It's easy, we fed the Germans false information that reinforced their beliefs and what they wanted to hear. The Germans believed that an invasion in the Pas de Calais area was the most suitable place for such an attack. We invaded somewhere else. The deception was so elaborate and convincing that some influential German generals did not accept Normandy as the actual landing until July, 1944. They were fooled and the allies won.

Are we being fooled now? We are being told exactly what our cowardly US politicians want to hear. Iran has only peaceful nucular intentions after all, Ahmadinijad said so, didn't he?

Bush wanted to hear about Iraqi megadeath weapons, and he was told exactly that. The American voters also want to hear good news, and it is being dished in giant spoonfuls.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 10, 2007 2:07 PM

Ahmedinajad said it himself, "In 2003 we ceased to have a nuclear program in Iran. And no more homosexuals either. No nukes and no gays..."

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at December 10, 2007 2:14 PM

"The report used new evidence - including human sources, wireless intercepts and evidence from an Iranian defector . . . "

Substitute British for Iranian, and you have exactly the disinforamtion that fooled the Germans in the Spring of 1944. That saying about remembering history is not just an old, worn out platitude.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 10, 2007 2:22 PM

Concerning British spies' well-founded concerns about the CIA being fed misinformation by Iran, all I can add is:

Well, somebody certainly misinformed this agency--and, intentionally.

Posted by: pythagoras at December 10, 2007 2:23 PM

Some have charged those responsible for the NIE Report with deliberately attempting to sabotage efforts to deal, militarily, with the menace of Iran by pretending that the menace does not exist. That is one possibility.

Another is that the Americans involved are, like so many Americans who are supposed to know what they are doing when they make high policy, complete naifs.

When I was ten I read Ewen Montagu's "The Man Who Never Was" about one of the cleverest -- possibly the cleverest -- and successful efforts to mislead the Germans about the Allied invasion plans. Its cover, I remember, showed a British officer's hat and uniform, but no head under that hat or body inside that uniform. An invisible man, The Man Who Never Was.

Ideally, those who are in the CIA and the NSA and similar outifts would have read such a book when they, too, had been ten-year-old boys. And then, when they were bigger -- say, during the last six years -- they would have been burning the midnight oil learning all about Islam, its texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics, so as to understand what makes Muslims tick, and what makes the khomeinis and khameinis and ahmadinajads and all those nameless promoters and organizers of Iran's nuclear-weapons project tick.

Both failures are disturbing. Surely the most disturbing is the failure to grasp, or even to begin to study in order to try to grasp, the meaning, and history, and menace, of Islam. But the inability of supposedly hard-headed, tough-minded "realistic" Americans in the CIA and NSA to understand that those whose lives are based on deception, who are to the manner born, would be able to figure out how to pretend to be continuing a policy (the temporary abandonment of the nuclear project just after the American invasion of Iraq) that may indeed have been adopted but then, most likely, was quickly abandoned once it was clear the American forces would not be proceeding to satisfactorily deal with Iran once they were stuck to Tarbaby Iraq, is amazing. Of course the Iranians are keenly aware of American abilities to listen, to monitor their communications. But they are also capable of exploiting those very abilities.

Who will send a thousand officials in our government copies -- brand new, nice paperbacks, easy to read -- of Ewen Montagu's "The Man Who Never Was"?

Perhaps Brown, or better Sarkozy, can have copies of Montagu's book hand-delivered to Bush and to Rice. Or they can just print out the entry in "Wikipedia" on The Man Who Never Was.

Posted by: Hugh at December 10, 2007 2:30 PM

...ring ring....

....CIA headquarters, agent Barney , how may I help you today...

....Hey Bud, this is Ahmadenijad, put me through to the chief...

....ok, one moment....

ring, ring....CIA headquartes, Chief Dumbo here...

....Chief , this agent Barney, I have Ahmadinejad on the line wanting to talk to you...

....ok, put him though...

....Ok, Ahmadinejad , what is it this time?....

....Hey Dumbo, I just thought you might want some inside information that you can use to reveal what a slug Bush is and at the same time you can please all the leftist and dhimmicrats and anyone associated with the United States teachers unions....

...kool...whatizit....

