Think Progress

CIA ordered analysts to cherry-pick intel for Iraq war.

In the book The Italian Letter, authors Peter Eiser and Knut Royce reveal that Alan Foley, the head of the CIA’s Weapons Intelligence Non-Proliferation and Arms Control Center, cherry-picked evidence to make the case for war in Iraq:

One day in December 2002, Foley called his senior production managers to his office. He had a clear message for the men and women who controlled the output of the center’s analysts: “If the president wants to go to war, our job is to find the intelligence to allow him to do so.” The directive was not quite an order to cook the books, but it was a strong suggestion that cherry-picking and slanting not only would be tolerated, but might even be rewarded.

(HT: Kevin Drum)



69 Responses to “CIA ordered analysts to cherry-pick intel for Iraq war.”

  1. Crump's Brother says:

    I’m fresh out of shock for this crap anymore.

    Oh wait.

    CLINTON DID IT!!! IT’S HIS FAULT!!



  2. KRank says:

    Trolls in 3, 2 1…


  3. Patrick1 says:

    This guy must be working for MSNBC now.


  4. Yikes says:

    “might even be rewarded.”

    How about a medal from Bush!


  5. Jake-o-bin says:

    Clinton liked to eat cherries too.


  6. Patrick1 says:

    And the background of Eisner and Royce would be?


  7. Ben B says:

    He must be working for NBC because it’s not way off base? or what?


  8. stopthecons says:

    this is called propaganda. well, hopefully that’s quite obvious to anyone reading this post.

    But, this is just how politics has gone for ages. The politics of war is the politics of distortions, deceit, lying, omissions, and the like.

    Why should American politicians be any different? It’s simply the nature of the beast and it’s not going to change. We need to take away their power to do these things in our name, and with our money and lives…

    The sad part is that the evil dictator, Saddam, ending up being right about much of this “intel” and Bush and his cronies were wrong…or outright lying.

    It’s a terrible place where the beacon of freedom is less honest than a strong-armed dictator.

    Some reading on this:

    “Saddam was Right and Bush was Wrong”
    http://www.populistamerica.com/saddam_was_right_and_bush_was_wrong


  9. Jake-o-bin says:

    hey Patrick1,

    weren’t you against negotiating with North Korea and Iran? will you condemn the Bush administration with the same vitriol you had for its critics in 01-07, now that it is negotiating with the “Axis of Evil”?


  10. Patrick1 says:

    A Saddam lover..LOL


  11. Typical Troll Response Team says:

    This guy is obviously being propped up by George Soros. We can effectively disregard him based on this baseless assumption.


  12. Abby says:

    Premeditated mass murder is exactly the same crime as the one Hitler committed.


  13. Trizza says:

    Confirming what we already knew.


  14. WaltTheMan says:

    #4 – Patrick1,
    Maybe he has a job at Frenches making mustard.


  15. Zooey says:

    Alan Foley: “If the president wants to go to war, our job is to find the intelligence to allow him to do so.”

    Traitor.


  16. GregM says:

    You mean the intelligence was cherry-picked? SHOCKING!!


  17. po says:

    No way, they wouldn’t do that, would they? Give me a fricken break people. And remember, anyways, we all live here in the Good Ol’ U S of A at the pleasure of this President, so be glad that he cherry picked intel otherwise he’d of had to explain himself and we know he can’t do that. Damn straight, if he wanted a war our elected leaders were only to happy to let him go for it. It won’t be that bad, will it?

    I’m tired of they cooked the books. In a game of chicken, the Democrats turned away first, thinking, surely he won’t run me off the road. Guess what, dumbasses, he did and he’s going to continue to do it until you don’t turn away. And don’t tell me it’s hard, you start sounding like his whinny ass!


  18. Patrick1 says:

    I would condemn talking with Iran and North Korea.


  19. joe says:

    Trolls in 3, 2 1…

    Comment by KRank — May 29, 2007 @ 4:02 pm

    This guy must be working for MSNBC now.

    Comment by Patrick1 — May 29, 2007 @ 4:02 pm

    Count faster, KRank!


  20. Shane says:

    Okay trolls, explain to us how this is John Edwards’ and Al Gore’s fault, we’re all fascinated by your brilliance (barf).


