50 defense intelligence analysts have filed a complaint with U.S. Central Command alleging that their work on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria was altered. They are saying that much intelligence, including briefs to President Obama, have been altered to show that ISIS is weaker than it really is.
Many analysts are angered by what has been made public but these 50 spies are alleging something worse: That intel is being cherry picked and spun to fit a narrative unfitting of the true situation by senior officials.
This sounds much like the complaints coming out in 2003 regarding Iraq intel but this time the analysts describe a work environment in which they are afraid to tell the truth and break narrative.
These analysts have been speaking out since October but the story broke in a recent Daily Beast article which you can check out here:
More than 50 intelligence analysts working out of the U.S. military’s Central Command have formally complained that their reports on ISIS and al Qaeda’s branch in Syria were being inappropriately altered by senior officials, The Daily Beast has learned.
The complaints spurred the Pentagon’s inspector general to open an investigation into the alleged manipulation of intelligence. The fact that so many people complained suggests there are deep-rooted, systemic problems in how the U.S. military command charged with the war against the self-proclaimed Islamic State assesses intelligence.
“The cancer was within the senior level of the intelligence command,” one defense official said.
Is the government telling us the truth about what’s going on in the Middle East? Sound off in the comments below!