Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

DEAD WRONG was DEAD WRONG.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:01 AM
Original message
DEAD WRONG was DEAD WRONG.
I'm thoroughly disgusted.

"Slam Dunk" and "Tenent" that's what this is about.

Tenent resigned and he fell on his sword for his king.

Powell took the biggest hit next to tenent.

CNN spewed bush/blair lies about the DSM.

CNN runs this garbage about WHAT????

This wasn't an indictment about the nation's most corrupt administration EVER! This wasn't investigative IN THE LEAST.

This is a white wash. This is a fucking white wash. It's COVER for bush. THAT'S what CNN has accomplished.

They provided cover by laying the blame at the CIAs feet.

WHY THE FUCK DID CHENEY'S ENERGY TASK FORCE HAVE MAPS OF IRAQ LAID OUT WHEN THEY MET?

This program has aquitted bush of all his fucking crimes.

DEAD WRONG was DEAD WRONG. Correction... it was DEAD MISLEADING.



:nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke: :nuke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jsamuel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:02 AM
Response to Original message
1. while that may be true it showed the facts about what was hidden before
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Captain Hilts Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:03 AM
Response to Original message
2. They didn't mention Miller or Chalabi about the mushroom cloud...
stuff.

And they just breezed past the Office of Special Plans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shugah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #2
37. miller and the mushroom cloud were there
not glaringly, but there was a point in the program where they scanned over a NYT issue and you could see miller in the byline and "mushroom cloud" in the text.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:18 AM
Response to Reply #37
42. They also discussed the use of the phrase "mushroom cloud" in....
...public speeches given by Condi and Herr Busch, and showed clips of their exact comments. CNN then followed up with why their public statements were false.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Son of California Donating Member (467 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
3. They might not of gone as far as you wanted
but having watched the small section that did, felt the presence of more than one or two pregnant assertions that will lead more than one person to see the truth about the stupidity of this war and the ment hat led us into it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #3
11. Okay.
I can respect your opinion and I'll watch it again when they rerun it with an open mind. I promise.

I just can't accept what passes for "investigative reporting" anymore.

Truth be told... I give up. Those in power can chew us up and spit us out. Our kids will continue to die in their illegal wars. Corporations run this government and policy. Our intel agencies are there to serve the powerful, not America. Game over. They won.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
goclark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:31 AM
Response to Reply #11
17. Never, never, never give up-never! nt


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Son of California Donating Member (467 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:53 AM
Response to Reply #11
27. NO GIVING UP!!!!!!!
"I HAVE NEVER NEEDED THE HOPE OF VICTORY TO SPUR ME ON TO FIGHT!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Al-CIAda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:07 AM
Response to Original message
4. Whitewash, limited hangout, gloss-over, etc., yes sir. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
chookie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
5. Sounds about right
Someone else posted the notion that this program was a sign that CNN was jumping off the neocon ship -- which I was very skeptical about.

Your analysis seems more likely.

I find it highly unlikely that any of the messages -- apart from slapping the face of George Tenent -- will reappear in coverage of the news or Iraq during their more watched programs.

I hope you and I are wrong....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lonestarnot Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
6. Not what I heard! I heard he was made the "scapegoat."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FreedomAngel82 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:08 AM
Response to Original message
7. What were you expecting?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:14 AM
Response to Original message
8. I tend to agree...
If a picture is worth a thousand words, Tenet was as guilty as sin. The average person will read it as an intelligence failure of the CIA and the "slam dunk" will be what they remember. Bush and the Repubs will be able to convince their followers they were only following the intelligence they were given. When, in fact, they convinced Tenet to go along with their scheme. So Tenet becomes the fall guy for the entire Administration. He was not innocent but he was lower down the ladder.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #8
18. kentuck... that's EXACTLY what was accomplished here.
<<<< The average person will read it as an intelligence failure of the CIA and the "slam dunk" will be what they remember. >>>>



I tell you with complete confidence that these bastards just made up a "PLAUSIBLE" scenario with about as much investigation put into it as would be exerted in finding the killer of an ANT.

