Insurgency? What Insurgency?

INSURGENCY? WHAT INSURGENCY?….Within months of the fall of Baghdad, the U.S. intelligence community had concluded that the Iraq insurgency was the real deal:

Among the warnings, Knight Ridder has learned, was a major study, called a National Intelligence Estimate, completed in October 2003 that concluded that the insurgency was fueled by local conditions ? not foreign terrorists ? and drew strength from deep grievances, including the presence of U.S. troops.

…. Robert Hutchings, the chairman of the National Intelligence Council from 2003 to 2005, said the October 2003 study was part of a “steady stream” of dozens of intelligence reports warning Bush and his top lieutenants that the insurgency was intensifying and expanding.

“Frankly, senior officials simply weren’t ready to pay attention to analysis that didn’t conform to their own optimistic scenarios,” Hutchings said in a telephone interview.

Golly. Imagine that. The White House ignored some evidence that was politically inconvenient. I sure hope they don’t make a habit of that.

POSTSCRIPT: By the way, I can’t wait for this story to spawn yet another post at The Corner explaining that Bush and Cheney were right to ignore the CIA because, you know, the CIA always gets everything wrong. You’d think that excuse would get embarrassing after the tenth or twentieth time in three years that the CIA has turned out to be more on the ball than the White House (or The Corner, for that matter), but it seems to be an evergreen.