  21. KRank says:

    I would condemn talking with Iran and North Korea.

    Comment by Patrick1 — May 29, 2007 @ 4:13 pm

    PattySmall1, I don’t get it — why the half-hearted attempt at intellectual honesty NOW? I think that ship has sailed, my little friend.


  22. Juan C says:

    No, no…Everybody suspected there were WMDs. Captain McCormick just told me that in the ThinkFast thread. He even mentioned that Hillary Clinton believed that there were WMDs, and well, if she believes that, then it must be true! Upright left said the same thing last night.

    I guess the trolls wants to share their stupidity around.


  23. joe says:

    …and Syria, Patrick1.

    Don’t forget, the administration has been meeting with the Syrians, too.

    It’s good to see that John Kerry’s Iraq policy is finally being implemented. I just wish it had been done three years ago, when it might have made a difference, and by people with three digit IQs.

    Oh, well. At least the Bush administration is giving up, and implementing John Kerry’s Iraq policy.


  24. Juan C says:

    I would condemn talking with Iran and North Korea.
    Comment by Patrick1

    My guess is that he copied & pasted that from another troll.


  25. Tom3 says:

    This is just another confirmation of what we have already heard from other insiders in the intel community, and in testimony on the Hill.

    It figures the trolls would try to discredit it, because it is powerful and factual.

    Chimpy DID cherry pick the intel. We’ve known that since the Downing Street Memos and there have been many confirmations since then.

    Chimpy even had Dougy Feith create his own intel to support the Iraq invasion.

    It is now crystal clear to anyone with half a brain that the ONLY reason why Chimpy invaded Iraq was the OIL. All other reasons are lies.

    Chimpy is blackmailing the Iraqi parliament by withholding reconstruction funds until they sign the oil bill which gives away 80% of Iraqi oil to BIG OIL with 30 year leases.

    We are in Iraq to stay…those permanent bases are so our troops can protect Big Oil’s assets for the next 30 years.

    I bet half the Dems are also supporting this. Particularly Hitlery.


  26. Tundra says:

    The directive was not quite an order to cook the books,
    Yeah sounds kind of like, go out there and get me some Damn Intel people

    but it was a strong suggestion that cherry-picking and slanting not only would be tolerated, but might even be rewarded.
    Well that’s the way he took his boss telling him to do his job and get him Intelligence. Like a good little lap dog, he wanted to give the happy intel instead of real stuff. Good Spike


  27. Typical Troll Response Team says:

    We love hamsters!!


  28. Tom says:

    And the background of Eisner and Royce would be?

    Comment by Patrick1

    How about sensible, thoughtful journalists who want the planet to know the truth about the Bush administration. Is that enough background for you? The truth is slipping out, patty. Your side may not like it, but it IS happening. You better reserve your place in the lifeboat if ya want a seat. All rethugs are jumping ship. It’s kinda fun to watch.


  29. PatrioticLiberalChristian(PLC) says:

    I would condemn talking with Iran and North Korea.

    Comment by Patrick1
    _________________________
    Would you condemn the Bush officials engaged in those talks? Would you label them “traitors”? Would you call for their resignations?


  30. Jake-o-bin says:

    Patrick1,

    I find your condemnation sadly lacking in the piss and vinegar you usually toss out with all of your other condemnations. Where’s the sass? Where’s the sophism and Devil-may-care attitude?

    Is someone having a bad day (or year)? Remember, a smile is just a frown turned upside down.

    Say it with me… the Bush administration is a bunch of co$$sucking liars. Come on now. Don’t that make you feel much better?


  31. Tom3 says:

    PAtrick the Troll is too stupid to jump ship.

    He would continue to support Chimpy even if it was proven that a male hooker visited the White House overnight for two years.

    Oh wait, that’s already been proven.

    Patrick the Closet Case Troll. He thinks Chimpy and the Repukes can do no wrong because he has a man-crush on them.


  32. Tom3 says:

    “the Bush administration is a bunch of co$$sucking liars.

    True on both counts. They LIE and they also suck dick.


  33. MAF54 says:

    So what?

    Saddam had to go one way or another.


  34. Typical Troll Response Team says:

    babies are yummy!! Especially with ketchup!!


  35. FartSmell says:

    Patrick just let me out.


  36. ForTruth says:

    Patrick and his buddies are running of pure ego and principle now. They won’t back off, for the sake of not backing off.


  37. Juan C says:

    So what?
    Saddam had to go one way or another.
    Comment by MAF54

    Hahahaha. Priceless.
    Crumbling down…


  38. Crump's Brother says:

    MAF54,

    True enough.

    But you can’t spread democracy through force. It doesn’t work that way. Saddam’s people should have drove him out themselves if they were really put out by him. Didn’t we do that back in the 1770’s?

    There is more than one way to force regime change.


  39. MAF54 says:

    #37: Back off from what? As I said above, I don’t care if the evidence was made up or not. The main thing is that Saddam is gone and we are in control of Iraq’s oil.


  40. WaltTheMan says:

    babies are yummy!! Especially with ketchup!!

    Comment by Typical Troll Response Team

    Constitutional mustard is even better!


  41. Tom3 says:

    Jeez, the trolls are out in force today.

    Even MAF54 is here.

    And that’s Mark Foley’s instant messaging nickname.

    That means the troll is a pedophile. He likes underage boys.

    Typical Repukes. Liars, crooks and perverts.


  42. whiteyfresh says:

    ForTruth: doesn’t that remind you of a certain “Chimpy-in-Chief”???


  43. whiteyfresh says:

    oh, geez, Karl Rove,um, i mean Maf(bend over and take it like a man, boy!)54 is here. whoop whoop.


  44. whiteyfresh says:

    TTRT: or is that CATSUP?


  45. Karim says:

    Another nail in the coffin for Bubble Boy.


  46. Juan C says:

    Saddam had to go one way or another.
    Comment by MAF54

    This is priceless…crumbling down.


  47. MAF54 says:

    Why is it that you people love Saddam so much that you’re still crying over him? What is it that makes you lefties love tyrants like Pol Pot, Mao, Lenin and Stalin? I’ve watched you since the late 60s and I still don’t get it. Is it because they oppose the big bad America you hate so much (but still you want to live here, so go figure)?


  48. Namtillaku says:

    #37: Back off from what? As I said above, I don’t care if the evidence was made up or not. The main thing is that Saddam is gone and we are in control of Iraq’s oil.

    Comment by MAF54 — May 29, 2007 @ 4:35 pm

    Why do you use a known pedophiles’ ID? Is this some right wing rallying cry or something? The use of this ID just marks you as a pedophile yourself, or a supporter of them – either way that makes you a sub human.


  49. Spudge_Boy says:

    I would condemn talking with Iran and North Korea.

    Comment by Patrick1

    Notice dipsh!t said “would,” but nowhere DOES he condem them.


  50. KRank says:

    In order to comment like MAF54:

    purse lips

    position index finger directly in front of lips

    say “beebeebee” as index finger wiggles lips.

    Repeat.


  51. Juan C says:

    Is it because they oppose the big bad America you hate so much (but still you want to live here, so go figure)?
    Comment by MAF54

    *yawn*


  52. Ashen Shard says:

    well, if you were intelligent you would actually understand that no one here supports any dictators … why do you think we oppose the bush administration?
    we realize that US policy tends to support dictators. Iran is a good example. They had a nice vibrant democracy, and we overthrew it and put the Shah in charge because he was US friendly. I’m sure many others here could add a myriad of similar examples.
    We also realize that using force to change a country is near impossible. Also remember it was Don Rumsfeld who was buddy buddy with Saddam back in the day. Only reason we went after him, besides the oil, is because he was no longer our dictator.


  53. Spudge_Boy says:

    Comment by MAF54 — May 29, 2007 @ 4:43 pm

    Why do you people love pedophiles, crooks, con men and liars? mostly, why do you love pedophiles?


  54. ValiantVenusGrewFromUranus says:

    Why is it that you people love Saddam so much that you’re still crying over him? What is it that makes you lefties love tyrants like Pol Pot, Mao, Lenin and Stalin? I’ve watched you since the late 60s and I still don’t get it. Is it because they oppose the big bad America you hate so much (but still you want to live here, so go figure)? Comment by MAF54 — May 29, 2007 @ 4:43 pm

    Another NeoCon wingnut “Hitler-Lover” disciple of Leo Strauss – YAWN….