This was a wholesale marketing of plausible deniability for the administration, created for john q. public, JUST as things seemed to be going to hell for this criminal cabal.

It was a sci-fi. Yes, they used facts... but these facts were twisted to lay the blame on tenent and powell. If I heard "slam dunk" once, I heard it ten times. It's the same wholesale marketing that laid the blame for the acts of torture at Abu Gharaib solely at the feet of "a few bad apples". All sci-fi. All to absolve the powerful of responsibility for horrendous acts of crimes against humanity.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:42 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Intentional or not, that will be the result.
I agree with you.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
radio4progressives Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:15 AM
Response to Original message
9. That was my take n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Webster Green Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:17 AM
Response to Original message
10. It was far more balanced than I thought it would be.....
It showed that the intelligence was being hand-picked and manipulated by BushCo Inc., and that the war was indeed based on lies.

We at DU, being political and news junkies are armed with a lot more information than your average viewer, so we would like to see a really scathing indictment of the chimp, but, for CNN, this wasn't too bad at all.

I can tell you that the freepers threw tarps over their TVs and hid under the bed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tomg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:20 AM
Response to Reply #10
12. I have to agree with you.
And you are right about the Freepers. All pretty much the same: "I didn't watch it. It was all lies anyway" nonsense.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shraby Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:48 AM
Response to Reply #12
24. If they didn't watch it, how could they
possibly know it was all lies? :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FrenchieCat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
13. I'll take what I can get....
And pray for a Dead Wrong Part Deux!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truebrit71 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:23 AM
Response to Original message
14. I disagree...
Whilst it didn't go far enough, they placed the blame EXACTLY where it belonged. For example the former CIA guy saying that the CIA chief ALWAYS got the blame when stuff went wrong even though it was the President that set the policy based on the intel. There were numerous mentions of alternative intelligence groups at the Pentagon and the WH countering the "there is no link" mantra coming from the CIA. There were numerous clips of the liars in the admin overstating the intel, Senator Dick Durbin stating categorically that he heard something completely different in the classified briefing from what was being issued from the WH. The CIA's #2 guy who was in the room when Tenet allegedly said "slam dunk" disputing not only that characterization, but also that mindset as being an accurate representation of the CIA director.

In this day and age you have to take babysteps to get through all of the bullshit that has been stuffed down people's throats. You have to tackle the mountain of lies one stage at a time. In a conspiracy case you build up from the outside, working your way inside until you finally uncover the truth. If you start going off on tangents about Ambassador Wilson, or Crook Cheney's energy grab you'll lose most people. Keep it simple. Focus on reiterating the most obvious glaring lie and hammer it home. There were no WMD, they KNEW there were no WMD, there was no imminent threat, they KNEW there was no imminent threat, and yet they lied us into war.

IMHO there was more than enough there to start the ball rolling, to get people to ask the same questions, and to wonder exactly why it is that after tens of thousands of US forces have been killed or injured, the pretzeldent STILL refuses to admit he was wrong.

If WH personnel get indicted by Fitzgerald over the Plame incident, the house of cards will start to crumble.

Remember, Watergate began with a bungled burglary and yet it wound up ending the Nixon Presidency.

This was a good start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 01:12 AM
Response to Reply #14
32. And I want you to be right.
I'm a flaming liberal who comes here to keep up with the news about my country because of a bad bad stench emanating from washington dc.

Now, I'm not the brightest star in the sky. But I'm an ex-art director with Time Warner with more than a few excellent creative notches in my belt to make up for the lack of brains. I have never seen a more blatant whitewash coming out of an "investigative" report.

Let me explain... you can hide a shitload of devasting facts in one pretty package. People will remember how pretty the package was after it was tied up. What was repeated over and over again? "Slam Dunk", tenent, powell, cia failures.

