Leaked Memo

[eric]

It appears that a memo was leaked that could show a connection between Iraq and UBL as reported by the Weekly Standard. I know, I know, it is a conservative publication, but lets see what develops.

http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by eric
It appears that a memo was leaked that could show a connection between Iraq and UBL as reported by the Weekly Standard. I know, I know, it is a conservative publication, but lets see what develops.

http://www.theweeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/003/378fmxyz.asp

Uh oh, the national enquirer has spotted big foot again.....What's this make, the seventh or eight time they've prooved this claim?

 

[SLClemens]

What I don't get is, if the CIA had accumulated all this evidence over such a long time why keep it such a secret? Why not open it up to public and international scrutiny? Wait... I think I might know why, lol.

 

[eric]

Uh oh, the national enquirer has spotted big foot again

Don't be silly, no one could believe in Bigfoot, it is absurd, time is better spent looking for the Lockness Monster !

 

[eric]

All kidding aside, it does seem a little funny that it is just coming out now, but I think you guys are smart enough to not just dismiss a report like this without further investigation.

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by eric
All kidding aside, it does seem a little funny that it is just coming out now, but I think you guys are smart enough to not just dismiss a report like this without further investigation.

Oh man, you are getting really good at this game. Point eric!!!! I'll shut up until I've read it....

 

[SLClemens]

Originally posted by eric
All kidding aside, it does seem a little funny that it is just coming out now, but I think you guys are smart enough to not just dismiss a report like this without further investigation.

I agree, but I'm sure there's someone less lazy than me who'll do a proper job of investigating this report. I only spend about two to four hours a day on the Net and there are too many more interesting things to do.

 

[eric]

Actually what I was trying to say was it should be investigated further by the proper agencies and commitees.

 

[jimnyc]

I'll reserve comment on the article itself once further investigation is done.

I just find it funny that the other day everyone took a leaked memo from the CIA as gospel but in this scenario they find it laughable. Does this on not support your cause?

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I'll reserve comment on the article itself once further investigation is done.

I just find it funny that the other day everyone took a leaked memo from the CIA as gospel but in this scenario they find it laughable. Does this on not support your cause?

This memo is not from the CIA, (stop watching Fox, they are the ones mislabeling it).
This memo was created by "Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith"
A little background on Mr Feiths, he is a Rumsfeld political apointee and a contributing member of the People for a New American Century (PNAC).

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by dijetlo
This memo is not from the CIA, (stop watching Fox, they are the ones mislabeling it).
This memo was created by "Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith"
A little background on Mr Feiths, he is a Rumsfeld political apointee and a contributing member of the People for a New American Century (PNAC).

No, but it included data from them, as well as other agencies:

"Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency."

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jimnyc
No, but it included data from them, as well as other agencies:

The CIA has the same information as Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Douglas J. Feith, why is it he sees this connection so starkly and they (the proffesionals who analyze intelligence for a living) consider it largely vapor? The CIA book on the Al-Qaeda/Hussein connection is that it is largely a creation of Chalabi and the INC, funny how Feith and Chalabi appear to be on a similar PR mission simultaneously, isn't it?

 

[jimnyc]

And how do you so easily dismiss data from the NSA, FBI & DIA?

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And how do you so easily dismiss data from the NSA, FBI & DIA?

All the info comes to a head at the NSC level. Specificaly the CIA is responsible for all of it that falls outside our borders. The data, which your looking at in this memo, is then gone over by analysts. See that is what your missing here, an informed eye looking over these "facts". For instance, hot tips need to be confirmed by an unrelated source. Mr. Feith ran into trouble with this before when Mr. Chalabi provided him several "nuclear scientists" to confirm Iraqs burgoning nuclear program. He claimed it as fact (much like this memo claims the connection is fact). Unfortunately, we found no evidence to support any of those claims.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

Originally posted by SLClemens
What I don't get is, if the CIA had accumulated all this evidence over such a long time why keep it such a secret? Why not open it up to public and international scrutiny? Wait... I think I might know why, lol.

