Former U.S. Intellegence Officers tell Chancellor Merkel to doubt photo intel on Ukraine.

[another_liberal]

“We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now,” says the organization "Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity." Lets hope at least a few European leaders are listening.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel.(AFP Photo)

Remember Iraq? Former US intel officers warn Merkel against NATO images of Ukraine.

With the escalating Ukrainian crisis towards the top of the agenda at this week’s NATO summit in Wales, a group of former American intelligence workers is urging the alliance to be careful before crafting a response.

Sixty foreign leaders and dozens of diplomats and defense officials from around the globe will convene at the event this week and are expected to approve a plan that calls for assembling a 4,000-strong “spearhead” force to counter “Russia's aggressive behavior,” NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said on Monday, in the wake of the release of satellite images purported to show the advancement of at least 1,000 Russian troops and artillery into eastern Ukraine. But on the eve of the first major NATO meeting since 2012, a coalition composed of seven former United States intelligence officers is asking the alliance to recall the 2003 invasion of Iraq before authorizing any military action.

According to the group, Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, the evidence produced by NATO from the Ukrainian-Russian border is on par with the “same dubious, politically ‘fixed’ kind used 12 years ago to ‘justify’ the US-led attack on Iraq.”

“We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now,” reads an excerpt from the memo signed by the VIPS steering group — a coalition composed of former National Security Agency analyst William Binney, retired CIA analyst Ray McGovern, retired US Army Colonel Ann Wright and others — published online over the weekend and addressed to German Chancellor Angela Merkel. “Photos can be worth a thousand words; they can also deceive. We have considerable experience collecting, analyzing and reporting on all kinds of satellite and other imagery, as well as other kinds of intelligence. Suffice it to say that the images released by NATO on August 28 provide a very flimsy basis on which to charge Russia with invading Ukraine,” the group added.

(snip)

Read more at: http://rt.com/usa/184512-vips-memo-merkel-nato/

[Tommy_Carcetti]

1. Well, there is the little problem of what happened in Crimea.

Putin pretty much mortgaged all credibility when he denied sending troops there and then admitted it after the annexation was complete.

[another_liberal]

2. What does that have to do with my OP?

Can you stick with the topic, at least in your initial response? Thanks.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

4. Arguably the ship has long sailed as to proof of Russian troops in Ukraine.

Really it dates back to late February 2014.

And given Putin's about-face admission regarding his involvement in events in Crimea, why should we believe him again?

[another_liberal]

25. If you want an OP on Crimea . . .

You could just write it yourself. Is it really necessary for you to try and highjack mine instead?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

23. you seriously want to divorce what happened in Crimea, to what is happening now in Ukraine.

that's mighty convenient

[tazkcmo]

26. This

It's relevant, not a hijack.

[another_liberal]

29. Do you think you know better than I why I wrote the OP?

Seriously?

[tazkcmo]

30. No

Still relevant to your OP.

[another_liberal]

32. Nothing to say . . .

About the warning to Chancellor Merkel then?

[tazkcmo]

35. Nope

Seems you covered it pretty well.

[another_liberal]

28. The topics may be tenuously related, but my OP topic is not Crimea . . .

The topic of this OP is the warning presented to Chancellor Merkel. What do you have to say on that topic?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

39. tenuously related. LOL.

[Duckhunter935]

31. Too bad it is not

convenient for other facts that substantiate Putin's lies and conduct do not fit your narrative. Absolutely relevant to your OP

[another_liberal]

33. Is President Putin quoted in my OP?

(sigh)

[Duckhunter935]

36. Are you the OP police and want to censor others comments, I hope not

I can post my thoughts and comments on how Russian soldiers are in east Ukraine now and how the same thing happened earlier in Crimea. Putin said no troops where there in both cases and admitted to lying about Crimea and all evidence is he is again lying. Yes it is relevant if not very convenient for you.

[another_liberal]

37. The rules do suggest one needs to stay on topic . . .

Being "off topic" is one of the grounds for having one's reply hidden by jury vote, correct?

