Pentagon to Investigate Douglas Feith

I don't know why it makes sense for the Pentagon to be investigating to role of Neocons in prewar intelligence.  Seeing how Rummy is one of them it would seem like a conflict of interest.  If you have an angle on this, please share.

From Reuters...

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The Pentagon's inspector general has agreed to review the prewar intelligence activities of former U.S. defense undersecretary Douglas Feith, a main architect of the Iraq war, congressional officials said on Thursday.

more...

The inspector general's office informed the Senate on October 19 that it would undertake a review after receiving separate requests from the Republican chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and the ranking Democrat on the Senate Committee on Armed Services, officials said.

Congressional officials expect the review to look at whether Feith and his staff bypassed the CIA by giving the White House uncorroborated intelligence that sought to make a case for war in the months leading up to the 2003 Iraq invasion.

And here's what I mean about a conflict of interest...

Defense officials have defended Feith, saying no credible evidence of wrongdoing by him or his staff has ever been discovered. They also say Democratic lawmakers never responded to a Pentagon challenge to produce incriminating evidence.

•  Tommy Franks...

  ...called Feith the dumbest man he'd ever met.  So it could be considered sensible to believe that he not only cooked the books, but was too stupid to know how to cover it up...

  I don't understand why they don't just investigate them all--Card, Hadley, Feith, Cheney, and Rice.  They're ALL complicit in the lies and malfeasance...

  by topicalstorm on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:22:39 AM PDT

  •  Maybe Gen Franks

    didn't realize that Feith ran an Israeli espionage cell and was confused about his objectives.

    by gerardo on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:40:42 AM PDT

  •  Kakistocracy

    Oooh... that's a new word for me.  I like it!

    by John in Norway on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:45:26 AM PDT

•  Inspectors General.....

  ....are supposed to be comparatively independent of the agency to which they are attached, and we've seen a number of cases -- even under Bush -- where IGs have done yeoman's work in exposing questionable practices.

  The real question is whether or not that kind of independence and thoroughness can be expected of the IG at DOD.

  by greenskeeper on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:26:02 AM PDT

  •  independent inspectors

    The IG did a great job exposing the Boeing lease scandal and can be trusted to do a good job with the Feith investigation.

    The problem is the with the request itself. Look where it comes from: the same clowns who didn't want to investigate anything in the first place. What will the IG be asked / permitted to investigate? In other words, expect Feith to be tagged as the bad apple in an otherwise sound barrel, the Lyndie Englund of intelligence

    by sakitume on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 08:03:37 AM PDT

•  Impact from Democratic pressure for phase 2

  DoD is out to cover their tracks, or at least insulate Rumsfeld from being snared by what an independent investigation might find.

  by high5 on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:44:32 AM PDT

•  They pick the MOST unpopular

  guy they've got to invesitgate. A scapegoat? A diversion?

  by vlogger on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 07:45:48 AM PDT

  •  A good place to start

    If there is a spark here, then you can see where the  smoke trail leads.

    by polecat on Fri Nov 18, 2005 at 08:36:50 AM PDT