it hasen't been a secret. it's been reported in drips and drabs for YEARS now. the memo only put everything into 16 pages

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by Lefty Wilbury
it hasen't been a secret. it's been reported in drips and drabs for YEARS now. the memo only put everything into 16 pages

No, no dude, the weekly standard says this is new, conclusive information...from the article
>> Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials<<
Custodial interviews....you might get good intel when you torture someone, or you might just get to hear what he thinks you want to hear. As every analyst knows, if it only takes words to make pain go away, your subject will eventualy give you those words. You don't really want him (the subject) to say there is a connection, you want him to give you a fact that can be independently verified (we flew into Damascus on the morning of the 23rd, I was using the name "Donald Rumsfeld", for example). If he can prove he was in Damascus, and he works for Iraqi intelligence (another major reason to discount intel is the "how could he possibly know that?" school of analysis) now you have a possible source. Otherwise, it's just some poor bastard strapped to a chair, staring at a one way mirror who might tell you he was OBL, if he thought you would let him sleep. That's why you don't give raw intelligence to political appoitees.

 

[jimnyc]

Dijetlo - can you tell me then why the prior leaked document (CIA leaked document about number of insurgents) was taken seriously when it was leaked in a similar manner and is unsubstantiated and unverifiable?

 

[dijetlo]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Dijetlo - can you tell me then why the prior leaked document (CIA leaked document about number of insurgents) was taken seriously when it was leaked in a similar manner and is unsubstantiated and unverifiable?

The numbers make sense and nobody has stepped forward to dispute them (if british intel put the number at three times the amount there might be more of a tendancy to doubt the information.)
The other thing you have to look at is the providence of the information...how did we get it. Feithe is a political operative and he is doing the analysis on this intel. If it was a strong as he claims anybody could do the analysis and reach the same conclusion, and the CIA would have issued the finding, not the DOD Office of Planning.
What's your take on FOX ID'ing this as a CIA memo on their news program. Honest mistake or a little GWB "damage control in action"?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by dijetlo
The numbers make sense and nobody has stepped forward to dispute them (if british intel put the number at three times the amount there might be more of a tendancy to doubt the information.)
The other thing you have to look at is the providence of the information...how did we get it. Feithe is a political operative and he is doing the analysis on this intel. If it was a strong as he claims anybody could do the analysis and reach the same conclusion, and the CIA would have issued the finding, not the DOD Office of Planning.
What's your take on FOX ID'ing this as a CIA memo on their news program. Honest mistake or a little GWB "damage control in action"?

Nobody is going to go public with disputes as it is still considered confidential information, but the leading General in charge DID state a different amount.

How do you know what was issued and what wasn't? This is all a matter of national security and highly confidential. I'm quite confident there was a hell of a lot more memos and paperwork between the agencies other than the one document that was leaked.

I didn't see the Fox bit, so I can't offer too much there. They maye have leaned with more credit towards the CIA to make it more credible, but the CIA and other agencies did contribute to the accuracy of the data.

 

[Lefty Wilbury]

Originally posted by dijetlo
No, no dude, the weekly standard says this is new, conclusive information...from the article
>> Some of it is new information obtained in custodial interviews with high-level al Qaeda terrorists and Iraqi officials<<
Custodial interviews....you might get good intel when you torture someone, or you might just get to hear what he thinks you want to hear. As every analyst knows, if it only takes words to make pain go away, your subject will eventualy give you those words. You don't really want him (the subject) to say there is a connection, you want him to give you a fact that can be independently verified (we flew into Damascus on the morning of the 23rd, I was using the name "Donald Rumsfeld", for example). If he can prove he was in Damascus, and he works for Iraqi intelligence (another major reason to discount intel is the "how could he possibly know that?" school of analysis) now you have a possible source. Otherwise, it's just some poor bastard strapped to a chair, staring at a one way mirror who might tell you he was OBL, if he thought you would let him sleep. That's why you don't give raw intelligence to political appoitees.

some of it is new some of it isn't. just pick one topic from the memo and do a search on it. you'll get hits on it