By repetition... by rote, cnn managed to tie the ugly truth into a pretty package for john q. public JUST by avoiding to end the program by asking why would this administration be so hell bent to go to war.

IMO, what they want people to remember is one & the same as whom george bush wants the public to blame for his criminal acts: "Slam Dunk", tenent, powell, cia failures. CNN formed a conclusion instead of ending the program with provocative questions for john q. public to answer.

People won't even remember the name of that cia guy.

I want to be wrong. I want you to be right and if it turns out the way we BOTH hope... I'll be around to take my spanking.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not_Giving_Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:26 AM
Response to Original message
15. They said that he resigned to take the heat off of *
There was one guy (I'm awful with names) who said that's how it always is. He ran the list of times when the CIA has taken a hit for the WH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:43 AM
Response to Reply #15
21. Larry Johnson...
ex-CIA , I think?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Not_Giving_Up Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:51 AM
Response to Reply #21
26. Could have been
I'm taping it at 1 AM CST.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:27 AM
Response to Original message
16. It was bettr than expected IMO
I almost didn;t watch it, for fear of raising my blood pressure over a coverup.

But I was "pleasantly" surprised at how it didn;t let the administration off the hook.

Although it did put a lot of blame on Tenant, it also showed how the administration put pressure to get the results they wanted and then ignored contrary evidence that was presented to them.

We have a tendency to want journalism to reflect our own biases. But that's not its role. In this case, CNN was surprisingly even handed in exposing the determination to go to war and exagerate the "evidence."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:39 AM
Response to Original message
19. pretty much, my girlfriend agrees, too n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Carolab Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:44 AM
Response to Original message
22. I agree. They keep passing the buck to the intelligence community
when all the while, as the DSM tells us, the administration (read, Bush, Cheney, Rice, et al) had PLANNED it and was FIXING THE INTEL.

This was reported on LAST summer...

They are trying to exempt the White House in this. I knew when Tenet "resigned" what the story was. I wish he'd spill the beans.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kentuck Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:50 AM
Response to Reply #22
25. Maybe he's waiting for a more appropriate time ?
Like about 2 or 3 weeks before the next election? :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HereSince1628 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 08:57 AM
Response to Reply #22
38. I have to agree, if the story had turned to the Plame leak it would have
pointed an accusatory finger at the administration. As it was the toughest thing it said about the administration was that they wanted intelligence to support a policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Skip Intro Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:47 AM
Response to Original message
23. I agree.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
28. It is a start
Edited on Mon Aug-22-05 12:57 AM by Bluebear
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
punpirate Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:55 AM
Response to Original message
29. No television... haven't seen it, so I need...
... a question answered. How much time was spent on the Office of Special Plans, apart from just incidental mention?

Because, folks, that little den of iniquity is the key to the whole issue of faked v. faulty intelligence.

Here's why I think that way. The intelligence services are the ones getting the intelligence. That's obvious. So, if you're the White House and you want to start a war, but need a phony pretext to convince Congress of the need for that war, what do you do when the intelligence services don't give you the evidence you need? You need a place to introduce your phony evidence into the system.

The OSP, buried deep in the civilian leadership of the Pentagon, got that information into the system. They took it directly from sources which the other intelligence services had already discredited. They then pushed it through two pipes, to the DIA and to the White House, without the attribution and multiple-source vetting that the other services would normally do. When that information reached the White House, it could then be sent back down to the CIA from Cheney's office and the NSC, with demands--not so much the "is this true?" demand, but the "why didn't you tell us about this?" demand. That immediately put the highly-politicized leadership of the CIA on the defensive and served to legitimize the value of the phony intelligence.

Under pressure to come up with politically satisfactory evidence, the CIA leadership found analysts who were either personally or politically motivated to vet falsehoods. A prime example of the latter was the CIA analyst who pronounced the aluminum tubes "perfect" for centrifuge use--even though the DOE and the NRC said that claim was poppycock--and any dolt with first-year inorganic college chemistry and a first-year statics and mechanics course would know to be false, as well.