[Duckhunter935]

38. So now you seem to be issueing a threat?

the topic seems to be about Russian troops possibly in Ukraine and evidence or lack of. The evidence seems to be yes.

At least that is my take

[Purveyor]

3. Also see: Memorandum For: Angela Merkel: Beware of Fixed Intelligence on Ukraine-- Think WMDs

MEMORANDUM FOR: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany

FROM: Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS)

SUBJECT: Ukraine and NATO

We the undersigned are long-time veterans of U.S. intelligence. We take the unusual step of writing this open letter to you to ensure that you have an opportunity to be briefed on our views prior to the NATO summit on September 4-5.

You need to know, for example, that accusations of a major Russian "invasion" of Ukraine appear not to be supported by reliable intelligence. Rather, the "intelligence" seems to be of the same dubious, politically "fixed" kind used 12 years ago to "justify" the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. We saw no credible evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq then; we see no credible evidence of a Russian invasion now. Twelve years ago, former Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder, mindful of the flimsiness of the evidence on Iraqi WMD, refused to join in the attack on Iraq. In our view, you should be appropriately suspicious of charges made by the U.S. State Department and NATO officials alleging a Russian invasion of Ukraine.

President Barack Obama tried yesterday to cool the rhetoric of his own senior diplomats and the corporate media, when he publicly described recent activity in the Ukraine, as "a continuation of what's been taking place for months now ... it's not really a shift."

Obama, however, has only tenuous control over the policymakers in his administration -- who, sadly, lack much sense of history, know little of war, and substitute anti-Russian invective for a policy. One year ago, hawkish State Department officials and their friends in the media very nearly got Mr. Obama to launch a major attack on Syria based, once again, on "intelligence" that was dubious, at best.

Largely because of the growing prominence of, and apparent reliance on, intelligence we believe to be spurious, we think the possibility of hostilities escalating beyond the borders of Ukraine has increased significantly over the past several days. More important, we believe that this likelihood can be avoided, depending on the degree of judicious skepticism you and other European leaders bring to the NATO summit next week.

more...

http://www.opednews.com/articles/Memorandum-For-Angela-Mer-by-Coleen-Rowley-Angela-Merkel_Ukraine_Ukraine_Veteran-Intelligence-Professionals-For-Sanity-140831-791.html

Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

[another_liberal]

15. Thanks for the links . . .

Otherwise someone will say the statement never happened, because I sourced it from RT.

[BillZBubb]

5. It's semantics.

Russia hasn't "invaded" Ukraine. That's not Putin's game. Russia has infiltrated Ukraine. They send in adequate men and materiel to keep the rebels in the game. Calling it an invasion is hyperbole. But denying Putin is stirring up and supporting trouble is absurd.

That's how he stole Crimea. It is how he's trying to steal the Donbas.

[another_liberal]

11. So you think the majority . . .

Ethnic Russian population of Crimea really wanted to stay part of Ukraine?

Were they forced somehow to vote for joining the Russian Federation instead? It was a big majority in favor, right?

[BillZBubb]

40. That is an absurd point.

One cannot carve out a homogeneous segment of a country's population and allow them to secede without the assent of the majority of the ENTIRE populace or at least a legal path that allows secession. We've been down that road before, for example the Sudetenland.

As far as the election in Crimea, who knows whether it was fair or foul. It was hastily thrown together and done under the barrel of Russian guns. At any rate it is as acceptable as the Ordinances of Secession from the Confederate States.

[OilemFirchen]

6. In 2003 VIPS released a memo detailing what most of the world already knew...

...stating that intelligence analysts were not being listened to by policy makers...

and still got it wrong:

On February 7, 2003, VIPS publicly released a "Memorandum for The President" criticizing Secretary Powell's speech before the United Nations, in part, because VIPS was afraid Saddam Hussein would use his chemical weapons against U.S. troops if the U.S. invaded. It stated "The narrow focus on Resolution 1441 has diverted attention from the wider picture. It is crucial that we not lose sight of that. Intelligence community analysts are finding it hard to make themselves heard above the drumbeat for war."

