“Soft despotism is a term coined by Alexis de Tocqueville describing the state into which a country overrun by "a network of small complicated rules" might degrade. Soft despotism is different from despotism (also called 'hard despotism') in the sense that it is not obvious to the people."

Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Westhawk on Iranian Nuclear Halt


Iran gave up nothing with its nuclear weapons halt

Admiral Mike McConnell, the U.S. Director of National Intelligence, created some drama today. Today’s U.S. National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iran’s nuclear capabilities and intentions was a “bombshell” but not for the reasons found in the mainstream media’s headlines. Although the universal MSM headline on this story is “U.S. Says Iran Ended Atomic Arms Work,” the two most interesting conclusions from the NIE are:

We assess with high confidence that until fall 2003, Iranian military entities were working under government direction to develop nuclear weapons.


We assess with moderate confidence that convincing the Iranian leadership to forgo the eventual development of nuclear weapons will be difficult given the linkage many within the leadership probably see between nuclear weapons development and Iran’s key national security and foreign policy objectives, and given Iran’s considerable effort from at least the late 1980s to 2003 to develop such weapons. In our judgment, only an Iranian political decision to abandon a nuclear weapons objective would plausibly keep Iran from eventually producing nuclear weapons—and such a decision is inherently reversible. [emphasis added]

If arms control advocates want to use this report as an argument for international pressure as a solution, they must also accept that Iran had an active nuclear weapons program, and that it will be difficult to stop that program in the long-run.

Iran may have “halted” but it gave up nothing

Arms control advocates are today making the point that this NIE supports the proposition that diplomatic pressure and negotiations work. The NIE states:

Our assessment that Iran halted the program in 2003 primarily in response to international pressure indicates Tehran’s decisions are guided by a cost-benefit approach rather than a rush to a weapon irrespective of the political, economic, and military costs. This, in turn, suggests that some combination of threats of intensified international scrutiny and pressures, along with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways, might—if perceived by Iran’s leaders as credible—prompt Tehran to extend the current halt to its nuclear weapons program.

But arms control advocates are making too much from this assessment. For Iran, halting work on nuclear weapons development in 2003 (shortly after the clandestine nuclear program became public knowledge) was a “no-brainer.” It is the industrial processes of the nuclear effort, the large-scale uranium conversion and enrichment complexes, the construction and running of a large heavy water reactor for plutonium, and the construction and operation of an industrial-scale plutonium separation plant, that would govern the pace and timescale of the entire nuclear effort. Compared to these engineering and industrial problems, the final machining, fabrication, non-critical implosion testing, and assembly of a nuclear weapon are relatively well-known, straight-forward, and could wait until the aforementioned industrial processes were nearing culmination. Iran lost nothing by “halting” its nuclear weapons engineering work.

By contrast, had Iran explicitly continued its nuclear weapons engineering work after 2003, it would have made it that much easier for the international community to rally against it.

Who are the spies in Tehran?

For obvious reasons, the NIE does not say what the sources of its information are. Uranium enrichment facilities and nuclear power plants are large industrial facilities and are difficult to hide. Not so the final bomb fabrication, testing, and assembly processes. These activities can occur in warehouses, laboratories, and military bases, and blend in with their surroundings. Thus, when the U.S. intelligence community states with “high confidence” that Iran halted the weaponization portion of its nuclear program, it is very likely that such “high confidence” intelligence came from multiple human sources within the Iranian government and military. No doubt a large-scale “mole hunt” is now occurring inside Iran.

So did the publication of this NIE endanger U.S. intelligence agents inside Iran? Probably. But that is the regrettable price of doing business with the leaky U.S. government. The Bush administration had to reveal this NIE. Had it tried to keep it secret, it would have leaked, especially since it concludes that the Iran “halted” its weapons program in 2003. Had that headline reached the New York Times via a leak (as it surely would have), the Bush administration would have suffered another blow to its reputation.

War against Iran is now more likely

Although the 2007 NIE seems less worrisome than the 2005 assessment, the trajectory of Iran’s nuclear program has not changed at all. Today’s NIE tried to make the case for “international pressure” and a diplomatic approach to Iran. Regrettably, this report will only deflate the urgency with which UN Security Council and others approach the problem. This will reduce the likelihood of an effective international effort against Iran, and increase the chances of Iranian over-confidence, miscalculation, and then armed conflict.

Admiral McConnell created some drama today, but not in the way portrayed by the mainstream media. Alas, there is much more drama to come.


  1. That the Iranians stopped, that means they stopped. Of course they could start again, as the Russians have dropped out of Conventional Arms Treaties and the US reneged on the ABM Treaty.

    Best one can do, is short term, when dealing with sovereigns abroad.

    There is a three year lag in their program, even if the desire to arm up remains. Perhaps some day there will be another change, in DC or Tehran, that will solidify the current situation.

    The future is an unknowable, if predictable thing

    The Iranians seem to have done what we asked, when we asked, just as they were saying they never even had a program.

    Glass half full or half empty?

    Could see it either way, but no excuse for preemption exists, on the Iranian nuclear front.
    They have the authority to process uranium, to have the full enrichment process, in the Non-proliferation Treaty.

  2. Revisionism and The Iranian Non-Bomb
    [Victor Davis Hanson]

    The latest news from Iran about the supposed abandonment in 2003 of the effort to produce a Bomb � if even remotely accurate � presents somewhat of a dilemma for liberal Democrats.

    Are they now to suggest that Republicans have been warmongering over a nonexistent threat for partisan purposes? But to advance that belief is also to concede that, Iran, like Libya, likely came to a conjecture around (say early spring 2003?) that it was not wise for regimes to conceal WMD programs, given the unpredictable, but lethal American military reaction.

    After all, what critic would wish now to grant that one result of the 2003 war-aside from the real chance that Iraq can stabilize and function under the only consensual government in the region-might have been the elimination for some time of two growing and potentially nuclear threats to American security, quite apart from Saddam Hussein?

    Another feather in Mr Bush's cap, if spun correctly, as whit was saying, last thread.

    Success in Iraq, Libya and Iran.

    What more would a patriot want of US.

  3. What the heck has Bush been doing these past few month? If anyone in the world had 'wind' of what the Intelligence community was 'thinking' it would be him....errrr Him. I guess the decider in chief hasn't been doing his regular morning reading of the reports? All this while harping on WWIII due to Iranian weapons development and his own advice mechanism, his 'intelligence' was leaning the other way? It is just simply appalling that he was 'blindsided' at this stage. Maybe Cheney really does read and filter all reports before it gets to the decider, but even that is true, what does that say about Cheney's analytic skills? I just don't see Teresita's tinfoil hat contention that all those agencies purposely blindsided the boys at the top - what? they've kept all their estimates hidden until the document was written? Naw, Bush and team seem to exist in a bubble of their own design.

  4. ..."a bubble of their own design" with (as per DR's above comment) as spin machine par excellence.

  5. This comment has been removed by the author.

  6. This comment has been removed by the author.

  7. The push to regularize the situation with Iran is across the Federal spectrum of employees. Not limited to Intel folk.

    In Iraq, U.S. shifts its tone on Iran

    By Tina Susman, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer
    December 1, 2007
    BAGHDAD -- Not long ago, U.S. military officials in Iraq routinely displayed rockets, mortars and jagged chunks of metal to reporters and insisted that they were Iranian-made arms being fired at American bases. Collaboration between Tehran and Washington on stabilizing Iraq seemed doubtful at best.

    In the last two months, though, there has been a shift in U.S. military and diplomatic attitudes toward Iran. Officials have backed away from sweeping accusations that the Iranian leadership is orchestrating massive smuggling of arms, agents and ammunition. Instead, they have agreed to a new round of talks with Iranian and Iraqi officials over security in Iraq. The meeting is expected to take place this month.

    The U.S. also freed nine Iranian men last month, some of whom it had been holding since 2004. Iran denied U.S. accusations that many of them had been assisting anti-U.S. militias in Iraq, and had demanded their release in a series of testy exchanges with U.S. officials.

    When the U.S. freed them, it did not allude to the Iranian demands. It said only that they no longer posed a threat.

    Pentagon officials and analysts cite several reasons for the change, including U.S. concern that provoking Iran could set off a confrontation that military commanders are keen to avoid, and the realization that better relations with Iran would help stabilize Iraq.