That's one of the reasons why the OSP is gone now--it was dissolved after it had accomplished its task of introducing phony information into the system. Much harder to investigate an office that no longer exists.

OSP was a new manhole into that piping system for intelligence, placed at just the right point to get false information into the system where it could do the most good, and now the manhole's been paved over.

Cheers.





Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Generator Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 04:58 PM
Response to Reply #29
47. Excellent post about the OSP
Does anybody know to answer your question? I don't watch CNN..but this has been an interesting read.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
oasis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
30. Damage to Bush from 1 to 10 on the Mclaughlin scale. Eleanor would say 9
Tony Blankley, shaking in his boots, would say 7, Pat Buchannan an 8 and Lawrence O' Donnell rates it an enthusiastic 10.

The program's damage to Bush gets a 10 from me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 12:59 AM
Response to Original message
31. It was a very good report - I wasn't even expecting it
I have to wonder what reality some people here are living in? This was unexpected and very complete IMHO. Yeah, every unprovable theory isn't there - but there is more than enough real evidence to soil these folks - and they showed the tapes to prove it. I liked it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Straight Shooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 01:21 AM
Response to Original message
33. Hello, I'm with the Name Police. The name is Tenet, not tenent.
Critical player in this critical FUBAR. Sorry, but I see his name misspelled so often that I just had to say something.

Thanks for the info on the program. I don't have television, and it's good to know what's being shown to America. They should have a marquee running at the bottom of the program, "For the whole truth, go to democraticunderground.com"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bluebear Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 01:24 AM
Response to Reply #33
34. Thank you, Officer.
I hate to be pesky but he is indeed a critical part of the equation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 01:39 AM
Response to Reply #33
35. Thanks...
I'll remember that and appreciate the heads up.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mtnsnake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 08:51 AM
Response to Original message
36. I disagree. This was a good start & CNN is just did what our Dem leaders
have failed miserably to do. They spoke up in clear terms about what's really going on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MidnightWind Donating Member (428 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:13 AM
Response to Original message
39. Agreed-they kept trying to push the idea that Bush was just badly
"advised". My ass!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:14 AM
Response to Original message
40. Interesting. Did you watch the same program I watched?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RagAss Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:16 AM
Response to Original message
41. I need to watch it again...
I may be dead wrong but what I saw was more the ignoring of intelligence by the WH more so than bad intelligence....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 09:20 AM
Response to Reply #41
43. Bingo. In fact, the inference was clear that the NeoCon Junta........
...deliberately ignored the real intelligence because they had already decided to attack Iraq.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rocktivity Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 03:46 PM
Response to Original message
44. I've been calling CNN on it since Friday, Katsy
When I read their own advance publicity: "The program...pieces together the events leading up to the mistaken WMD intelligence that was presented to the public."

My response? "...the title of this program really bothers me. If its premise is that Bush was the innocent victim of incompetent intelligence, it's PROPAGANDA! There WERE no weapons, they KNEW there were no weapons, and thanks to the Downing Street Minutes, we now KNOW that they knew there were no weapons!"

:headbang:
rocknation
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
katsy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #44
45. Did you like how they glossed over the DSM...
like, it depends on the whose definition of "fixed" is applied.

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bpilgrim Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Aug-22-05 04:39 PM
Response to Original message
46. I agree, this left a LOT out considering what we all now know
& knew at the time, especially the M$MW's cheerleading of the war and that the blogosphere and GLOBAL protesters and media who KNEW, before we ILLEGALY invaded - which they still haven't even ADDRESSED as noted by the head of the U.N. - that it was BS.

until they - american M$MW's - admit this was an ILLEGAL war, based on a PACK OF LIES, which was KNOWABLE & KNOWN before hand, by those pay'n attention, they deserve NO reprieve!

i am going to make an mp3 and post it on my site for any interested.

Thank GORE he 'invented' the INTERNETs :bounce:

peace
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 26th 2014, 03:21 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC