Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Congress: We don't know shit about Iran

Posted by Lindsay Beyerstein at 12:22 PM on August 24, 2006.


Report faults intel on Iran.

Share and save this post:

      

      

Share on Facebook       

AlterNet Social Networks:
follow us on twitter
find us on Facebook

Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form

Get The Mix in your
mailbox!

 

Congress published a report saying that the United States has no intel on Iran:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. intelligence community is ill-prepared to assess Iran's nuclear weapons capabilities and its intentions for developing weapons of mass destruction, a congressional report said on Wednesday.

Noting "significant gaps in our knowledge and understanding of the various areas of concern about Iran," the House Intelligence Committee staff report questioned whether the United States could even effectively engage in talks with Tehran on ways to diffuse tensions.

The Bush administration said it was handling the problem.
Glad to hear it. I'm sure they'll have some sexed up slam-dunk evidence in no time. If not, there's no better way to get to know a country than to invade it.

[AMERICAblog]

Digg!

Lindsay Beyerstein a New York writer blogging at Majikthise.


On the religious right 'nuts,' liberals, and catching a break
A response to a colleague...
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 17, 2006.
Bush thinking of 'replacing' Iraqi government? [VIDEO]
A whole new definition of Democracy.
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.
Religious right rally's first gaffe
Church opposes bigoted agenda
Post by Evan Derkacz. October 16, 2006.
Advertisement
Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
We can Solve All Our Problems
Posted by: FairFight on Aug 24, 2006 7:57 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Withdraw from the U.N. Secuity Council. Precision strike the administrations of Syria and Iran. If that doesn't work, nuke the whole of both countries.
Having scared the shit out of the world, serve notice on Hugo Chavez and Kim Jong Il to cut out the crap.

Then, convince China, Russia, India and Pakistan that our gun is bigger than theirs; and, that we will not hesitate to use it.

Without finance and support from Iran, Hezbollah and Al Queda; and, their suicide bombers will eventually die on the vine. The glow from our nuclear blasts will convince the world that we don't care about their approval or condemnation; and, that we seriously want Osama bin Laden NOW!

Enter 1,000 years of peace.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: We can Solve All Our Problems Posted by: elmertwittle
» RE: We can Solve All Our Problems Posted by: FedererFan
» RE: We can Solve All Our Problems Posted by: ConnecttheDots
common knowledge not news
Posted by: larry278 on Aug 24, 2006 8:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The fact that the USA's intelligence(?) community doesn't know anything (shit) about Iran isn't news. It won't keep W & co from blundering into Iran as it did in Iraq. It must be late August since the media is full of dog-day, no news day features like this. Media mavens are sloathful creatures of habit. File stories like this one for use in years when the really is no news in August. Media Mavens: put down the cold drink; go to the office; give the second stringers some experience in finding the 'new' news & writing about it by walking the second stringers through all the steps in finding news & publishing it; lock up the files of August, dog-day, no news day stories & report 'new' news not cw & common knowledge. Cease & desist from presenting dried feces as news. Leave that to faux news. Wake up! Get your nose out of your navel or get a job with Tribune Corp or Murdoch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Whack-a-mole
Posted by: rotorooter on Aug 24, 2006 8:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The outing of Valerie Plame, who was involved with intel on Iranian nuclear development and procurement, is coming back to haunt this incompetent adminisration. Any moles we did have in Iran are now dead moles.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Whack-a-mole Posted by: sirossisofliver
» RE: Whack-a-mole Posted by: rotorooter
» RE: Whack-a-mole..sickofsleaze Posted by: ladybug1@carrollsweb.com
» RE: Whack-a-mole Posted by: jcutler9
A different take ...
Posted by: Joshua Holland on Aug 24, 2006 9:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... over in The Mix.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Josh is correct..see his link
Posted by: FedererFan on Aug 24, 2006 11:54 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Like having no intel ever stopped this crew of criminal mini-minded mini-me's. They simply made up the intel for Iraq (as Josh Holland points out in Counterpoint to this piece). Or they manipulated to the point of being unrecognizable, as anything close to truth or accuracy, what intel they did have. Makes me think the reason CIA, NSA, and the alphabet soup of 16 or 17 agencies charged with collecting and interpreting intel demand so much secrecy is to protect utter incompetence rather than information. Another sad sack of shit from our 'for the people' government.

Charles in NYC

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lindsay's verbiage
Posted by: Abushite on Aug 24, 2006 3:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Lindsay try making a point without recourse to foul language,
you may find it that your blog becomes more acceptable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Lindsay's verbiage Posted by: 0hmygod
» RE: Lindsay's verbiage Posted by: aonghus36
What start another war?
Posted by: ghoster on Aug 25, 2006 6:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One more that we won't win, how about we try a different approach? Hmm any of that mentioned. The clown that thinks nuking anyone that doesn't agree with the corporate fascist american administration needs to be blown sky high in order to get them in line, is smoking the same shit that gw and his crowd of butt boys are. Get a life, and figure out that when all you have is a hammer everything looks like a nail!! If we had someone with a brain in charge we might get a better result, but if you still think that go ahead and enlist, they need more bullet stoppers over there and I am sure there is an IED with your name on it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why does a nation (Iran) with abundant oil want nuclear energy?
Posted by: Sojourner on Aug 26, 2006 12:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have often wondered how far ahead the oil rich Mideast looks to its financial future. Is Iran running out of oil? Do they know that someday they will and want to use today's wealth to guarantee that they have a tomorrow?

Or is it that the nuclear club is such an exclusive privilege and Iran wants to challenge Israel's status as the only regional member of the club?

I am not surprised that Israel has a bad political hangover from the war. I shall be interested to see how that plays out. Is it that it was the wrong war? Or is it that Olmert truly managed it badly?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

awrhw
Posted by: tukurion on Mar 4, 2007 5:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]