Conflating Bond’s criticisms on the C.I.A. and its intelligence sharing obstacles and his quote on Pelosi’s situation is a silly, and typical effort by the P.D. to propagandize an issue.

After 9-11, criticisms abounded on both sides of the aisle concerning intelligence sharing amongst the national security apparatti.

…sorry, errantly hit submit…

To try and compare the two and then project the two comments as hypocritical is weak, but usual ploy to frame an issue with faulty logic.

Two different contexts, too different in comparison…

Lame for even a partisan paper.

Sorry, dr-debunk, this was not about 9/11 intelligence failures.

This was the critique of pre-Iraq War intelligence. You remember - WMD? Secretary of State Powell’s presentation before the United Nations? admittedly false statement in President Bush’s state of the union address about Iraq trying to trade in uranium “yellow cake” from Niger?

Mr. Bond wrote the “intelligence failures” were “pervasive.” He claimed they extended from the Director of Central Intelligence to “junior analysts” and “senior intelligence officers” who failed to ask “tough questions.” He called it an intelligence community in “denial.”

And he was referring to the same period time that Rep. Pelosi received the briefing she said was “misleading.”

Oh Gawwwd.

If Mr. Roth believes Speaker Pelosi was completely unaware of the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques — those that were explicitly described to her (per senior members of the intelligence community and her congressional colleagues that sat in the same meetings as she) — then he will believe anything.

Eddie, why didnt you state in the article the context of Bond’s criticism? IT looks like you are trying to cover Pelosi’s butt by claiming Bond said the CIA was a bunch of liars. You also claim that Bush’s “sixteen words” were “admittedly false”, can you source that? I remember them saying they shouldnt have been in the speech, but never that they were false. In fact, the British Intelligence agencies have stood by the accusations to this day. How is that “admittedly false”? Maybe you can clear it up for us. Niger has two (2) exportable materials, cow peas and uranium, why would Iraq send its top nuke guy to Niger for trade talks about cow peas?

This Pelosi thing must really have you libs scared.

You bet liberals and Democrats are scared. Speaker Pelosi’s lying is as obvious as the nose on her face and they know it. Quibbling over minutia and horking up long-refuted claims about no WMD is a clumsy attempt to deflect attention from a slanderous charge.

There’s a world of difference between “intelligence failures” (does the enemy have 8 ships in that harbor or only 6?) and deliberatly lying to a sitting member of congress. The Speaker of the House has in effect charged the CIA with treason, a charge she has absolutely no evidence to support. She’s made this slanderous in order to deflect attention from her own culpability in something that for political expediency she first supported, and then when the political winds changed, pretends now to reject.

The Speaker and her supporters on the far left want a “truth commission” and a real airing of the facts? I say bring it. Let’s get everything out in the open. The press should first demand that the President stop releasing redacted memos that only support his party’s side of the story.

“Sorry, dr-debunk, this was not about 9/11 intelligence failures”—Eddie Roth—

So who said it was? What part of AFTER 9-11, is confusing? Just making a point about the out of context comparisons.

“You remember - WMD?”…

Yes, as do these people…

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction

“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” –President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” –Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.” –Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by: — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

“Mr. Bond wrote the “intelligence failures” were “pervasive.” He claimed they extended from the Director of Central Intelligence to “junior analysts” and “senior intelligence officers” who failed to ask “tough questions.” He called it an intelligence community in “denial.”…

He was referring to “Gorelick’s wall”, and you can read more about it here;
directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/09/jamie-gorelick-mistress-of-disaster.html - 84k

As I explained to Mr. Roth in an email this morning, comparing Senator Bond’s comments in 2004 to Speaker Pelosi’s accusations that our terror-fighters are liars is, at best, grasping at straws.

From the posts below its clear that the readers already get this, but I’d like to elaborate – first, in 2004 Senator Bond pointed out that there was an intelligence failure, not that the CIA was dishonest.

Calling the CIA liars, as Speaker Pelosi did earlier this month, is quite different. In fact, this dangerous accusation puts our CIA in a risk-adverse position, a position that led to our intelligence failures and got us 9-11 in the first place.

Also, pointing out the intelligence community’s failures and working with them to fix those problems is what oversight is about. That’s what Senator Bond did and continues to do.

Calling the CIA a bunch of liars to protect your own hide is something quite different.

Shana Marchio
Communications Director
Senator Kit Bond

Shana Marchio—

—Thank you for your insight. As you can see, the editorial board has a problem with those fact thingie, they get in the way of their agenda.

—Jamie Riley is especially fond of making things up that suit her perspective, and also using blatantly partisan “sources” to “verify” her “facts”. Gratefully, due to the internet and “adult” supervision, they don’t get away unchallenged.

—Eddie Roth is relatively new and judging by this, well-schooled in the leftist art of skullduggery. We’ll keep them honest…

—Thanks again for your vigilance, it seems Senator Bond is in good hands…