The anti-war and anti-liberation brigades are pretty upset over the Feith memo, as it clearly sinks their claims of a firewall between Saddam’s goons and Osama’s goons. Consequently, they’re pushing back with their own memo, this by advocate Anthony Cordesman on an exhaustive search he conducted during a harrowing ten-day trip to Iraq spent mostly in David Kay’s offices with a note pad and a pencil. Read this and tell me who Cordesman works for:
The CIA’s search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has found no evidence that former president Saddam Hussein tried to transfer chemical or biological technology or weapons to terrorists, according to a military and intelligence expert.
Anthony Cordesman, a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, provided new details about the weapons search and Iraqi insurgency in a report released Friday. It was based on briefings over the past two weeks in Iraq from David Kay, the CIA representative who is directing the search for unconventional weapons in Iraq; L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civil administrator there; and military officials.
“No evidence of any Iraqi effort to transfer weapons of mass destruction or weapons to terrorists,” Cordesman wrote of Kay’s briefing. “Only possibility was Saddam’s Fedayeen [his son’s irregular terrorist force] and talk only.”
Can I see a show of hands from those who think he’s a CIA operative? The first paragraph implies that he is, but the second says that he’s not. So if Cordesman isn’t a CIA operative, why would the CIA appoint him to publicize the findings of an ongoing investigation, when they have their own in-house PR staff?
They wouldn’t, of course, and they didn’t.
Cordesman is a an analyst and sometime TV personality. Definitely not CIA.
Now, here’s something fun – he’s a well-known audiophile who reviews pricy gear for glossy magazines.
http://www.stereophile.com/searchresults/index.html?terms=Anthony+Cordesman&stype=A
http://www.thielaudio.com/THIEL_Web/Pages/nwscs7_2_audiomag.html
about the Feith memo….so when the DoD press release says
“The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions.”
is that formality phrasing, stamped on really any sort of ‘leaked’ document ? Or, is that phrasing there because the DoD is proclaiming that the classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions ?
The annex simply reported on the meetings, and didn’t attempt to draw conclusions because that wasn’t the CIA’s job, apparently. Please note that the CIA is not part of the DoD.
I’m puzzled as to why this story isn’t taking over every airwave in the country right now, and not a MAJOR talking point of every politician. It would seem that this report would be plastered on every major news network, given how huge this issue is.
Even drudge has pulled the story from his front
page. Why isn’t this everywhere ?