....Listen closely Dumbo....I am telling you the truth...I gave up the idea of making nuclear bombs four years ago because I feared they could be used to annihilate the Jews....really!...oh yeah, I have also stopped sending suicide bombers and tons of shaped charges and other weapons into Iraq....and I have stopped supplying Hizabollah with rockets and small arms...I also have stopped shipping rockets and explosives to Afghanistan for the taliban to use when they attack churches, schools, hospitals, and infidels...and I have no issues with Iranian students and there are no queers in Iran....

...Gee thanks Ahmadinejad, this is just the news the Americans have been waiting to hear,,,I will get this out to those famous newscasters, wolfowitz and anderson cooper, keith overby, jack cafferty, matt lauer, and chris matthews...
...it will be on TV tomorrow...I believe you are telling the truth...Just wait until Dubya gets wind of this new developement...I guess we can quit monitoring you now...

...that's right Buddy,, I owe you one....

...Ok Amadinejad, I get right on and peace brother...

...Right.....

...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at December 10, 2007 2:55 PM

"The Man Who Never Was"

Hugh, when I was ten, I saw the movie and watch it every time it is shown if I have the time.

It is on of those very good British WW2 movies made in the fifties.

Posted by: Pelayo at December 10, 2007 3:30 PM

Bolton told us this a week ago.

Posted by: awake at December 10, 2007 3:37 PM

While Qadhafi is invited in France, see the VIDEO of the vision of "Eurabia" that the leader of Lybia spread on April 10, 2006 :

"Europe will be an islamic continent"

http://leblogdrzz.over-blog.com/article-14516511.html

Posted by: drzz at December 10, 2007 3:38 PM

"The timing of the CIA report has also provoked fury in the British Government, where officials believe it has undermined efforts to impose tough new sanctions on Iran and made an Israeli attack on its nuclear facilities more likely."

Skip the sanctions and go straight to bombs.

You hear this Mr. Dinahjacket? Israel gonna get you and you can't blame any of us.
Did anyone notice that Iran has publicly charged us with spying to get this info? LOL

Very Churchillian.

Posted by: Aunt Bea at December 10, 2007 3:41 PM

exsgtbrown

"...ring ring....

....CIA headquarters, agent Barney , how may I help you today...

....Hey Bud, this is Ahmadenijad, put me through to the chief..."

where did you get this top secret transcript from? you must have friends in high places!

Posted by: leonthepigfarmer at December 10, 2007 3:59 PM

The NIE report has destroyed any hopes of a successful tightening of economic sanctions on Iran.

I've been pondering the possibility that the NIE report was part of a quid pro quo...an orchestrated response by the Bush Admin. to Iran's role in the remarkable success of the so-called surge in Iraq?

All one need do is acknowledge that the success of the surge would never have been possible if Iranian policy had been to use its proxies in Iraq (both Sunni and Shia) to exacerbate the violence there...(as they've done since the invasion). Instead, by all accounts, it appears the Iranians have changed policy and opted for restraint...contributing to the dramatic drop in the level of violence in Iraq.

On the heels of this policy of restraint comes the bogus NIE report absolving Iran of its nuclear ambitions.

Whatever short-term benefits we accrue through stability in Iraq will be certainly negated by the birth of a nuclear Iran. Perhaps Bush is developing feet of clay late in his second term, realizing that stopping the Iranian program was impossible without a military strike that the American public had no appetite for...and therefore decided to make a deal with the devil.

Posted by: Cornelius at December 10, 2007 4:07 PM

At first when I heard this initial report I was speechless, after everything we have known to be true about the Iranians and their deceit I could not fathom how 16 of our intelligence agencies could have come to the conclusion that they have actually suspended weapons manufacturing.

I was sure President Bush was going to come out and bash the report, when he didn't and supported the conclusions I had a sick feeling in my gut. Bush has hung the Israelis out to dry. Congress will in no way support military action against Iran and may even attempt to impeach Bush and Cheney if they go for it, although sanctions seem to be working somewhat, they obviously aren't enough and Russia and China are playing both sides of the fiddle so to speak. They will never allow stronger sanctions against Iran. Israel has repeatedly said if we have to do it alone we will.

Bush wants to stop Iran at all costs, and Cheney would rather do it with a full on military strike, this is their way of getting what they want and not actually giving the order to American troops to pull the trigger.

Israel will go it alone and I'm afraid will also pay a heavy price, who else but the US has ever really backed them up?