    "I do think that the military and civilian leadership in Washington has by and large come to the realization that it's going to be impossible to stabilize Iraq without Iran's positive contribution or cooperation," said Karim Sadjadpour, an Iran expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington.


  8. They have the authority to process uranium, to have the full enrichment process, in the Non-proliferation Treaty.

    the treaty also hold for full openness

    the treaty does not allow for covert nuke operations that are only disclosed when tattled on..

    iran still does not disclose with openness it nuke programs, iran still doesnt allow inspection..

    so it's not a PICK or CHOOSE issue with the NPT

    they signed, they lied, they still cover up

    not at all with the spirit of the NPT

    also, Iran in violation of the UN CHARTER have called for the destruction of fellow member states.

    thus you may sing kumbaya all you wish, iran was and is a threat to the USA, the arabs, the Jews & Europe. (and also quite funny Russia)

  9. Is it just a coincidence that the release of the NIE report is coming so close on the heels of the Annapolis Conference? The thrust of that conference was to isolate Israel and promote the interest of the US's oil-producing, Arab "Allies". Clearly the report makes it more difficult for the Israeli's to initiate military action against Iran's now "non-existant" A-bomb program. The US apparently forcing the cancellation of an advanced Israeli spy satellite, which would be used to monitor the Iranian (as well as all the peace loving Arab states) also reeks of the sell-out to the interests of the oil sheiks.

    The September launch of an Israeli spy satellite from India, which now faces months of postponements, was canceled due to "last-minute" pressure by the United States, the Indian press reported Monday.

    The TECSAR will monitor Iran's nuclear weapons progress.
    Photo: IAI
    The TecSar satellite - developed and manufactured by Israel Aerospace Industries (IAI) - initially was supposed to be launched in September, on the heels of the June launch of the Ofek 7 spy satellite. It is the first Israeli satellite with Synthetic Aperture Radar (SAR) capabilities, a technology that allows the camera to take pictures of targets in all weather conditions.

    Weighing just under 300 kilograms, the TecSar was developed by the IAI's Space Division MBT and has the ability to create images of objects on Earth even in cloudy weather conditions, a capability not available in Israel's Ofek satellite series.

    The Israelis say that Iran did halt their A-bomb development program in 2003 as stated in the NIE report, but have since resumed it. Fortunately the US and its oil producing allies won't have to worry about the new spy satellite producing any data support the Israeli claim, at least for a while.

    So we regularize our relations with the chief sponsor of terrorism in the region at the same time that we force the Israelis to concede security assets. Perhaps Mr. Bush is just looking for a coherent foreign policy vis-a-vis the Middle East. Israel makes concessions, the Pals,Saudis Iranians etc. get what they want.

  10. Now drudge has this up as the banner story.

  11. Again, wi"o" the judge of Iranian compliance to the NPT is the IAEA, then the Security Council.

    The US but one vote amongst many on that panel.
    As we designed in 1948.

    When the Security Council agrees that Iran is not in compliance, then they won't be, but until then ... they are on track to fulfilling their legal obligations.

    As to Abracadbra's wish to wipe Israel off the map, he just wants that State moved. Perhaps to Europe or Nevada. Not really very reasonable, but neither was placing Israel in the middle of the Islamic Middle East.

    The clandestine nuclear program operating under the past "moderate" Iranian regieme. Heard Mr Bush say so himself, that Abracadbra was the problem, when it appears he is more moderate than the moderates he replaced, in his actions, if not his rhetoric.

    Mr Bush spinning the report the best he could.

  12. "We assess with high confidence that Iran has the scientific, technical and industrial capacity eventually to produce nuclear weapons if it decides to do so."


  13. "Instead, emotional circuits are activated that provide a momentary dollop of limbic ecstasy when a way is found to prove the other side wrong."

    Do you have limbic ecstasy?

    Dollops Of Limbic Ecstasy Here

  14. There's so much angst coming from left and right. The right thinks the Intel Community has blindsided the Administration and the left can't believe that the evil one isn't going to attack Iran. Such disappointment everywhere.

