emptywheel compiles this timeline from Cheney Tried to Stifle Dissent in Iran NIE:
| November 2006 | NIE "completed." |
| January 5, 2007 | John Negroponte resigns as DNI, reportedly because of fight over NIE. |
| February 2007 | NIE completed; Cheney objecting to content. |
| April 26, 2007 | Thomas Fingar announces NIE will be delayed due to Ahmadinejad’s demagoguery. |
| June (?) 2007 | Information collected that supports claim Iran’s nuclear program remains suspended. |
| Early October 2007 | BushCo considers spiking the NIE. |
| October 27, 2007 | David Shedd reveals Mike McConnell has made it harder to declassify NIE judgments–leading most observers to believe the Iran NIE would not be released. |
| Early November 2007 | Administration decides to release NIE, but not publish judgments. |
| November 22, 2007 | Mohammed el Baradei states Iran is cooperating, though IAEA still has questions about its nuclear program. |
| December 1, 2007 | Mohammed el Baradei states that bombing Iran would ensure it gets the bomb more quickly. |
| December 3, 2007 | NIE key judgments released. |
ThinkProgress summarizes these quotes:
| “So I’ve told people that if you’re interested in avoiding World War III, it seems like you ought to be interested in preventing them from have the knowledge necessary to make a nuclear weapon. I take the threat of Iran with a nuclear weapon very seriously.” [Bush, 10/17/07] |
| “Our country, and the entire international community, cannot stand by as a terror-supporting state fulfills its grandest ambitions. … The Iranian regime needs to know that if it stays on its present course the international community is prepared to impose serious consequences.” [Cheney, 10/21/07] |
| “The problem is Iran, and Iran has not stepped back from trying to pursue a nuclear weapon, and — or reprocessing and enriching uranium, which would lead to a nuclear weapon.” [Dana Perino, 10/26/07] |
| “We talked about Iran and the desire to work jointly to convince the Iranian regime to give up their nuclear weapons ambitions, for the sake of peace.” [Bush, 11/7/07] |
| “We’re in a position now, clearly, especially when we look at Iran, where it’s very, very important we succeed in our efforts, our national security efforts, to discourage the Iranians from enriching uranium and producing nuclear weapons.” [Cheney, 11/9/07] |
| “We are convinced that they are developing nuclear weapons.” [Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, 11/13/07] |
Stephen Hadley offers this spin:
The national security adviser, Stephen J. Hadley, quickly issued a statement describing the N.I.E. as containing positive news rather than reflecting intelligence mistakes. "It confirms that we were right to be worried about Iran seeking to develop nuclear weapons," Mr. Hadley said. "It tells us that we have made progress in trying to ensure that this does not happen. But the intelligence also tells us that the risk of Iran acquiring a nuclear weapon remains a very serious problem." "The estimate offers grounds for hope that the problem can be solved diplomatically – without the use of force – as the administration has been trying to do," Mr. Hadley said.
My father had a saying, "I don’t mind you peeing in my boot, but don’t tell me it’s water." Then there’s the old saying, "… can’t see the forest for the trees" and "insanity is doing the same thing, over and over, expecting different results." These are the things that come to mind as I read the reports about this National Intelligence Estimate finally being released. For this entire year, we’ve all been ranting about President Bush and Vice President Cheney calling us to war with Iran. It has been an uncomfortable position to be in. We don’t want Iran building atomic bombs either. We don’t want to ignore a threat from Iran. We’re not excited about Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. All we really know is that we cannot trust what President Bush and Vice President Cheney tell us. I guess we also know that these two men don’t trust us to know what the Intelligence Community has to say. I presume they’re afraid we might disagree with them.
in·tel·li·gence /ɪnˈtÉ›l
ɪdʒəns/
| 1. | capacity for learning, reasoning, understanding, and similar forms of mental activity; aptitude in grasping truths, relationships, facts, meanings, etc. |
| 2. | manifestation of a high mental capacity: He writes with intelligence and wit. |
| 3. | the faculty of understanding. |
| 4. | knowledge of an event, circumstance, etc., received or imparted; news; information. |
| 5. | the gathering or distribution of information, esp. secret information. |
| 6. | >Government.
|
| 7. | interchange of information: They have been maintaining intelligence with foreign agents for years. |
| 8. | Christian Science. a fundamental attribute of God, or infinite Mind. |
| 9. | (often initial capital letter) an intelligent being or spirit, esp. an incorporeal one, as an angel. |
All of this is really trees, including the endless speculation about "why" they finally released this year old National Intelligence Estimate. The forest is that we have a government we can’t trust – either to do the right thing or to tell us what they’re basing their decisions on. Jean-Jacques Rousseau said it a long time ago – government has a Social Contract with the people. Our government has broken that contract…
A friend and I were discussing this today. He was musing about their motive – Why withhold the N.E.I.? What’s the payoff? My answer was not the usual – oil, power, neoconservative insanity, etc. I thought the answer might be that Bush and Cheney don’t want to admit how wrong they’ve been, or worse, don’t want to admit it even to themselves. Whichever the case, they sure don’t want us to see the in·tel·li·gence.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.