Liberals have always maintained that our intelligence agencies were "dead wrong in almost all of its pre-war judgments about Iraq (1)" or were just pushing outright lies (2) on a gullible American and worldwide public.
In light of the recent report (3) of the US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) that there is no "concrete evidence" that Iran is building a bomb, can Liberals now conclude that they are either lying, incompetent, or simply feeding us disinformation and bogus intelligence to lull us against the real threat?
I think Liberals were right all along. Our intelligence agencies had it all wrong about Iraq, and again are wrong about Iran. Therefore, I, along with every Liberal who wishes to remain consistent to his political beliefs, now strongly urge the President to immediately attack Iran before it is too late.
We shouldn't be fooled a second time.
Read all my articles on Nuclear Iran here.
5 Dec 2007,
Most of official Israel challenges NIE on Iran
I find it hard to believe that the centrifuges broke down. That's ridiculous! Deliberate misinformation sounds more likely. While it's somewhat reassuring to see that President Bush isn't abandoning the struggle against Iran so quickly, I have to wonder whether anyone in Washington is behind him.
infowars.com, 1 Apr 2005, Lies revealed: pretext for war fabricated, dead wrong
A presidential commission investigating the intelligence debacle that preceded the Iraq invasion reported yesterday that the damage done to US credibility would "take years to undo".
American intelligence was described by the report as being in chaos, often paralysed by the rivalry of 15 different spy agencies and affected by unchallenged assumptions about Baghdad's supposed weapons of mass destruction.
The incompetence described in the report occasionally descends into farce, particularly over an Iraqi defector codenamed Curveball, whose fabricated tales about mobile biological laboratories and their influence on US decision-makers were reminiscent of Graham Greene's accidental spy in Our Man in Havana. Despite warnings that he was "crazy", "a waste of time", and that he had not even been in Iraq at the time of an event he supposedly saw, his claims became the subject of almost 100 Defence Intelligence Agency reports and a focus of the National Intelligence Estimate in October 2002.
Mother Jones, The Lie Factory
Kwiatkowski, 43, a now-retired Air Force officer who served in the Pentagon's Near East and South Asia (NESA) unit in the year before the invasion of Iraq, observed how the Pentagon's Iraq war-planning unit manufactured scare stories about Iraq's weapons and ties to terrorists. "It wasn't intelligence‚ -- it was propaganda," she says. "They'd take a little bit of intelligence, cherry-pick it, make it sound much more exciting, usually by taking it out of context, often by juxtaposition of two pieces of information that don't belong together." It was by turning such bogus intelligence into talking points for U.S. officials‚ -- including ominous lines in speeches by President Bush and Vice President Cheney, along with Secretary of State Colin Powell's testimony at the U.N. Security Council last February‚ -- that the administration pushed American public opinion into supporting an unnecessary war.
BBC News, 4 Dec 2007, US report cools crisis on Iran
The US National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran has acted like a safety valve, letting off the steam that had been building up over a possible American military attack.
It is also likely to make it more difficult to significantly increase international sanctions.
Russia and China in particular might argue that Iran is contained for the moment.
Russia's President Vladimir Putin remarked the other day that there was no "concrete evidence" that Iran was building a bomb and his judgment is now accepted by the US intelligence report.
The head of the International Atomic Energy Agency Mohamed ElBaradei had also expressed a similar opinion.