Main Architect Of Pre Iraq War Intelligence Denies Responsibility

Douglas Feith, the man whose lies got American troops into Iraq, is now lying about his role in putting them there.Main Architect of Pre-Iraq War Intelligence Denies ResponsibilityBy Cliff Montgomery – May 1st, 2007Douglas Feith, the former Under Secretary of Defense for Policy at the Pentagon whom many say is the main architect of the false intelligence which got America into Iraq, recently made a round of the Sunday talk shows sprouting the pretense that his prewar assessment of a relationship between Iraq and al-Qaeda was simply a much-needed critique of the CIA’s intelligence on the subject.”It’s healthy to criticize the CIA’s intelligence,” said Feith during a February appearance on Fox News Sunday. “What the people in the Pentagon were doing was right. It was good government.”It was nothing of the kind. Feith has only added insult to injury for every honest American. A February review by the Defense Department Inspector General (DoD IG) clearly stated that Feith’s office did not provide a mere intelligence critique, but instead “developed, produced, and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaida relationship, which included some conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community, to senior decision makers.””This condition,” the report continued, “occurred because of an expanded role and mission of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy from policy formulation to alternative intelligence analysis and dissemination.”The IG’s report also found that “the CIA and DIA disavowed any ‘mature, symbiotic’ relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida.””No one in my office ever claimed there was an operational relationship,” Feith denied on Fox News Sunday. “[But] there was a relationship,” he added.In truth, the 2004 report from the bi-partisan Sept. 11th Commission found no evidence of a collaborative relationship between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist organization–the same conclusion reached by every official Post-Iraq War study on the subject.The DoD IG report reiterated the Pentagon’s view that the actions of Feith’s office were neither illegal or unauthorized–but the IG admitted they were an inappropriate “alternative” analysis which did not reflect the consensus of the intelligence community or include caveats about the information’s reliability.Feith claimed this amounted to circular logic from the Pentagon’s internal watchdog.”The people in my office were doing a criticism of the intelligence community consensus,” Feith said. “By definition, that criticism varied. If it didn’t vary, they wouldn’t have done the criticism.”Feith’s rhetorical device here is a type of denial known as the “half-truth”–he deliberately leaves out the part of the truth which makes him look bad. Feith’s argument hinges on the falsehood that his actions and those of his staff to aggressively argue for an Iraq invasion is the same as offering an unbiased critique of varying intelligence.But let’s put this half-truth in context: Imagine you are a doctor, and a patient of yours is very sick. This patient has been to a few previous doctors, who offered rather differing views on the patient’s illness. If you’re a concerned and honest doctor, you would indeed point out the variation of views, but would also try to refrain from any aggressive treatment until more definite evidence shows a certain prognosis to be the correct one. However, a dishonest doctor would openly ignore all the facts  he or she does not wish to hear, and would aggressively put forward only that evidence–however flimsy or foolish–which fits their unfounded preconceptions.Let’s just say that while the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, Mr. Feith behaved like a dishonest doctor rather than an honest one and leave it at that.When asked if his office ever made the case against going to war with Saddam Hussein, Feith said, “The answer is emphatically yes.”But wishful thinking is not truth Mr. Feith, regardless of the intensity of the wish.Senator Jack Reed (R-RI), a member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, pointed out that  the Pentagon–through Feith’s office–in fact intentionally made an exclusive case for war in 2002 based on obviously skewed analysis.”They did it very deliberately,” Sen. Reed replied. “They used that analysis. It was leaked to the media. It was reported in newspapers. It took on a credibility beyond the facts that the intelligence community had.” Reed also appeared on Fox News Sunday.In February, Senator Carl Levin, Chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, released the declassified report of the DoD IG on its “Review of the Pre-Iraqi War Activities of the Office of the Under Secretary of Defense for Policy.” The report was declassified at Levin’s request.”It is important for the public to see why the Pentagon’s Inspector General concluded that Secretary Feith’s office ‘developed, produced and then disseminated alternative intelligence assessments on the Iraq and al-Qaeda relationship,'” said Sen. Levin.”These included ‘conclusions that were inconsistent with the consensus of the Intelligence Community,’ and why the Inspector General concluded that these actions were ‘inappropriate,'” he added.