Quadsville

" the former officer contends that his 22-year CIA career collapsed after he questioned CIA doctrine about the nuclear programs of Iraq and Iran. As a native of the Middle East and a fluent speaker of both Farsi and Arabic, he had been assigned undercover work in the Persian Gulf region, where he successfully recruited an informant with access to sensitive information about Iran's nuclear program, Krieger said.

The informant provided secret evidence that Tehran had halted its research into designing and building a nuclear weapon. Yet, when the operative sought to file reports on the findings, his attempts were "thwarted by CIA employees,"......and later was told to "remove himself from any further handling" of the informant.

In the months after the conflict, the operative became the target of two internal investigations....and in both cases the allegations of wrongdoing were never substantiated.

CIA spokesman declined to comment on the specifics of the case but rejected the allegation that the agency had suppressed reports. "It would be wrong to suggest that agency managers direct their officers to falsify the intelligence they collect or to suppress it for political reasons," he said. "That's not our policy. That's not what we're about."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/30/AR2008063001940

_pf.html 

The bush cia used suspect wmd info from ahmed chalabi, later revealed as an iranian operative, to invade iraq. The wmd info turned out to be false (as suspected) and chalabi informed iran the US was reading their communications (blowing the capability). THIS was the same chalabi the wh attempted to install as the new iraqi strongman/leader.

"It would be wrong to suggest that agency managers direct their officers to falsify the intelligence they collect or to suppress it for political reasons,"

Google Office of Special Plans, then next read up on  WH-deliberately outed agent Valerie Plame .

"By this point, war profiteering in Iraq has become legend. The conflict has generated well over a hundred billion dollars in contracts for private business—many, like KBR's contract with the Army, awarded without competitive bidding and featuring a "cost-plus" arrangement, essentially entitling companies to name their own price for services rendered (or not rendered, as the case may be.)

As contracts have swelled in size, so, too, has the size of contract-related fraud, waste, and abuse. Last year, the Defense Contract Audit Agency identified $4.9 billion wasted on overcharging or fraud (and an additional $5.1 billion spent without any documentation).

In response, the Army sponsored a blue-ribbon commission to study the problem and propose possible fixes, which it did in a report (.pdf) issued last November.

Among the recommendations was the assignment of five generals to oversee the contracting process and guard against the sort of waste and abuse that had plagued Army operations up to that point.

The Army took the suggestion to heart and included $1.2 million in a budget request to fund the new positions—an amount so modest compared to the scale of the larger problem that the measure would surely be approved, right?

Wrong. The Office of Management and Budget slammed the brakes on the proposal."

From USA Today:

The Army's march to overhaul its tarnished contracting system has been slowed by an unlikely foe: the White House.

The Office of Management and Budget, President Bush's administrative arm, has shot down a service plan to add five active-duty generals who would oversee purchasing and monitor contractor performance."

The Army has appealed the decision. An OMB spokesman refused comment to a reporter, explaining that the agency is "internally deliberating."

 --Besides avoiding finding more problems, greater political embarrassment, and protecting influential gop/bush patrons/industries, what possible reasons could bushco have to override this?

Clearly, bush and the modern gop has abandoned any of it's founding principles; goldwater would weep.

Pentagon accountability? Killed that principle.

Fiscal discipline? A dessicated corpse. 

LAST, they'll have the chutzpah and brazen hypocrisy to campaign in 2010 and 2012 for "their" chance to "fix" things, whereupon they'll do the Exact Same Thing once more.

It never changes: taxes...military readiness...domestic programs....the domestic economy. The gop wrecks virtually everything it lays its' hands on, loses power, complains that the dem's can't fix things fast enough, then regain power and take up where they left off.

Every.Single.Time.

You'd think the nat'n would eventually learn that putting the party that hates govn and preaches dismantling it, might not be the ablest or most competent stewards of it. Go figure. 

You can witness it over the current oil/gas price issue: the gop trashed the market w/ an unnecessary iraq war and unchecked/unregulated speculation. Their solution? Keep on keepin' on with what's worked so smashingly until now.....oh, and more drilling, please. (Plus an immediate, temporary 18cent/gallon taxcut that'll be lumped onto the nat'l debt, and send oil up further).

And yet, the lemming 29%er's, charge towards the cliffs. 

The Bush administration yesterday invoked executive privilege and refused to turn over key documents sought by a House investigative committee, escalating a fight over the White House role in U.S. policy on greenhouse-gas emissions and ozone air quality standards.

Lawmakers say the two Bush administration officials refused to respond to subpoenas for documents about communications between the White House and EPA. The papers concern White House intervention in Johnson's December decision to overrule EPA officials who were in favor of granting California and 17 other states permission to mandate a reduction of vehicle emissions by 30 percent by 2016.

--Bush's claiming privilege, but what for? That old chestnut's been polished from overuse, beginning w/ the energy commission and rolling non-stop through Plame, among others to this.

Has ANY other admin, in all of US history, hidden so much behind privilege and state secrets assertions?

But to the point, what IS it that bush has to hide? Can this be an actual, good-faith attempt at maintaining the pres's sanctity of counsel?

I recall the massive salmon kill in the NW states, b/c (it later turned out) cheney (not the pres, but a lowly vp!) ordered the Klamath river waters to be released, 'overriding' EPA expert counsel, during bush's first term. (Bear in mind, this benefited the predominately gop backing farming interests in the area; another example of "it's our due?"). (I'll also leave out that the entire West Coast salmon fisheries have since collapsed, economically devastating the entire regions' commercial and recreational salmon industry. Could cheney's salmon kill have been the genesis of that?)

Then how, in dribs and drabs, years later, info leaked out that the committee was overwhelmingly comprised of oil, gas, coal, and utility lobbyists. That the 'findings' of the committee were essentially industry wish-lists, often written word-for-word by the industries themselves.

Since this admin repeatedly has stifled, twisted (cherrypicked), ignored, and/or silenced science whenever it interfered w/ gop dogma or corporate desires....I find it hard to give them the benefit of the doubt, yet again. Cry wolf too often...