Then they followed up with this:

On August 3, 2010, VIPS publicly released another "MEMORANDUM FOR: The President" warning the administration that their analysis suggests that Israel is likely to unilaterally attack Iran "as early as this month." It cited two reasons for this conclusion:

Firstly, Israel fears that western intelligence assessments over Iran's nuclear program will change soon and Israel will lose its "justification" for an attack. U.S. intelligence has been trying for some time to update the National Intelligence Estimate of November 2007 on Iran's nuclear program. It says that Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program in 2003 and as of mid-2007 has not restarted it. The group says Israel would like to strike soon, preemptively, before the new assessment reaffirms that Iran has not restarted its nuclear weapons program. Secondly, with the recent announcement by the U.S. that talks will resume with Iran next month regarding Iran's controversial uranium enrichment program, the group tells Obama: "incentives build in Tel-Aviv for the Israelis to attack before any such agreement can be reached."

Oops.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veteran_Intelligence_Professionals_for_Sanity

[another_liberal]

13. Cherry-picking their mistakes doesn't change anything.

They have been right far more often than they have been wrong.

[OilemFirchen]

16. They have?

I've no interest in researching the group's vast intelligence efforts. I'll go by the Wiki entry, thank you, and they have two cap feathers, both hilariously wrong.

Cite otherwise, or drop the pretense.

[another_liberal]

19. Here's a secret . . .

Wikipedia can be unreliable. It often provides incomplete or altered information.

You might want to consult a few more sources of information before you start to make unilateral demands on others. Hmmmm?

[OilemFirchen]

22. Wow! Eddycated on the Wiki!

Otherwise, no thanks. I'm happy with what I posted.

BTW, RT can be "unreliable". Now you've learned something too!

[another_liberal]

24. I know that RT can be wrong or simply mistaken . . .

So can any news service.

"Doubt everything, and trust no one."

[OilemFirchen]

27. "Doubt everything, and trust no one."

... according to RT.

(h/t SidDithers)

[Blue_Tires]

7. You're scraping the bottom of the barrel now...

[another_liberal]

9. Can we get back to the topic of the OP?

Thanks.

[another_liberal]

12. That is a direct, personal insult.

I take strong exception to that.

[LiberalAndProud]

8. i just googled Binney, McGovern and Wright.

Based upon their credentials and their personal histories, I think we should listen to what they have to say.

Does saying so make me a Putin-lover?

[Octafish]

14. TIME Person of the Year, too.

Coleen Rowley, one great American FBI hero who tried to stop terrorists learning to fly 747s, but was stymied by Washington FBI.

http://www.democracynow.org/2004/4/9/two_fbi_whistleblowers_accuse_bureau_of

[KittyWampus]

17. Based on their credentials which they've used to make a living on SPEAKING FEES?

LOL

[LiberalAndProud]

18. Which says what about them, exactly?

I find your criticism to be less than persuasive.

[KittyWampus]

20. They have zero access to credible information- rather like Robert Parry.

Yet they regularly opine on current events as if they are informed.

At one point in the past, they did have credible and important information.

And it's amusing that they can receive speaking fees without criticism from DU's ideologues and yet Hillary Clinton must speak for free.

[LiberalAndProud]

21. Who said Hillary must speak for free?

I will have to admit to a certain bias in these prelude to war arguments. The war profiteers will make their money regardless of who we are warring with. And for them, the more the merrier. That tends to make me skeptical as we argue the merits of any given military action. Don't worry though, Kitty, my meager protestations won't altar the course of these world events, any more than they did prior to our invasion of Iraq. The world will carry on in spite of my disagreement with the course.

[another_liberal]

34. Good point . . .

Anyone who can command a fee to address a paying crowd will generally accept the money, or so it seems.

[malaise]

41. Tonight's word on this thread is

OBFUSCATE -

Seriously how many times do the gullible have to be fooled before they wake the fugg up.

[KoKo]

42. Veteran Intelligence Officers....Speaking Up....

The whole letter is a good read...