    Call me crazy, but I see this as a NIE report as a terrific development. Early on, George Bush said that he would not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon on his watch. That's beginning to look like "Mission Accomplished." Bush, almost alone, pressed forward with the surge which at this point certainly appears to be another success. Now, we can wrap up the nation building in Iraq which everyone, left and right, has just about had enough of anyway. Check and Checkmate.

    These developments could cement the '08 elections which could be more imminently critical to the US future than Iran. Conversely, escalating hostilities (right now) with Iran do not serve the interests of the economy, the military or the Republican party. It is entirely possible that oil prices will now begin to decline as the market begins to understand the implications. More good news for US
    voters next year.

    It's beginning to look a lot like Christmas!

  15. Few days ago I'd been reading that the USS Harry S. Truman was joining the USS Enterprise and USS Nimitz in the Gulf region, along with stuff about the Navy fueling up big time, ammo deliversies, and other items, and was thinking W was up to something. Being a voteless observer, not even a primary worth a sock to participate in, with second hand knowledge, sucks!

  16. Rasmussen has Giuliani and Huckabee tied, across the nation, for the first time.

  17. Yes, Huckabee sounds good until you begin to realize that he might have more in common with Jimmy Carter than Ronald Reagan. I think the American public will realize that Governor Huckabee is a little too compassionate for the times and circumstances. He's got issues with taxing and spending that I don't believe he has been entirely forthcoming about.

  18. Every woman has the capacity to be a whore, does not mean they all are.

    The Iranians may have the capacity, some day, to build a nuclear weapon, but then again, so do the South Africans.

    It is impossible to enforce ignorance around the globe, or even in Iran.

    2010 or 2015 or never, that's the estimate, depending upon what happens, in Iran. As to the US fleet, it comes, it goes. On a secret schedule, part of the soft power that has been so effective in obtaining US goals, with regards Iran.

  19. Mr Huckabee is a real Christian, which is something we don't need, in the White House.

  20. UN Nuclear Watchdog: US Report on Iran 'Consistent' With Its Own Findings
    12-04-2007 9:12 AM
    By WILLIAM J. KOLE, Associated Press Writer

    VIENNA, Austria (Associated Press) -- A new U.S. intelligence review that concludes Iran stopped developing a nuclear weapons program in 2003 is consistent with the U.N. atomic watchdog agency's own findings and "should help to defuse the current crisis," the organization's chief said Tuesday.

    "Although Iran still needs to clarify some important aspects of its past and present nuclear activities, the agency has no concrete evidence of an ongoing nuclear weapons program or undeclared nuclear facilities in Iran," International Atomic Energy Agency director-general Mohamed ElBaradei said in a statement.

    ElBaradei said he viewed "with great interest" Monday's release of a U.S. National Intelligence Estimate that said Tehran halted nuclear weapons development in late 2003 under international pressure.

    The UN and the US agree, ain't that grand.

    Success, without a shot being fired. Soft power diplomacy does its' thing.

    Peace in our time.

  21. Following are excerpts from a debate on apostates in Islam, which aired on Al-Risala TV on November 5, 2007.
    Sheik Tareq Al-Sweidan: We have a question for the viewers at home, not in the studio, and they can respond with a text message. What is the best way to deal with apostates who converted from Islam? You have three possible responses. The first is through dialogue only. The second option is killing them, and the third option is to leave it up to the legal system. Enter your votes, send in your answers, and the results will appear on the screen. As for the young people with us in the studio, you can participate in a survey on which we will base our discussion with our guests. You've heard one opinion, and my question is very simple: Does a Muslim have the liberty to change his religion or not? Does a Muslim have the liberty to change his religion?


    Al-Sweidan: If a person converted out of conviction, should he be declared an infidel?

    Abir: First, he should be allowed to repent. We should explain his error to him, and if he is adamant on rejecting this and insists on his interpretation, he should be allowed to repent and have the opportunity to...

    Al-Sweidan: And afterwards, he should be pronounced an infidel?

    Abir: I believe he should be.

    Al-Sweidan: Thank you, Abir. Let's move to Fatima. What's your opinion?

    Fatima: In my opinion, he should be declared an infidel. Why is there a problem with declaring people to be infidels?

