kolmapäev, mai 19, 2004
Tell Me Again How They Didn't Lie
Knight Ridder is on fire. This has to be like the 18th time they've picked up a story about the Bush administration's dishonesty regarding Iraq that no other mainstream media source seems to care about.
Today's example: Adnan Ihsan Saeed al Haideri. His lies were promoted by Bush administration officials despite his having "showed signs of deception" in a lie detector test and having been rejected as a liar by US intelligence services.
While no evidence has surfaced to indicate that administration officials knowingly fed dubious information to Congress, the public and the media, Saeed's case suggests that officials either were unaware that he'd done poorly on the polygraph exam or overlooked that fact when they publicized his claims.
The administration also publicized claims about Iraqi mobile biological weapons labs from a defector whom the Defense Intelligence Agency had labeled a fabricator and charges that Saddam had tried to buy uranium for nuclear weapons in Africa even though the CIA had said it couldn't verify the charge.
The White House used Saeed's claims in a background paper nine months after CIA and DIA officers had dismissed him as unreliable.
How many examples of this do you need before people accept that they were just being dishonest and deceptive?
My favorite part of the article, though: An administration official, speaking for the White House and insisting that his name and position not be used, said he couldn't comment on intelligence matters and referred all questions to the CIA.
Um...right. And this needed to be anonymous why?
|
Knight Ridder is on fire. This has to be like the 18th time they've picked up a story about the Bush administration's dishonesty regarding Iraq that no other mainstream media source seems to care about.
Today's example: Adnan Ihsan Saeed al Haideri. His lies were promoted by Bush administration officials despite his having "showed signs of deception" in a lie detector test and having been rejected as a liar by US intelligence services.
While no evidence has surfaced to indicate that administration officials knowingly fed dubious information to Congress, the public and the media, Saeed's case suggests that officials either were unaware that he'd done poorly on the polygraph exam or overlooked that fact when they publicized his claims.
The administration also publicized claims about Iraqi mobile biological weapons labs from a defector whom the Defense Intelligence Agency had labeled a fabricator and charges that Saddam had tried to buy uranium for nuclear weapons in Africa even though the CIA had said it couldn't verify the charge.
The White House used Saeed's claims in a background paper nine months after CIA and DIA officers had dismissed him as unreliable.
How many examples of this do you need before people accept that they were just being dishonest and deceptive?
My favorite part of the article, though: An administration official, speaking for the White House and insisting that his name and position not be used, said he couldn't comment on intelligence matters and referred all questions to the CIA.
Um...right. And this needed to be anonymous why?
