Guliani national security adviser Norman Podhoretz is greeting the news of the NIE estimate with what can only be called paranoia and conspiratorial logic. Podhoretz argues that their findings -- that Iran halted its nuclear weapons program some 4 years ago -- may constitute a dishonest effort by members of the intelligence community to "stop Bush in his tracks" in his effort to ramp up toward military action in Iran.
From Commentary, via TPM:
I entertain an even darker suspicion. It is that the intelligence community, which has for some years now been leaking material calculated to undermine George W. Bush, is doing it again. This time the purpose is to head off the possibility that the President may order air strikes on the Iranian nuclear installations. As the intelligence community must know, if he were to do so, it would be as a last resort, only after it had become undeniable that neither negotiations nor sanctions could prevent Iran from getting the bomb, and only after being convinced that it was very close to succeeding. How better, then, to stop Bush in his tracks than by telling him and the world that such pressures have already been effective and that keeping them up could well bring about "a halt to Iran’s entire nuclear weapons program"—especially if the negotiations and sanctions were combined with a goodly dose of appeasement or, in the NIE’s own euphemistic formulation, "with opportunities for Iran to achieve its security, prestige, and goals for regional influence in other ways."
So what is Podhoretz suggsting? That members of the CIA -- public servants who are on the front lines of the so-called "war on terror," and who, like the troops, have pledged their loyalty to their country -- are in fact disloyal. He is arguing that they would pass along false intelligence in an effort to undermine the president.
How is this different from calling our troops traitors, exactly? If CIA officials (like Valerie Plame) risk their lives for our security, are they not comparable to soldiers? And is it not an affront to their honor to spin a conspiracy theory about their motives and actions?
Most importantly, shouldn't Rudy Guliani be asked whether he stands by his adviser's paranoid attack against the honesty and loyalty of our CIA officers? And shouldn't members of Congress interrupt their work to condemn such attacks on our men and women in the intelligence community? And shouldn't everyone from Wolf Blitzer to Chris Wallace be talking about it, and asking whether this kind of slur gives aid and comfort to the enemy?
Just asking.