    Al-Sweidan: I'm not saying there is, I'm just asking a question.

    Fatima: He should be declared an infidel. The Koran divided people into Muslims, infidels, and the People of the Book. So there is a group of people who should be declared infidels.


    Gamal 'Allam: With regard to matters of faith, the Sunni scholars have agreed that some acts lead to the excommunication of a person. If a person commits any of these acts, he is considered an infidel. The first case is denying something that is irrefutably part of Islam.


    Gamal 'Allam: Another case is when a person forbids something that is irrefutably permitted. If Allah permitted something, and along comes somebody and forbids it...

    Al-Sweidan: For example, some Muslim countries forbid polygamy.

    Gamal 'Allam: Someone who forbids polygamy is an infidel, who should be excommunicated, because he is defying Allah in his right to forbid and permit.


    Gamal 'Allam: Whoever rules according to a law other than the law sent down by Allah, and who does so out of full awareness and conviction...


    Gamal 'Allam: If he believes that his law is equal to the law of Allah, he is comparing Allah to human beings, and thus, he is an infidel. If he believes his law to be better than the law of Allah, then he prefers the creature over its Creator, and thus, he is an infidel.

    Gamal 'Allam: Anybody who calls people to worship him...

    Al-Sweidan: Obviously, like Pharaoh.

    Gamal 'Allam: Yes, anyone who called upon people...or who claimed he was the son of God, or that he...

    Al-Sweidan: This is obvious.


    Gamal 'Allam: One is considered an infidel if one curses Allah, His messenger, or the Koran, or who mocks the Prophet's family.


    Gamal 'Allam: Whoever mocks Muslim men or women because of their religion...I don't mean a person who has a dispute with someone, and says to him: You mock me as a Muslim, you are an infidel. I mean a person who mocks or curses a Muslim because he prays...

    Al-Sweidan: In other words, he mocks the religion.

    Gamal 'Allam: He mocks one of the religious rites. For example, a person who mocks a woman for wearing the veil...


    Gamal Al-Bana: Whoever says: "There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah" is a Muslim. End of discussion. It is not our place to delve into the details of his belief. In addition, heresy and faith are, first of all, up to Allah, and secondly, they are personal issues.


    Al-Sweidan: Before the break, I asked our audience for their views on this important issue. Does a Muslim have the liberty or the right to change his religion? The results are as follows: 24% said: "Yes, he has the right to change his religion." 76% of the people said: "No." Let's hear some opinions and then I will return to out guests.


    Audience member: Sir, if you become an apostate, your punishment is death. There is a great problem that most of us, 70% of us, are Muslims because they were born to Muslim fathers and mothers. Before a person converts to Islam, he has the liberty to choose, but remember that if you want to convert from Islam, you will be punished by death. So you have the liberty to choose, but on the condition...

    Al-Sweidan: That's not liberty.

    Audience member: It has conditions...

    Al-Sweidan: What you are saying is: You have the right to become an apostate, but I will kill you.

    Audience member: That's right. I won't tell him not to.

    Al-Sweidan: What can be worse than being killed?

    Audience member: That's why he will not become an apostate.

    Good thinking.

    from JihadWatch

    Options discussed included talk, chop, or leave it up to the legal system. Leaving it up to the legal system seems to narrow the options back to talk, or chop. The majority seems to favor chop. The good news is 24% of the audience favored letting a person alone.

  22. They were going to execute that convert in Afghanistan, a year or so ago.
    Another US sponsored Islamic Republic.

    Whole bunch of 'em out there.
    Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, Jordon, Saudi Arabia ...

    Sendin' those Dhimni payments, on time.

  23. Bobal: Leaving it up to the legal system seems to narrow the options back to talk, or chop. The majority seems to favor chop.

    Hassan chop!

    Try making that cartoon today!

  24. If Huck is Jimmah and I think you're right, and Romney is an electoral disaster as Rat says, and McCain is beginning to have senior moments, that leaves Giuliani and Thompson, and Thompson doesn't seem to be going anywhere, at least yet.

  25. Bobal: If Huck is Jimmah and I think you're right, and Romney is an electoral disaster as Rat says, and McCain is beginning to have senior moments, that leaves Giuliani and Thompson, and Thompson doesn't seem to be going anywhere, at least yet.

