Manipulated Intel Lets US Presidents Escape Blame for Starting Wars

FILE - In this June 5, 2014, file photo, a man rides a bicycle through a devastated part of Homs, Syria. From the three-year-old boy who washed ashore on a Turkish beach to the 71 migrants who suffocated in a truck in Austria to the daily scenes of chaos unfolding in European cities as governments try to halt a human tide heading north. There is no let up to the horrors that Syria’s civil war keeps producing. Syria’s brutal conflict, now in its fifth year, has touched off the greatest humanitarian crisis of our time. About 250,000 people have been killed and more than one million wounded since March 2011, according to U.N. officials. (AP Photo/Dusan Vranic, File)

Allegations that US Central Command (CENTCOM) analysts manipulated Daesh intelligence assessments could indicate attempts to provide a false justification for future wars, National Security Agency (NSA) whistleblower William Binney told Sputnik.

WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — On August 11, CENTCOM spokesman Commander Kyle Raines confirmed that CENTCOM is investigating a US House of Representatives Joint Task Force report that alleges the command manipulated intelligence on the US fight against the Daesh.

“That [intelligence manipulation] is so that they can justify their decisions based on that faulty intelligence,” Binney, a veteran US government cryptanalyst, said on Wednesday.

The investigation has aroused concern among senior US political figures. In a statement last week, US Senator Kelly Ayotte demanded that CENTCOM officials be held accountable if the allegations are shown to be true.

US leaders like Presidents Barack Obama and George W. Bush welcomed any intelligence assessment, however dubious or unfounded, that supported decisions they had already made to undertake aggressive or otherwise controversial security and military policies, Binney explained.

The provision of such desired intelligence “means they avoid any responsibility or accountability,” he pointed out.

As a result, Bush could defend his decision to invade Iraq in 2003, or Obama could justify toppling the Libyan leader Muammar Gadaffi in 2011 or providing massive support for rebel forces seeking to overthrow the government of Syria, Binney recalled.

“Of course, the president and others can always say that they based their decision on the best information they had at the time.”

The practice of tailoring false and unsubstantiated intelligence for US leaders had precedents going back at least half a century, Binney remarked.

“It would be similar to the faulty intelligence used to start a war in Vietnam.”

William Binney is a cryptanalyst and mathematician, and for 30 years he was a senior analyst at the NSA, where he was regarded as one of the best in the agency’s history before he exposed major aspects of its blanket surveillance programs.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here