Washington, DC (TFC) – A series of rather startling statements by current and former Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) officials have many wondering if the agency has had enough of its intelligence being used for political purposes, rather than being used in the best interests of the country. Many of the statements completely broke rank with the narrative pushed by the Central Intelligence Agency, the administration, and the political machine in DC.
For some, this may be the first time the term “DIA” has been heard, even though the agency has been around for more than fifty years. The DIA is similar to the CIA in mission. There are two primary differences. The first is that the DIA conducts combat related intelligence-gathering operations and is almost entirely limited to operations on foreign soil. The CIA engages in political, economic, industrial, and military espionage. The other difference is that DIA is made up of military personnel for the most part, whereas the CIA is a civilian organization. Another thing that is worth remembering is that the intelligence community has a saying: Our failures are known, our successes are not. The fact that most people have never even heard of DIA should be a solid indication of the agency’s success rate.
In fact, almost every misstep the agency has ever had was the direct result of a political appointee cooking the intelligence. Apparently, the case officers and analysts within the agency are refusing to allow that to happen again, and more than 50 analysts have lodged complaints over the misrepresentation of their reports by the current administration. DIA analysts have accused the political appointees within the intelligence community and the Oval Office itself of drastically misrepresenting their intelligence forecasts in relation to the fight against the Islamic State in Syria and Iraq. The analysts say the administration is using the data to falsely paint a positive image of a fight that has ground to a stalemate.
One act of whistleblowing is admirable, but certainly isn’t a trend. However, in another matter, it was again the DIA that spoke up. The CIA and FBI have more or less remained silent regarding Hillary Clinton’s private email server. The FBI should be the agency leading the charge, given that it is the agency responsible for counter-intelligence operations. It was DIA’s former Director, General Michael T. Flynn, that called for the immediate revocation of Mrs. Clinton’s security clearance.
He is the same DIA official that presented the most explosive charge so far. He publicly stated that the administration ignored warnings about the Islamic State and cooked the intelligence about the threat. He stated plainly:
“I think it was a decision. I think it was a willful decision,”
He spoke openly about the administration’s support for the Islamic State. These statements were confirmed by a declassified report that clearly stated: “The West, Gulf countries, and Turkey support the opposition.” The opposition is later defined in the report as groups such as Al-Qaeda and the “Salafists”. The Islamic State is the Salafist group in question. It also makes reference to the close relationship between Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State by pointing out that they use the same spokesman. Even though the report is three years old, it references the Islamic State by name.
While that may be the most headline grabbing piece of information, it isn’t the most important. The most important revelation from the DIA was when Lt. Gen. Vincent Stewart publicly stated that Syria will most likely be split into three countries, and that Iraq will also most likely break apart. Stewart said he had a hard time “wrestling with the idea that the Kurds will come back to a central government of Iraq.” Lt. Gen. Stewart is not some has-been intelligence officer looking for his 15 minutes of fame. He is currently the Director of the DIA. His statement on the matter will be considered heavily by the American people.
Why is this so important?
First, this statement is directly at odds with the establishment’s propaganda that everything is going well in Iraq and Syria. Second, he made the announcement in a public forum that was beyond the control of Washington’s censorship. By doing this, Stewart most likely derailed US plans for yet another war in the Middle East. The plan has always been for regime change in Syria and the perpetuation of a puppet regime in Iraq. This would take boots on the ground to clean up the mess once President Assad of Syria is destabilized. The top intelligence officer of the Defense Department has openly stated that both countries are bound for the history books. This statement will provide those that seek to avoid another war all of the ammunition they need to derail the war effort. What use is there in intervening in countries that won’t be here in a year or two? Will we risk American lives to fight under a flag that will no longer be flown?
General’s Stewart’s actions most likely ended his career. It won’t be immediate, but we can safely assume that he will not be kept on by the next administration and will most likely lose his position prior to the end of Obama’s term. He knew this when he openly went against the establishment’s narrative. His actions probably saved thousands of lives. General Stewart won’t receive the fanfare he deserves for his actions. Why? Because, like everything else in the intelligence world: failures are known, successes are not.
We would also like to congratulate the DIA’s analysts for reaching the same conclusion TFC reached when we suggested the breakup of Iraq as the only hope for peace seven months ago, and then suggested the inevitability of it six months ago.