If over 50 top-level intelligence
agents are saying there’s something wrong with how the Obama admin has handled
the situation in the Middle East, you know something’s wrong.
If one of them says there’s a
“cancer” in the senior level of administration, then you know something’s
seriously wrong. This exactly the bad news Americans
are getting from quite a few (50) intelligence officials who say their reports
on ISIS and Syrian rebel groups have been altered by senior officials at the
State Department. Yes, the same State Department that
won’t cooperate with Trey Gowdy and turn over emails relating to the Benghazi
investigation.
Western Journalism writes: According to the news outlet, two
senior CENCOM intelligence analysts, who work for the Defense Intelligence
Agency, sent a written complaint to the DOD’s IG alleging that reports were
being altered to portray the terror groups as weaker than they actually were.
Some of these changed assessments were then used to brief President Obama. Over
50 analysts have come forward to support the claim.
The reports may have been changed to
fit the Obama administration’s narrative that ISIS was being degraded through
the U.S. led air campaign and other military operations. The president has resisted
efforts to introduce large numbers of U.S. ground troops into the region. “Some analysts allege that reports
deemed overly negative in their assessment of the Syria campaign were either
blocked from reaching policymakers or sent back down the chain of command.
Others claim that key elements of intelligence reports were removed,
fundamentally altering their conclusions,” Fox News reports. “Another claim is
that senior leaders at CENTCOM created a work environment where giving a candid
opinion on the progress of the anti-ISIS campaign was discouraged, with one
analyst describing the tenor as ‘Stalinist.'”
During the last several months, the administration has continued to speak
positively about its efforts to combat the Islamic State in the region. “I am confident that over time, we
will beat, we will, indeed, degrade and ultimately destroy ISIL,” Secretary of
State John Kerry said in March. “No, I don’t think we’re losing,”
President Obama said in May. “‘ISIS is losing,’ John Allen, the
retired Marine general charged with coordinating the ISIS campaign, said in
July,” according to the Daily Beast.
The New York Times reports that the
Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) was set up early in the 1960s to avoid
service bias and give more accurate assessments of the enemy’s capabilities.
During the Vietnam War, the DIA consistently warned that the U.S. war effort
was unlikely to defeat the North Vietnamese.
“There’s a built-in tension for the
people who work at DIA, between dispassionate analysis and what command wants,”
said Paul R. Pillar, a retired senior Central Intelligence Agency analyst. “You’re part of a large structure
that does have a vested interest in portraying the overall mission as going
well,” he said.
Concerning the alleged cooking of
the books regarding ISIS, U.S. CENTCOM spokesman Air Force Col. Patrick Ryder
said: While we cannot comment on the
specific investigation cited in the [Daily Beast] article, we can speak to the
process. The Intelligence Community routinely provides a wide range of subjective
assessments related to the current security environment. These products and the
analysis that they present are absolutely vital to our efforts, particularly
given the incredibly complex nature of the multi-front fights that are ongoing
now in Iraq and Syria.
Senior civilian and military
leadership consider these assessments during planning and decision-making,
along with information gained from various other sources, to include the
insights provided by commanders on the ground and other key advisors,
intelligence collection assets, and previous experience.
Fox News reports: “The House and Senate Intelligence Committees have been
advised of the complaint that prompted the inspector general’s investigation,
which is required if Pentagon officials find the claims credible.” It’s absolutely incredible this kind
of thing can happen in America. The only real explanation for this
is the Obama administration has ulterior motives they’re trying to bring to
fruition while keeping them out of the public eye.
If that wasn’t true then our
intelligence officials wouldn’t be struggling to get straight intel from the
highest sources in the land. Think about it another way. If Obama
was concerned about tackling the problem of radical Islam he would:
- Say the words “radical Islam”
- Send our troops in to defend the innocents being killed every day
- Never have referred to them as a JV squad
- Would not have gone through with the historic deal in IranAnd more.Do you think Obama guided the State Department to lie to intelligence officials?
No comments:
Post a Comment