Skip to main content

Note the article today in WaPo by Walter Pincus regarding two of the analysts that provided flawed intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq War.

George Norris and Robert Campos,  primary rocket analysts with Army's National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC), were instrumental in the sleight-of-hand that passed for incompetence on the aluminum tubing research.

Yet these two analysts received lump-sum cash payments as performance awards three years running -- in 2002, 2003, and 2004.

What the f*ck?

In the REAL world, where people are terminated for fluff ups that cause losses in the range of ten dollars let alone BILLIONS and human lives, these two would be out on the street.

But somehow these two analysts "missed" published data about aluminum tubing that would have killed any reference to the Iraqi tubing as precursors for weapons.  And somehow these two remained in NGIC long enough to continue to draw performance awards.

But here's the rub: we know government bureaucracy grinds S-L-O-W-L-Y.  Even in a Fortune 100 organization, getting a lump sum performance award isn't something that happens on the spur of the moment, must be submitted and approved well in advance -- and that doesn't include the overall budgeting processes prior to award requests.  Surely the Army is S-L-O-W-E-R than the average Fortune 100 company, given the size of the organization.

So when exactly did the request for the performance awards get placed?  Who requested them?  Who approved them?

My money is on an award approval date prior to 23-JUL-2002.  What say you?

And exactly whose fingerprints are all over these awards and aluminum tube misinformation?

[Note to Jonah Goldberg: dude, you could do a lot better for that family of yours by signing up with Army intel, from the looks of it.  Maybe you could ask for a transfer from the 101st Keyboard unit to NGIC...they certainly won't mind your inability to find data and use it properly, might even pay you for it.]

Originally posted to Rayne on Sat May 28, 2005 at 03:44 PM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  I think I remember seeing something about this (none)
    before (or about something similar).

    Of course it was in the works long before.  The were fixing the intel around the policy, after all.

    It is a very mixed blessing to be brought back from the dead.

    by Steven D on Sat May 28, 2005 at 03:51:21 PM PDT

    •  Agreed 100% (none)
      WE know that.  But we haven't had all the data in hand on this.

      I'm certain that some of the corroborating evidence is in the Energy Task Force documents that Cheney has squirreled away (or shredded by now).  At some point in 2003 I remember hearing Gen. Tommy Franks say in an interview on NPR that he had been told to begin plans for an invasion; the timing of the request, as I remember it, coincides with the Energy Task Force meetings during the first 90 days of Bush's first term.

      And now this...when did these two so-called analysts get their evidence on the tubes, by the way?

  •  good questions all (none)
    Now we'll see if anything comes of it, or how long it takes to get any details.  I don't think we're likely to see a cashed check with the memo as "Falsification of critical war-mongering data" but who knows where this'll lead?  

    Wonder who the officials are that called attention to it and if anymore from them is forthcoming? This fits the pattern of disgruntled (I love using that word positively) intelligence people being the best source of information for us.

    ''I think every good Christian ought to kick Falwell right in the ass.'' Barry Goldwater, 1981 When conservatives were, well...conservative.

    by lizah on Sat May 28, 2005 at 03:57:41 PM PDT

    •  I'd have been pissed off (none)
      Two dittoheads get cash that's now long gone for passing off crappy intelligence.

      Was that all the award budget for their department?  If somebody else working on legitimate but contrary intel DIDN'T get an award, they should be righteously pissed off.  I know I would be.

      Hell, I'm pretty pissed off that somebody wrote a check to these two out of our joint checking account, so to speak, and without damned good reason!!

  •  Weed & Feed (none)
    This is how you transform an organization without obvious pressure.  You poke around until you find who will give you what you want, you reward them in front of their peers.  You ignore those who are naysayers.

    If you were an analyst who pushed an unpopular series of reports then you probably got ignored or your division boss got a call telling you to stop or reword.

    Dear Lord, please save me from your followers

    by mz on Sat May 28, 2005 at 05:07:23 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site