Comments on: CIA VS. THE WHITE HOUSE: MISSING THE “BIG STORY”

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Tue, 11 Apr 2006 14:04:00 +0000

Chris Hitchens on the Iraq/Niger/uranium issue

Hitch breaks all the details down regarding the claims that Iraq sought uranium from Niger:
In the late 1980s, the Iraqi representative to the International Atomic Energy Agencyâ€”Iraq’s senior public envoy for nuclear matters, in effectâ€”was a …

By: LomaAlta

LomaAlta — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:24:00 +0000

Great post Rick, thanks.
I dont know if it true or of any value but I have been hearing a persistent rumor (via a range of sources from blogs to news magazines) for years about a “Sisterhood” in the CIA. It supposedly came about when there was a push to get more women in CIA yet their field opportunities were limited by statute and tradidion. These limitations in turn limited their promotion potential so they banded together.

As the Sisterhood rose in rank within the CIA, lacking field experience and on a self-help mission, they started controlling what information from the field got where. And, how it was analyzed along the way. As many were more liberal than their traditional predecessors, they were more in tune with Clinton et. al. than Bush et. al. so that conflicts arose. The story goes that the Sisterhood is now high enough to have access, motive, and opportuity to leak information of the type you are discussing. I do not know what if any credibility to give to these rumors other than to sugest, if they were proved true, that this would be a good place to start looking.

By: Unscripted Thoughts

Unscripted Thoughts — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 16:40:19 +0000

Lookâ€™s like Sy Hershâ€™s piece is a good example of another CIA leak. I am a retired military officer and I have no doubt that the JCS is â€œplanningâ€ for the contingency of hitting Iran (gasp!) if the President decided that is the best course to protect the US. Because it is such a vast mission, part of that planning will most assuredly involve contingencies such as nuclear weapons because they require extensive confirmation, coordination, notification, etc. (Trust me, that’s a good thing!)

â€œLeakingâ€ such select information can only frighten those unaware of military operations and is yet another disingenuous attempt to sway public opinion. Such a leak can only come from high within the channels that control exceedingly classified and sensitive materials. Gee, I wonder who that could be?

By: A Goy and his Blog

A Goy and his Blog — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:29:53 +0000

Rhetorical Question

A few decades ago (in Internet years), Bob Novak wrote a stinging response to a July 6, 2003 NYT editorial by Joe Wilson IV.
In the editorial, Wilson effectively admitted that he was the person anonymously supplying what turned out to be bogus inform…

By: Gary Bezowsky

Gary Bezowsky — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 15:26:36 +0000

Do you have any insites on Porter Goss and any successes purging the CIA of these analyst/political activists that are at war with the Administration?

By: clarice

clarice — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:45:40 +0000

P.S. Another thing the press never mentions is that beginning in May 2003 Wilson was working with Kerry (per Rand Beers statement in Oct 2003 that Wilson had been working with them for 6 months). May coincidentally is when he first began his claim(Kristof) that the Administration lied and ignored his report.

By: clarice

clarice — Mon, 10 Apr 2006 14:07:34 +0000

Hats off to you for a wonderful piece of work.