Somewhere out there, there must be someone defending George Tenet. I'm just having trouble finding that person (or persons).
Let's see: Liberals are ticked off. Conservatives feel betrayed. Ex-CIA types are angry. White House officials are playing defense. That pretty much runs the gamut, doesn't it?
Yeah, pretty much Howard. He deliciously continued:
I can't get beyond the following: Whatever Tenet's strengths and weaknesses as CIA director, he quit three years ago. He accepted a presidential medal of freedom and then remained silent--until now, when he's peddling a book. If he felt so strongly about these intelligence issues, about the rush to war in Iraq, about the way he says he's been besmirched, why didn't he speak out before now? How does he justify having remained silent?
As Kurtz pointed out, he's not alone in these sentiments:
Arianna [Huffington] says Tenet should have fallen on his sword:
"Does this sound familiar? A senior Bush administration official plays a key role in selling the Iraq war debacle to the American public, resigns a few years later, and then tries to distance himself from Bush and the war by writing a book or talking to Bob Woodward, portraying himself as a poor, hapless victim who knew the truth at the time and really, really wanted to tell it, but, somehow, just had no choice but to go along . . .
"He's about four years too late. Tenet seems to believe there's a major distinction between lying and standing by silently while others lie, and then proudly receiving a Medal of Freedom from the liars.
"He could have simply resigned and freed himself to 'tell the truth.' Tenet acts as if resignation were not an option. But it was."
Seems fairly obvious, except of course to the folks at CBS who are always willing to help a former Bush administration official promote tell-all books about this White House.