    Huckabee's rise in the polls is at the expense of Thompson. Huck thinks the Earth is 6,000 years old and doesn't even believe human beings are primates (but he is willing to let other people believe that: "If anybody wants to believe that they are the descendants of a primate, they are certainly welcome to do it." [from the first GOP debate in NH])

    Huck revealed the reasons why schools in Arkansas got an F in science standards by one independent survey: "Science changes with every generation and with new discoveries, and God doesn't. So I'll stick with God if the two are in conflict."

    No thanks, we've had eight years of that crap under Dubya.

  26. Huck knows more than Huck.:)

    "You can't behead me, I've got no neck!"

  27. "Science changes with every generation and with new discoveries, and God doesn't."

    Science changes with every generation. We all know that is so. A decade ago I was reading the universe would probably end, or begin again, in the big 'crunch.' Now I'm told the universe is speeding up in expansion, and is flying forever apart.

    God doesn't Well that's true, unless one has the idea of an emergent deity, which many have had.

    Huckabee's problem seems to be he's trying to read the Bible as geology, and biology,
    an old story, and mistake. Makes Christians look like fools. Someone ought to send him some Teilhard de Chardin, or many another. Teilhard knew the rocks, and was a catholic priest, and thought the journey is a long one, from dust to divinity. But maybe Huckabee is just playing the crowd, wooling the rubes, panhandling for votes. But I doubt it.

  28. Haaretz says NIE provides for hearty laughter in Tehran. Nice picture of Ahmadinajad in hearty laughter mode.

  29. I have become a fan of Duncan Hunter. The guy is a leader as well as a conservative.

  30. Trish needs to read this and comment before she goes to Colombia. I plead guilty to having been a chronic misspeller of Colombia. I still want to go for the "U".

    Mon Dec 03, 10:56:00 PM EST

    Feels like someone opened a window and let in a little fresh air. As Martha Stewart says, "It's a good thing."

    I don't think it obviously benefits or harms any given camp's political prospects. All depends.

    And whit's got a point, as does Rat, that when Bush declared unambiguously a couple of years ago that Iran would not be allowed to acquire a nuclear weapon - which we always understood to mean "on my watch" - that this can be employed as an indication of mission accomplished. Surely this is part of the intent, as well. Bush, of course, isn't running for re-election. The interesting problem as I see it is the extent to which an "excess demand" for war with Iran has been created on the Right. What do you with, how do you address, that demand as a political matter? If you believe, as Ledeen-ites do, that the intel community is an actively subversive bloc vis a vis this administration, and the national defense generally, you're going to keep banging the same ol' drum and looking for candidates doing the same. On the Left and among sundry anti-war/ anti-intervention folks, however, as a practical matter, it's harder to keep asserting, a la Raimondo, that "Iran is the Plan." It never was, but for not a few on both sides, that has continued to be the story line. (Regime change, keep in mind, is still the official policy, but that's another matter.)

    My 2 cents.

    (VDH, that SOB, I don't even want to talk about.)

  31. But maybe Huckabee is just playing the crowd, wooling the rubes, panhandling for votes. But I doubt it.
    Like Clinton-- Huckabee is a people person.

    In case you want to catch the streaming video of the surf meet ongoing at Sunset Beach,North Shore, Oahu, Hawaii--try this link:

  32. "The right thinks the Intel Community has blindsided the Administration and the left can't believe that the evil one isn't going to attack Iran. Such disappointment everywhere."

    - whit

    Let me ask you something, whit, in all friendliness.

    When you hear the phrase "intel community," what organization comes to mind?

  33. The Central Intelligence Agency.

  34. Whit, the very purpose of creating a CENTRAL intelligence agency was to distill the products of any number of competing intelligence agencies.

  35. Weren't 16 agencies involved in the NIE?

  36. Exactly.

    Who comprises the vast bulk of the intelligence community?

  37. The older I get sometimes I think the only intelligence community around is the Amish, who will have a leg up when we run out of gas.

  38. Trish asked "which organization comes to mind." The CIA comes to mind even though there are 16 different agencies in the "community" but how many of them would make this kind of determination about Iran? Most would probably plead agnostic. I agree with Ash though that State is a big player; perhaps too big...