Posted by: gaelen at December 10, 2007 4:21 PM

I'm slightly encouraged by the nearly universal skepticism expressed about this NIE and the general lack of quality and unreliabilty of American I intelligence in general. It was inevitable that the hideous failure of the 9/11 intelligence catastrophe, and the subsequent failure to purge the corrupt CIA of all the moles, morons, and nincompoops would cause America more troubles, and here it is in spades.

So why be "slightly encouraged"? Because there are many possible silver linings which may come from this debacle.

First and foremost will be the essential shifting from America's shoulders onto all the rest for the looming conflict with Shiite Iran's vile form of Islam. France, Germany, Russia, and most importantly, those several arrogant Sunni Arab tyrants across the Gulf can no longer sit cynically back and watch Gulliver lashed down by all their treachery and inactivity. America's intelligence 'street cred' is now thoroughly blown, as if 9/11 and Micael Sheuer hadn't done so already. That's bad, but if the others in the world who are equally threatened by Iran's genocidal regime are now forced to act, then the collapse of our malfunctioning intelligence regime needn't be a total loss. It could even be thought of as a great exchange.

Will the American Administration be smart enough to finesse this situation? I doubt it. But the thought of how much more worried various Arab regimes must have become the instant that preposterous NIE was published is nice to think about. Why shouldn't they foot the whole bill for their defense, and the defense of Europe? Let them do some of the worrying, some of the heavy lifting, more of the spending, and much more of the dying for a change.

Posted by: jsla at December 10, 2007 4:35 PM

It's easy to be "winked" when your hood is missing..........

Posted by: n.a. palm at December 10, 2007 5:04 PM

Iranians have a nuke program going on. It might have been suspended for awhile in 2003, but, it is going on underground.

Posted by: callmeinfidel at December 10, 2007 5:22 PM

Bush Embarks on Saudi-Brokered Deal with Tehran

"Saudi and American sources told DEBKAfile that President George W. Bush used the Annapolis conference as a piece of theater, which presented a sham moderate Arab front against Iran to disguise the intense work underway on a Saudi-mediated accommodation between Washington and Tehran.

The Bush administration appears to be in the midst of developing a new foreign strategy based on five key elements:

1. The halt of Iranian weapons and road bomb shipments into Iraq for use against US forces;

2. An Iranian instruction to Hizballah to open the way for the election of a Lebanese president, in return for which Washington will not interfere with the formation of a new government with a place of honor for the Iranian surrogate militia.

In other words, the Bush administration is not only engaged in a sellout of the Israeli government but also of the pro-Western Lebanese prime minister Fouad Siniora.

3. The cessation of Iranian arms and roadside bombs to Afghanistan.

4. The naming of Saudi Arabia as a channel for arbitrating American and Iranian differences.

5. A US pledge to backtrack on its charges that the Iran is engaged in developing nuclear weapons. This pledge was embodied in the dramatically revised US National Intelligence Estimate compared with its estimate of 2005, and effectively lifted not only the American military axe from over Iran’s strategic and economic infrastructure – and possibly regime - but also tied Israel’s hands."
[...]

Ominously:

"Moscow has dispatched war fleets to the Mediterranean and the northeast Atlantic.

A flotilla of six Russian warships including a carrier will dock at Syria’s Tartous port for the first time."

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=1321

Posted by: Mike_W at December 10, 2007 5:57 PM

Hugh said

When I was ten I read Ewen Montagu's "The Man Who Never Was" about one of the cleverest -- possibly the cleverest -- and successful efforts to mislead the Germans about the Allied invasion plans.

That was certainly a successful ruse. Another was the demotion of Patton after the "slapping incident" in Sicily, when he was put in charge of a non-existent Army battalion in the leadup to the Normandy invasion. This was a part of Operation Fortitude, which successfully fooled Nazi Germany about where the invasion would hit. I remember seeing video of inflatable army tanks and airplanes being displayed at phony military bases.

Is it possible that the CIA and NSA were fooled by the Iranians? Of course. Could there have been a body found floating in the Persian Gulf with a briefcase full of false Iranian nuclear "secrets"? Sure. Is it possible that Ahmedinijiad called the CIA and told them he had stopped his nuclear program, and the CIA dutifully wrote down that conclusion as others suggested above? I guess so.

Even leaving Islam out of it (since it is the RoP, and unrelated to jihad), Iran is a country that has stated their intention to destroy Israel and the U.S. The President included them in the "Axis of Evil", so it's safe to assume the CIA and NSA are watching Iran pretty closely. The question of whether they have nuclear weapons is near the top, if not at the top, of the foreign policy concerns. Could they have flubbed the most important question on their plate? Sure.

