place? If he wasn't talking WAR, WAR, WAR all the time, he would have given a REAL SOTU speech - one that the CIA didn't have to approve. That sounds FISHY to me. The CIA approving his SOTU address??

If the media buys his argument that the "issue is over," I don't know what I'm going to do. It is NOT over and we should make sure it's NOT over. He has lied and lied and lied and lied and caused the deaths of thousands. He will be held accountable. WE will hold him accountable.

WHEN WILL THIS JACKASS BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR HIS FAILED, MISERABLE LIFE?????

on edit: and now he's saying he has confidence in TENET?? Does this SMELL or what?

:mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke: :mad: :puke:

(end of rant. time for that second cup of coffee)

The CIA must not and should not be politicized. The logic of every principled attack on the CIA for the past 50 years (from Dulles to Tenet) is based on the spectre of its politicization. It is every bit as illegitimate to argue that Tenet should "blow the whistle" on the Smirksters as it is for Smirksters to argue (or Tenet to imply) that the CIA had any responsiblity whatsoever to do anything other than provide unbiased and unspun information. For this very reason, CIA's covert operations designed not to obtain intelligence but to subvert and sabotage the "opposition" are anathemetic to that mission. It is a corruption of means. The deep secrecy of CIA intelligence-gathering operations provided a seductive context within which to engage in practices antithetical to the national values and principles supposedly being served.

Tenet might just fall on his sword on this, and it would be "case closed" . The agency wouldnt get any more involved and the Bush crowd would have done the damage control via a Tenet resignation.

I saw the little "scrolling news" on CNN and said, "I'm sure this guy will end up resigning quietly soon and end up on the board of some company with a 7 or 8 figure salary." If he takes care of *Bush and quietly steps down, I'm sure his cronies will take good care of him.
If he speaks out on what REALLY happened, then they'll really "take care of him".