Posted by
timothy
on from the absence-of-evidence dept.
An anonymous reader writes "Severalnewsoutlets are reporting that the United States has officially ended the The Iraq Survey Group's search for WMDs. Prior to the war, WMDs were named as a justification for a 'preemptive' invasion."
Surprising some were not faked
by
justanyone
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
It has surprised me that WMD were not faked by CIA / DIA / etc. (insert random agency name here). Getting a hold of some generic sarin, anthrax, botulinin, chlorine gas, etc. would be easy for any U.S. agency determined to do so. Placing it in a couple of buried shipping containers in the desert that we 'accidentally' discovered the location to would have been very easy.
The fact that this was not done says to me: * maybe some was found but they can't talk about it (doubtful); * most of the people in the U.S. armed forces are basically ethical (encouraging); * no one thought of faking it (highly doubtful); * there are too many checks and balances within the agency structures to allow a fake to succeed (highly likely).
The checks-balances scenario is this: CIA decides to fake it. 1. They create the agent/material, bury it, fake up docs, release info about it, "find" it, make news. 2. FBI decides, Hey, let's test it and figure out where it really came from and how it was made. 3. UN / Brits request samples to test, start interviewing all their people about the subject and get nothing or actual denials. 4. FBI figures out this isn't genuine and points fingers, or: 5. ATF decides to test it independently, or: 6. Secret service / Treasury tests it independently, or: 7. GAO / Congressional subcommittee asks lots of questions, or: 8. UN figures it out, points fingers, or: 9. Iraq former-regime muckety-mucks say, "hey, wait, we didn't do that... it's cool, but we didn't do it."
Just some thoughts. I like having multiple levels of power structures all competing for the truth. The whole CIA reorg bill concentrates power too much in my opinion. It'll allow for this kind of potential fakery to succeed.
Slashdot Mirror
It has surprised me that WMD were not faked by CIA / DIA / etc. (insert random agency name here). Getting a hold of some generic sarin, anthrax, botulinin, chlorine gas, etc. would be easy for any U.S. agency determined to do so. Placing it in a couple of buried shipping containers in the desert that we 'accidentally' discovered the location to would have been very easy.
The fact that this was not done says to me:
* maybe some was found but they can't talk about it (doubtful);
* most of the people in the U.S. armed forces are basically ethical (encouraging);
* no one thought of faking it (highly doubtful);
* there are too many checks and balances within the agency structures to allow a fake to succeed (highly likely).
The checks-balances scenario is this: CIA decides to fake it.
1. They create the agent/material, bury it, fake up docs, release info about it, "find" it, make news.
2. FBI decides, Hey, let's test it and figure out where it really came from and how it was made.
3. UN / Brits request samples to test, start interviewing all their people about the subject and get nothing or actual denials.
4. FBI figures out this isn't genuine and points fingers, or:
5. ATF decides to test it independently, or:
6. Secret service / Treasury tests it independently, or:
7. GAO / Congressional subcommittee asks lots of questions, or:
8. UN figures it out, points fingers, or:
9. Iraq former-regime muckety-mucks say, "hey, wait, we didn't do that... it's cool, but we didn't do it."
Just some thoughts.
I like having multiple levels of power structures all competing for the truth. The whole CIA reorg bill concentrates power too much in my opinion. It'll allow for this kind of potential fakery to succeed.
-- Kevin
Unitarian Church: Freethinkers Congregate!