    Ask yourself wingnut, why you you people loved Saddam so much you gave him WMDs? Ask yourself wingnut, why you people loved Osama Bin Laden so much, you trained him to be a terrorist? Ask yourself wingnut, why you people love every wingnut dictator in the world – especially the terrorist leaning wingnuts of latin America?

    Stop projecting your own love of “dictators” on everyone else – wingnut. Those “leaders” you mention never represented “liberal” values – they were “totalitarianists” – like yourself. Liberals believe in “democracy” – unlike you, *ssh*le.


  55. ForTruth says:

    “Back off” meaning, admit to a mistake, stop doing the same thing over and over, and expecting different results.


  56. Shane says:

    Is it because they oppose the big bad America you hate so much (but still you want to live here, so go figure)?

    Comment by MAF54

    Do you mean the big bad American run by the neocon fascists you love so much?


  57. Tom says:

    So what?

    Saddam had to go one way or another.

    Comment by MAF54

    Whaaaaat? Why do you say that when we allow Mustareff to stay, Koreas nutbar can stay, Putin can stay, Chavez can stay, Egypts preznit can stay, osama been forgotten can stay, etc…These are all very bad people. Why can they stay in power – all ‘cept saddam? because he was a ‘bad guy’? Bush is a bad guy, shooter is a bad guy, neocons are all bad people, etc…Why do you continue to plow that field? Its a nowhere augument – put forth by nowhere people trying to defend the invasion. An invasion – it appears – WAS simply for oil. Hmmm, can you defend that? I didn’t think so.


  58. MAF54 says:

    #58: Defend it? I don’t have to defend it. As I said above, getting Saddam was good and getting access to oil was even better. Mission accomplished.


  59. Tom3 says:

    MAF 54 must be buggering too many page boys.

    He’s delusional.

    I know of NO liberal who loves Saddam. Or Pol Pot or Stalin for that matter.

    Stupid Repuke pervert is obviously suffering from end-state syphillis.


  60. Krazny says:

    Tom,

    don’t forget our pals in China, not exactly paragons of human rights over there. South Korea ain’t exactly a utopia, nor is a great deal of the middle east, Aisa, Africa, and a good chunk of South, and Central America.


  61. Bluedog49 says:

    MAF54: “Back off from what? As I said above, I don’t care if the evidence was made up or not.”

    I suggest you cuddle up with a young male intern and read “Judgement at Nuremberg.” In it you find the astonishing news that people were actually executed after WWII for “starting illegal wars of aggression.”


  62. Bluedog49 says:

    And the award for the most assinine, absurd and ugly strawman argument goes to male intern-grabbing Mark Foley (MAF54) for this steaming pile of nonsense:

    “Why is it that you people love Saddam so much that you’re still crying over him? What is it that makes you lefties love tyrants like Pol Pot, Mao, Lenin and Stalin? I’ve watched you since the late 60s and I still don’t get it. Is it because they oppose the big bad America you hate so much (but still you want to live here, so go figure)?”

    He’s been watching closely, but evidently he was napping when super-lefty peacenick John Lennon wrote these words: “And if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
    You ain’t gonna make it with anyone anyhow.”


  63. Bluedog49 says:

    MAF54: “As I said above, getting Saddam was good and getting access to oil was even better. Mission accomplished.”

    But, before the invasion, Bush told the American public that this wasn’t about oil. Was he lying?


  64. RUCerious says:

    Gun.
    Smoking.
    Impeach.


  65. 1984 says:

    PNAC plan + Office of special plans + downings street memos. We knew this already.


  66. big papa says:

    What an absolutely BRILLIANT strategy…

    …overwhelm the people with so MUCH evidence of corruption and intrigue…

    …that they don’t know WHERE TO START…

    …to bring these criminal sons of pigs, goats and bi*ches…

    …to justice…


  67. Jay Randal says:

    Not only did the Bush Regime cherry pick the intell, but also fabricated evidence to justify invading Iraq and occupying the nation to control its oil reserves.


  68. OxyCon says:

    They did a “Heckuva job” “slam dunking” the intel.



Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports


Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)


imageArchives


imageBlog Roll