-BUT-

From the article:

But British intelligence is concerned that US spy chiefs were so determined to avoid giving President Bush a reason to go to war - as their reports on Saddam Hussein's weapons programmes did in Iraq - that they got it wrong this time.

Again, it's easy to make vague unsubstantiated claims. It's one thing to say that they missed the evidence or were duped. It's another to say, as the British are doing here, that they are intentionally hiding the evidence that they have. Each of the heads of the various intelligence agencies has spent their career in the military and intelligence-gathering. I doubt that any of them are well-versed in Islamic ideology or history, but again, that is not required to answer the question of whether Iran is building nuclear weapons. I cannot imagine these men intentionally hiding data critical to the security of the country, in order to help Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid.

And even if you believe these leaders are all traitors and collaborating on hiding the evidence, we're supposed to believe that the same low-level CIA agents who are now in hot water for supposedly torturing suspects in Guantanamo Bay are willing to go along with the traitorous deception, just because it makes Bush look bad.

If the British or Israeli security agents have information to the contrary, I would hope that it would be shared with their U.S. counterparts. Then we could move from the current "U.S. intelligence hiding evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons" claims to "U.S. and British/Israeli intelligence differ in various degrees as to the interpretation of evidence of Iranian nuclear weapons".

I am tired of this story, but not as tired as hearing one group of Americans wage an all-out blitzkrieg of personal attacks against anyone who disagrees with them on any topic.

Posted by: special_guest at December 10, 2007 6:02 PM

If we really had a free press instead of an agenda driven one. These "experts" would be grilled about this reversal. Instead, for once, they take it on its face value. Why question what you hear when it is what you want to hear.

The MSM has broken its own mold here. Instead of refuting everything from the Bush Administration has ever said, as they have. Now they are more than willing to accept it, without questions.

Time to toss some Manurer in with those dead Fish and rotten Eggs.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at December 10, 2007 6:03 PM

The NIE, that incoherent document contradicting reality and common sense, and even itself, one paragraph cancelling out another, is every bit as disgraceful as that infamous Munich treason paper Chamberlain waived, promissing "peace in our time", and has the potential to cause even more evil.
It is our own US government who are Chamberlains now, however! Even the British and other Eurabians are dismayed! Make no mistake: this evil document was ordered by the cowards in charge of our government to use as an excuse for not dealing with the Iranian nuclear terror threat. The EUrabians, both the government and the populations, were ready to back us in a military action, because they knew what terrorists with nukes will mean for everybody! But our US government has now sunk even lower than the EUrabians! Most of us, American citizens, as weary as we are of Bush's ineptly waged wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, were on board when it came to taking military action to prevent Iranian nuclear terror. Argentina's new leftist President Christina Kirschner was firmly on our and Israel's side against Iran. We all looked to the Bush clique for leadership, and they let us all down! The evil NIE is already wrecking great havoc destroying the last best chance to prevent nuclear terror!
Cowards, cowards, cowards Bush, Rice, Gates and the CIA!

Ruslan Tokhchukov, EnragedSince1999.

Posted by: Enragedsince1999 at December 10, 2007 6:12 PM

Cornelius said

I've been pondering the possibility that the NIE report was part of a quid pro quo...an orchestrated response by the Bush Admin. to Iran's role in the remarkable success of the so-called surge in Iraq?

That's a very interesting idea.

But again, if the idea is that Iran is continuing their nuclear program, and we know it, but the Bush Administration is putting out this false NIE as a reward to Iran for a temporary hudna in Iraq ... I'm no fan of Bush, but even I can't believe he would do something like that.

Posted by: special_guest at December 10, 2007 6:15 PM

According to the Wall Street Journal this newest NIE report on Iran was principally composed by three individuals----Thomas Fingar, Vann Van Diepen and Kenneth Brill. All three are State Department officials and all three according to the WSJ are deeply hostile to President Bush's foreign policy and have been working for years to downplay Iran's nuclear ambitions in order to thwart the Bush Administration from going after Iran militarily. Politics, politics, politics. There's much below the surface on this one and meanwhile America, Israel and all of the West are less safe because of personal animosity that is beginning to reach suicidal levels.

Posted by: Wellington at December 10, 2007 6:16 PM

So what you are saying, is that the CIA are gullible fools?

