February 11, 2004 10:47 AM

Paul, a frequent commenter here (stonedown), got a letter published in the LA Times exposing the Iraq intelligence commission for what it is -- a ruse to blame the CIA:

What the Iraq intelligence commission should conclude is that the CIA works more effectively when the office of the vice president is not breathing down its neck, demanding evidence to fit a predetermined policy. Since the commission is constrained from investigating the administration's use of the intelligence and is composed entirely of individuals appointed by the president, it seems likely that, instead, the CIA will be the scapegoat.

It's ironic that the early CIA analysis, which took place before the administration started meddling, did not indicate that Iraq was much of a threat to the region, let alone to the U.S.

Next Entry: The Myth of Kerry's Electability (02.11.2004)
Previous Entry: Just one of the dirty tricks that sunk Dean (02.11.2004)

stonedown: NEW

The other letters on the same topic were excellent. I particularly liked this statement, which shows how feeble the White House's attempt at image management is:

"Giving the commission until March 2005 to present its findings sadly reminds me of President Nixon, at the height of the Watergate crisis, volunteering to edit the White House tapes and then present them to the American people."

Wed Feb 11 2004 1:05 PM

dhermesc: NEW

"It's ironic that the early CIA analysis, which took place before the administration started meddling, did not indicate that Iraq was much of a threat to the region, let alone to the U.S."

Please give links to these reports.

Fri Feb 13 2004 9:15 AM