  39. And just who says they don't want another war?


  40. Independent Agencies
    Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)

    United States Department of Defense

    Secretary of Defense, through the Counterintelligence Field Activity (CIFA)

    Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance Agency (AF ISR) AIA

    Army Intelligence [1]

    Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA)

    Marine Corps Intelligence Activity [2]

    National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA)

    National Reconnaissance Office (NRO)
    National Security Agency (NSA)

    Office of Naval Intelligence (ONI)

    United States Department of Energy

    Office of Intelligence

    United States Department of Homeland Security

    Coast Guard Intelligence [3]

    Office of Intelligence and Analysis

    United States Department of Justice

    Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Directorate of Intelligence

    Drug Enforcement Administration,
    Office of National Security Intelligence (DEA)

    United States Department of State
    Bureau of Intelligence and Research (INR)

    United States Department of the Treasury
    Office of Intelligence and Analysis

  41. Eight of the sixteen, DoD

    Mr Gates is half of the "Community",
    as Mr Rumsfeld used to be.

    Bet if the budget numbers were available that the DoD gets more than half the cash.

  42. Newsweak on Mr Gates and his position on furniture placement in the halls of power.

    Team41, Dad had to get some old school adults in the game.

  43. Bet if the budget numbers were available that the DoD gets more than half the cash.

    Tue Dec 04, 05:46:00 PM EST

    You betcha.

  44. It's the "Army", guys, that "blindsided" the drum beaters. Not CIA or State. Minor players in the intel game.

    Mr Gates cutting Mr Cheney off at the knees.

  45. So Trish, are you implying that DoD intel orgs blindsided the Commander-in-Chief?

  46. The only reason why the CIC would be blindsided is if he wasn't keeping (kept) up to date. He's got no one to blame but himself and those he lets filter what he observes.

  47. Rumsfeld in '05, Gates in '07.

    There's the difference, the tone from the headman.

    Factor in that the Army has been saying the Iranians have been helpful, in stabilizing Iraq, for the last two months.

    We ain't fightin' no new wars, not if the DoD has a say in the matter.

  48. Hell, no.

    I've said before countless times that Iran was never the Plan.

    (What Cheney might or might not have wanted, I've haven't the faintest.)

  49. I only want you to stop and think whenever you come across that phrase, "intel community." Loaded with freight, but it's deceptive.

  50. The Agency's value is in its unique control by the Executive. And for that there is no replacement. As the Executive discovered.

  51. Alireza Asgari

    This fellow, does he have a role in this?

  52. Timmerman.

    That rings a distant bell.

  53. I'm just regurgitating/reporting what I'm hearing on Savage.

    Traitors everywhere.

  54. My former colleague from the Washington Times, Bill Gertz, suggests in today’s print edition of the paper that Revolutionary Guards Gen. Alireza Asgari, who defected while in Turkey in February, was the human source whose information led to the NIE”s conclusion that Iran had stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003.

    But intelligence sources in Europe told Newsmax in late September that Asgari’s debriefings on Iran’s nuclear weapons programs were “so dramatic” that they caused French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his foreign minister to speak out publicly about the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran.


  55. "But intelligence sources in Europe told Newsmax in late September that Asgari’s debriefings on Iran’s nuclear weapons programs were “so dramatic” that they caused French President Nicolas Sarkozy and his foreign minister to speak out publicly about the threat of a nuclear-armed Iran."

    Well, you can wipe your ass with that quoting intelligence officials, who are...fuck knows who.

  56. "Intelligence sources" even lower on the totem.

  57. My dad used to sometimes say...

    "I know I'm getting screwed, but I can't figure just how."

  58. I know what my dad would say. If you can't figure out how you're getting screwed, you don't know and can't say that you are.

    Better figure it out.

  59. When you don't even know you're getting screwed, that's when your're really getting screwed.

  60. Teresita,

    Congratulations on your promotion.

  61. sam said:

    Teresita, Congratulations on your promotion.

    Thanks Sam. Keep on stirring the pot and you'll get your Oak Leaf Cluster, or Four Leaf Clover, or Drop Leaf Table, or whatever.