some thoughts on EW's "revolt of the spooks". . .

EW has, once again, done a fine
job of running to ground a whole host
of oddly-timed confluences. . .

[go read the link, above.]

which is to say, she is likely 90%
correct in her hunches about why we
are reading what we are reading, now,
in the wa po -- if not the nyt.

here is hers:

. . .what matters is that when Congress had
the opportunity to intervene, it did
not do so. Which, if I were the CIA
about to undergo painful Congressional
inquiries into past practices, I would
want to be clearly established. So here's
what has happened in the last 10 days.
The Intelligence Community has severely
undercut Dick Cheney's propaganda efforts and
threatened his plans to bring us to war.
Someone -- perhaps DOJ or perhaps CIA or
perhaps both -- has made it a lot harder
for Bush to veto a bill getting the CIA
out of the waterboarding business. And,
at the same time, CIA has made it crystal
clear that the waterboarding itself -- as
distinct from the destruction of the torture
tapes -- had legal sanction from Congress'
top intelligence leaders.

That all makes sense to me, in a way
that doesn't require the involvement of
Republicans smear masters at all. . .

with almost all of the above, i agree.

i simply would suggest that the nuance suggested
by EW may never be verifiable. what is verifiable
is that porter goss is likely to be the focus of an
obstruction of justice inquiry, if not an indictment.

and he is a named source for the wa po piece.
i simply suggest motive to spin, here -- and he
has truckloads of motive. it likely won't
matter to the larger narrative -- that
is, he (or someone like him) will be the
focus, as opposed to the grand architect, cheney. . .

but i do agree this blood is on all of our hands.

i simply suggest that the wa po was perhaps
willingly used by porter goss, and the wa po
willingly used porter goss, to try to grab some
headlines back from the new york times -- as
the grey lady has simply owned the past week
of scandal-breaking, and coverage of the same.

the wa po needed a "me too!" piece; goss kindly
offered. the wa po honored the offer. thus the "expose". . .

just my $0.02.

but my version doesn't require a civil war
inside intelligence agencies -- nor a revolt.

just ordinary courage of conviction.
a conviction to let the truth, out.

that is, i think the intelligence folks are
actually just doing their job -- telling
the truth as theyknow it -- and if that
now means crossing the president, and
his vice emperor -- so be it.

i just wish they'd done so in 2002, or 2003.

but that ship sailed.

p e a c e

read more | digg story