Emails show DOD analysts told to 'cut it out' on ISIS warnings; IG probe expands

[UK2K]

Say whatttt? White house telling people to keep bad news under wraps? You'd think they'd have learned after trying to lie about Benghazi during the run up to the last election.

[QUOTE]Analysts at U.S. Central Command were pressured to ease off negative assessments about the Islamic State threat and were even told in an email to

[HitandRun Reggie]

Most transparent administration...eva

[gigantes]

from the mainstream articles i've read, benghazi sounds like little more than an incident GOPers are hanging on to for dear life in order to make grief for hillary / obama. nothing actually got proven AFAIK.

also... fox news.

like i'm gonna trust that steaming pile of excrement to give me 'facts' about anything?

[KevinNYC]

Say whatttt? White house telling people to keep bad news under wraps? You'd think they'd have learned after trying to lie about Benghazi during the run up to the last election.



Now let's wait for DW or Kevin to come and tell us this isn't true.

Most transparent presidency ever!
hey man, what's up?

Any evidence it was coming from the White House? I remember when this first came out it was within DOD, that the middle-ups didn't want to pass bad news to higher ups. Anything change on that since the reports from August and September? (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/world/military-analyst-again-raises-red-flags-on-progress-in-iraq.html)

[QUOTE]Several current and former officials said that it was the two most senior intelligence officers at Centcom

[UK2K]

from the mainstream articles i've read, benghazi sounds like little more than an incident GOPers are hanging on to for dear life in order to make grief for hillary / obama. nothing actually got proven AFAIK.

also... fox news.

like i'm gonna trust that steaming pile of excrement to give me 'facts' about anything?
I only bring Benghazi up because it has been shown time and again the government intentionally tried to lie about it.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/11/22/us/politics/military-reviews-us-response-to-isis-rise.html?_r=0&referer=https://www.google.com/
There's been an ongoing investigation. It's not an opinion piece.

[UK2K]

hey man, what's up?

Any evidence it was coming from the White House? I remember when this first came out it was within DOD, that the middle-ups didn't want to pass bad news to higher ups. Anything change on that since the reports from August and September? (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/24/world/military-analyst-again-raises-red-flags-on-progress-in-iraq.html)



So any change to all that? And if this is within Centcom, how does this affect transparency one way or the other?
When Islamic State fighters overran a string of Iraqi cities last year, analysts at United States Central Command wrote classified assessments for military intelligence officials and policy makers that documented the humiliating retreat of the Iraqi Army. But before the assessments were final, former intelligence officials said, the analysts

[Godzuki]

Obama is the weakest leader the world has ever known :applause:

its sad when the world and especially americans are glad China and Russia are declaring war on them so ISIS actually has someone to fear. Obama has only had 100x's the military power and yet nobody fears his bitch ass because he's soft like a marshmallow. bitch ass mf'er :coleman:

[KevinNYC]

When Islamic State fighters overran a string of Iraqi cities last year, analysts at United States Central Command wrote classified assessments for military intelligence officials and policy makers that documented the humiliating retreat of the Iraqi Army. But before the assessments were final, former intelligence officials said, the analysts’ superiors made significant changes.

This past summer, a group of Centcom analysts took concerns about their superiors to the inspector general, saying they had evidence that senior officials had changed intelligence assessments to overstate the progress of American airstrikes against the Islamic State, also known as ISIS.

Sounds like the higher ups didn't want to report what was really happening. From the sounds of the emails, it seems the higher ups didn't want the reports to be made to the public... why else would they ask the analysts to stop posting warnings about ISIS? Tired of cluttering up their cloud storage?

Again, this is in Centcom. You still have no evidence for this claim

White house telling people to keep bad news under wraps?

Is there anything new today? Because the accusations since August are the head intel guy at Centcom rewrote Centcom analysts reports before passing them up the chain.

We know the folks who are being accused
two most senior intelligence officers at Centcom, Maj. Gen. Steven Grove and his civilian deputy, Gregory Ryckman.

So how do you bring this within the White House?

When the President is briefed that comes from all the various agencies NSA, CIA, Bureau of Intelligence and Research at State, etc. (I don't know if Centcom is in Army Military Intelligence or the Defense Intelligence Agency, DIA I'm guessing. EDIT: these analysts are DIA.) Is it only Centcom where this is happening? Because if the motivation is to keep things from becoming public, you have to be working on these guys too.

Let me suggest another motivation besides top-down pressure to deceive.
That is, bottom-up deception to make your self look better. That is lying to your superiors. Making it look like you are doing a better job than you are. This would be General Grove lying to who ever he reports to.

Then you could have the situation where it's a little of both. A boss who doesn't want to hear bad news and thus creates an environment where underlings lie to avoid getting chewed out by the boss.

[DeuceWallaces]

Again, this is in Centcom. You still have no evidence for this claim

White house telling people to keep bad news under wraps?

Is there anything new today? Because the accusations since August are the head intel guy at Centcom rewrote Centcom analysts reports before passing them up the chain.

We know the folks who are being accused

So how do you bring this within the White House?

When the President is briefed that comes from all the various agencies NSA, CIA, Bureau of Intelligence and Research at State, etc. (I don't know if Centcom is in Army Military Intelligence or the Defense Intelligence Agency, DIA I'm guessing. EDIT: these analysts are DIA.) Is it only Centcom where this is happening? Because if the motivation is to keep things from becoming public, you have to be working on these guys too.

Let me suggest another motivation besides top-down pressure to deceive.
That is, bottom-up deception to make your self look better. That is lying to your superiors. Making it look like you are doing a better job than you are. This would be General Grove lying to who ever he reports to.

Then you could have the situation where it's a little of both. A boss who doesn't want to hear bad news and thus creates an environment where underlings lie to avoid getting chewed out by the boss.

Ya know, the thing about UK2K, is he's an idiot. If you start with that premise the rest all makes sense.

[KyrieTheFuture]

Literally anything any government agency does is Obamas fault. I'm shocked you didn't blame the White House for Kim Davis as well