Britain must be getting ready to send in 007.

Posted by: payingattention at December 10, 2007 6:42 PM

I am tired of this story, but not as tired as hearing one group of Americans wage an all-out blitzkrieg of personal attacks against anyone who disagrees with them on any topic.
Posted by: special_guest

You must have been talking to the same people I have...

Posted by: duh_swami at December 10, 2007 7:11 PM

Good Evening special_guest,

“Another was the demotion of Patton after the "slapping incident" in Sicily, when he was put in charge of a non-existent Army battalion in the leadup to the Normandy invasion.”

Historically, a battalion varied from less than 300 to as many as 1000 soldiers. Patton’s Third Army had over 200,000 soldiers. He was put in charge of a fictitious army.

I am very much enjoyed James Burke courtesy of youtube. Someone has posted all episodes there. Please check it out before it is gone.

Take care!

Posted by: patagonianplato at December 10, 2007 7:31 PM

Once again the Duke of Wellington reminds me of the poem "If" by Rudyard Kipling. Yes indeed, there is much below the surface. Could it be that Bush is playing divide and conquer here? Is he pitting the Persians against the Arabs to force a deal for the Jews? Foggy bottom seems to be taking a few hits. Of course, those who love to call others stupid, who sing their own praises as ten year olds, who pump up their egos hoping to strut about as the alpha male, cannot even consider this as a possibility.

Posted by: justask at December 10, 2007 7:53 PM

patagonianplato said

Historically, a battalion varied from less than 300 to as many as 1000 soldiers. Patton’s Third Army had over 200,000 soldiers. He was put in charge of a fictitious army.

The Third Army is far from fictitious. That was the army that he was placed in charge of when his command was reinstated after the Normandy invasion.

It was the First U.S. Army Group that was fictional.

You are correct about the size of a battalion, that was my mistake. However, since the size was actually 1 (plus a few aides), one could argue that "battalion" is more accurate than "army". I won't.

Thanks, I'll try to check out YouTube after the Special Guestettes are in bed. Regards.

Posted by: special_guest at December 10, 2007 10:16 PM

Are we getting our money's worth with the CIA? I do not think so!

Posted by: have_mercy at December 11, 2007 12:12 AM

Even IF the report is correct, the actions and activity in Iran right now moves them closer to nuclear bomb production every day. They work to get the raw materials, and from there to restart the program and produce a weapon, is as short as twelve weeks.

The guard must hold their shields, to be ready and alert, do not fall asleep.

Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at December 11, 2007 1:06 AM

I think that Bush and Cheney allowed this to pass so that the masses understand how hidebound and useless sections of the CIA are. Now even the - Iran needs nukes for electricity generation - spinners are confused. They too could not have expected this. The conclusions of the NIE fly in the face of everything we've been told in the last four years that Bush must have simply decided to let the intelligence people wallow in their own absurdities.

Posted by: ivan at December 11, 2007 4:02 AM

It is clear that the Third Army existed. I was only pointing out the size of a real WWII Army, that Patton did command, for comparison sake to show the size difference between a battalion and an army.

Posted by: patagonianplato at December 11, 2007 12:27 PM

Bolton told us this a week ago.

Posted by: awake

Yep, on CNN last week with Blitzer Wolf.

Posted by: Sneakyzionistcrusader at December 11, 2007 3:06 PM

Ignoring the NIE, and going with the evidence previously offered--as well as your instinct--is preferable to being soothed by previously-proven incompetent spooks (see 9-11 catastrophe that was not forwarned).

John Bolton got it right. Bush babbled, as usual.

Do not for one moment believe that Ahmadinejad and the mullahs gave up on the idea of vaporizing Israel and then us (the United States of America).

We need a new President that recognizes this fact.

Pre-emptive strikes must be timed precisely. The one that could have prevented Pearl Harbor 1941, would have been hitting the Japanese aircraft carriers that were on their way towards Hawaii. Our (U.S.) aircraft carriers plus the battleships that were bottled up in Pearl Harbor could have crippled the Japanese armada.

But then, hindsight is so much better than foresight, isn't it?

The trick is to pinpoint the exact moment when you will not look like an unprovoked aggressor and can expose the intent of the enemy with evidence.

The Japanese fleet destruction with photographic evidence cited above would have been a perfect example of that axiom.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at December 11, 2007 3:24 PM