Tuesday, September 26, 2006

We don't need no stinkin' National Intelligence

That's the message you get from the Bush administration when you learn that they've only ordered one National Intelligence Estimate on global Jihadism since the invasion of Iraq, just one.

In case you're wondering, a National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) is the general concensus, and hopefully honest assessment, of the combined intelligence apparatus of the government. It's purpose is to provide a sober bottom line on what we know, not what we think, or hope, or want, but is real. It's the best tool the president has, especially in time of war, because of its unfiltered analysis.

No one can argue that the world is in a state of conflict with political unrest, wars, a low opinion of the U.S and the constant threat of terrorist attack anywhere, anytime. That's got to keep a president up at night. Yet Bush has only ordered one NIE in nearly 4 years. And while most thinking people are probably not surprised, there is a firestorm of reaction to what is a very grim picture painted by this belated NIE.

I don't know about you, but if I was at war with the world, I'd have a full-blown NIE every month, with daily updates in between, and I'd be running it out of the basement of the Whitehouse so I could drop in on them day or night. This is important stuff!

Anyway, the Bush machine is trying to downplay the reality of the NIE by saying that the portion of it leaked to the media does not give the big picture. Okay, I'll give them that. But what is the big picture, and who leaked the part we did see? The latter doesn't matter but apparently one of the few people privy to the big picture felt somehow duty-bound to let us in on it and probably chose the portion that would get the most attention, so as to draw attention to the rest of it.

Anytime someone leaks classified material to the press, they do so at great personal risk so either this is someone with a conscience who has had enough of the bullshit and found an opportunity to do something positive, or perhaps it is a ploy by the administration to whip up controversy, get everyone focused on it, only to douse it with an incontrovertable rebuttal, just in time for elections. It's hard to tell anymore what is or isn't part of a carefully calculated political play, but judging by the record of these guys, they're not smart enough to pull of something like this so I'll stick to my own personal intelligence estimate that they've got another PR problem and a bit of 'splainin' to do. I can't wait to see how they handle it.

No comments: