The National Intelligence Estimate released by the Bush administration’s intelligence apparatus in August 2007 regarding Iraq is full of cautionary and contingent language:
When we use words such as “we judge†or “we assessâ€â€”terms we use synonymously—
as well as “we estimate,†“likely†or “indicate,†we are trying to convey an analytical
assessment or judgment. These assessments, which are based on incomplete or at times
fragmentary information are not a fact, proof, or knowledge. Some analytical judgments
are based directly on collected information; others rest on previous judgments, which
serve as building blocks. In either type of judgment, we do not have “evidence†that
shows something to be a fact or that definitively links two items or issues….We do not intend the term “unlikely†to imply an event will not happen. We use
“probably†and “likely†to indicate there is a greater than even chance. We use words
such as “we cannot dismiss,†“we cannot rule out,†and “we cannot discount†to reflect
an unlikely—or even remote—event whose consequences are such it warrants
mentioning. Words such as “may be†and “suggest†are used to reflect situations in
which we are unable to assess the likelihood generally because relevant information is
nonexistent, sketchy, or fragmented.
Oh, great. So NOW that the United States has been stuck in a war with no good solution or outcome for over four years, NOW we’re hearing that the intelligence agencies actually “do not have ‘evidence’ that shows something to be a fact or that definitively links two items or issues.” It would have been nice to hear the intelligence agencies admit their level of ignorance on the issues BEFORE the nation threw itself unilaterally into a mess of a war. Instead, we had Bush’s director of intelligence asserting that the existence of Saddam Hussein’s supposed weapons of mass destruction was a “slam dunk”, Bush’s secretary of state identifying “mobile biological weapons labs” with certainty. Then we had Bush’s Secretary of Defense telling us of the supposed Weapons of Mass Destruction that “We know where they are. They’re in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.”
None of these statements were true. All of them were based on flimsy intelligence that was characterized in public as solid. It’s nice to see the executive branch of government under George W. Bush learn that it is is fallible in a possibly fatal way, but it has learned this lesson awfully late.
(Sources: White House News Release February 5 2003; Washington Post June 3 2004; Remarks of Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld March 30, 2003)
