Pentagon Office of Special Plans (OSP): What's the Deal?

I just heard the name of this group tonight.
A quick google turned up a little:

What’s the deal?

Fellow Dopers, ( I hope that I’m worthy of the appellation Doper), what do you know about this group and when did you know it?
Are they beneficial to the interests of the US or just to the interests of neo-con hawks?

It sounds like an agency that was created in the wake of 911, to take all raw data that was collected regarding al queda and sift through it to gather intel on the scope of the movements activities.

Shunting it over to Iraq is not such a long shot as Iraq was labeled as one of the sanctuarys that al queda was happily using.

Depending on weather or not the other agencies were giving the president the straightdope or simply waffling and not taking a position that would bite em in the butt , may have been a reason for shifting its mandate towards anything that Rummy want to know about now.


This is unsupported at the moment on my part, but I imagine that the Office of Special Plans would have been one of the agencies pushing hard for that assessment.

Heck, perhaps it was the agency pushing for such an assessment. Lords knows most of the CIA and State Department seemed to hold the notion in contempt.

Googling to follow.

Just about everything you need to know was published in the New Yorker in an expose by Seymour Hersh (mirrored here by

a few samples:

AFAIK, it was Hersh’s article that originally brought the OSP into the public eye.

So, it goes something like this:

1 - CIA and DIA maintain (all along) that Hussein’s regime has no significant WMD or links to terrorist groups

2 - Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz are not satisfied with this, and creat the OSP to ‘re-analyze’ the data produced by the CIA and DIA

3 - OSP does was it was created to do, and decides (for example) that INC claims are reliable where everyone else thought they were ludircous (INC = Iraqi National Congress, a group of defectors who stood to gain a lot from a US invasion of Iraq)

4 - Admin now ‘believes’ Iraq has WMD and ties to al-Quaeda

5 - Speeches

6 - War.

To selectivley quote a source like this is the same as lying!

If Bush used this source to claim WMD without giving the full quote then there is no arguement that he lied.

The OSP certainly fills in some gaps here.

Does Perle Have Access to Better Intelligence Than the CIA?

So who has the upside to this?
It sounds kinda fishy.
There has to be a pro side, elsewise why would Wolfowitz’ve benn allowed to create it?

Sounds like he was allowed to create it in the aftermath of 9/11 (11/9 damnit - its a uk thing) when all you had to do was say it was to counter terrorism.

Like most knee-jerk reactions it has proved to be deficient in practise

While it has been labelled that there has been a dearth of evidence. If Ansar al-Islam is/was connected to AQ then Iraq is connected to AQ through them. However, Hussein and the Baathists still would not be.
Labelled so is different than actually so.

Well, if they get $6 million to put Lee Majors back together, watch out!

I guess it’s undisputed then.
The OSP is a shady intel agency created to justify neo-con foreign policy initiative. The OSP doesn’t serve the interests of the US. It is only serves the interests of the neocons.
The OSP is one of the more Orwellian things we’ve yet to see from the US government.
Since it’s undisputedly harmful, why aren’t more people disturbed by it?

Oh, I find it quite disturbing. In fact, I find it disturbing any time that the government decides to add another arm of bureacracy under the guise of national security. This nation spends more than the rest of the world combined for “defense.” No way we need MORE levels of bureaucracy. Wasn’t this administration going to fix the intel problems that kept us from stopping 9/11? Instead, it creates a new group of neocons who add to the problem.

What a joke, 'cept it ain’t funny.

For the same reason more people aren’t disturbed by Bush’s lying about a nonexistent IAEA report, or Bush’s lying about Saddam’s mobile biolabs that aren’t, or Bush’s lying about aluminum tubes for gas centrifuges, or a lot of other stuff – people can’t get disturbed about stuff they don’t know about.

Does anyone know what good the OSP was supposed to bring?

Rumsfeld has said it was intended to take a second look at intelligence reports to make sure that other intel analysts were not missing something.

Why they couldn’t hire more analysts at CIA, DIA, or whereever else, I don’t know.

Oh wait, I do know. Professional intel analysts usually don’t have an axe to grind.

Where’s the upside?

Whither art thou SDMBGD proponents of the OSP? Is it that much of a pariah that not even december will present the upside(s) and/or necessity of the group?


Wolfowitz Committee Instructed White House To Use Iraq/Uranium Reference
The Committee in question is the OSP. It looks like we could be headed for a THIRD administration mea culpa here; maybe even one with a touch of reality to it.

Am I wrong in thinking that this signifigant?

I have to note that Chalabi’s name is closely associated with this fiasco.

From everything I have read the #1 rule in intelligence circles is “never let the tail wag the dog.” In other words you must look at all of the facts and build a picture of what is going on by what the facts tell you. NEVER should you start with a supposition and then gather together data to support it. Even the most neutral investigator will end up accepting data that supports the “pet” theory and ignoring data that might suggest another interpretation. The established agencies know and practice this.

Now we hear that a separate “intelligence” group was formed, given a pet theory (Saddam has WMD and AQ ties) and told to mine the data of the other intelligence agencies for information that would support this theory.

They have essentially admitted all of this now.

This is precisely what the “traitors” among us have been saying all along. The Bush White House misused intelligence and essentially invented a case for war by accepting any shred of information that supported their preconceived notions and ignoring the volumes of information that plainly disproved it.

They created a department to do just that. They have now admitted that they did so. How can anyone continue to say that this administration did not invent the case for war out of whole cloth? No one in the media seems to have the wit or courage to put the beads all on one string but by their own admissions this is precisely what they set out to do and what they then did.