Is There a WH Mole at the CIA? - Did WH leak news of CIA tape destruction in retaliation for NIE?

[Mugsy]

Via "Mugsy's Rap Sheet":

Is There a WH Mole at the CIA? - Did WH leak news of CIA tape destruction in retaliation for NIE embarrassment?

The election of "'08" is quickly turning into The election of "Oh, wait." Another day, another National Security scandal.

The "National Intelligence Estimate" released on December 3rd by the sixteen agencies of the American intelligence community, revealed that Iran appears to have suspended its pursuit of nuclear weapons back in 2003, some time after the invasion of Iraq. Instead of sharing this good news with the world, this (pardon the pun) "inconvenient truth" was suppressed by the White House on the grounds that it needed a greater level of "confirmation".

But despite KNOWING that there were strong doubts about Iran "actively" pursuing nuclear weapons, the Bush Administration chose to speak with GREATER certainty and MORE urgency regarding Iran's nuclear weapons program. And just as they did with Iraq a year before talking of "mushroom clouds" and providing terrorists with a nuclear bomb, they suggested Iran was becoming SO great a threat, we were running out of time to act. The rhetoric seemed to hit a fever pitch last October when President Bush invoked "World War III" when speaking about the looming threat of Iran.

Then the bottom fell out.

We learned, not only that Iran suspended its nuclear program in 2003, but the White House knew and had been suppressing the news for nearly a year. What's worse, photographic proof that Iran had suspended its nuclear weapons program had been available on the Internet for months as the CIA was able to compare the intel they were receiving with photos taken by journalists touring Iran's nuclear facilities last year.

The questions started flying. "What did Bush know and when did he know it?" Former UN Ambassador John Bolton went on several TV and Radio shows to suggest that "rogue elements in the intelligence community were out to discredit the Bush Administration", basically calling them liars and accusing them of treason, but not claiming anything they said was an actual "lie", nor was he willing to call for anyone in the intelligence community to be fired and brought up on charges of treason. If you are a Neocon and you get caught in a lie, you don't face up to it. You claim there's a "conspiracy" out to get you. When Hillary said it, they laughed and ridiculed her. When they say it, it's not paranoia, it's a serious national emergency.

I believe that, caught with their hand in the proverbial cookie jar, the White House needed a distraction. One that took the focus off their own lies and discredited the people that exposed them at the same time. That's when the "CIA destroyed taped evidence of waterboarding" story broke.

I don't think it is a coincidence that just two days after the nations intelligence agencies exposed the fact Bush had been lying all along about the threat from Iran (essentially telling President Bush they were tired of him hyping a threat they knew not to be true), "someone" leaked to the New York Times that the CIA destroyed video taped evidence of them using torture to interrogate prisoners in 2005. And now suddenly, the CIA find themselves having to answer questions about their *own* misdeeds.

Which piqued my curiosity: "Who told the NY Times about the CIA tapes?"...

Read the full Op/Ed on "Mugsy's Rap Sheet". Tie in to Plame scandal. Who at the CIA leaked her identity to the WH? Does the CIA have a White House mole?

[annabanana]

1. If so, won't they be surprised to see it twisted back again, DOUBLE

When they realize who it was that was being "interrogated"? (And what he later told anyone who would listen)


http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x2428031

[kickysnana]

2. Cheney has been reported to be the first VP with constant access to CIA

Clinton was crucified for asking for a background check from the FBI on Whitehouse Staff (Linda Tripp). Poppy IS CIA. WTF was he elected President?

The OP/Eder is a little late to the table.

[Mugsy]

3. Access does not give you intel.

Hardly "late to the table".

Simply having access to the CIA does not make you instantly omnipotent.

I don't see Cheney calling up the CIA director on the phone and ordering him to reveal damaging information about something the WH could use against them, do you?

The White House has been at war with the CIA ever since they expressed reluctance to give them the "proof" they needed to justify attacking Iraq. There is a *reason* the CIA was not put in DC... to avoid the politicization of intelligence. Yet somehow, the WH keeps revealing things they shouldn't have any way of knowing (eg: Plame's identity). Someone is feeding them information.

MAYBE it's a friend of Poppy's. MAYBE it's a friend of Cheney's. But who? The question still stands: Who is feeding them info?

[grasswire]

4. They are the masters of distraction

I believe they even may have brought down an airliner to seize the news cycle on the day that the consortium of newspapers was to release its report on the 2000 recount. They ARE that evil.

[MasonJar]

5. The actions, when verified, are ones sanctioned by W. I am not

surprised at the retaliation, and neither am I surprised that they are too stupid to think ahead more than one move.

[yurbud]

6. just the opposite: both are shots at White House from those in CIA tired of being the bad guys

[Ronnie Roach]

7. I think it was the agency itself.

It's no secret the CIA dislikes the Bush Crime family. They resent anybody like Porter Gos who tried to shove the Neo-Con agenda down their throats. The Chicken hawks are coming home to roost.

http://www.neilyoung.com/lwwtoday/videolinks/videolink_354.html