Kevin Drum alerts us to the fact that the Able Danger data miners tagged Condi Rice as a Chinese agent. Which is funny enough right there. But Mark Kleiman thinks they might be right:
Still, are we absolutely certain that Condi Rice is not a Chinese agent?Throw Greenspan in there and I think you get eggroll. Seriously, the Chinese could not have done anything more to successfully dismantle the US intelligence apparatus and buy our economic security at fire sale prices than the neocons have willingly done for them. Happy coincidence? I think not.
Consider: In the long term, the U.S. is China's rival as the dominant world power. Anything that weakens the U.S. is good for China.
The Bush foreign policy, of which Rice was one of the architects, has been a spectacular success -- from the Chinese perspective.
It is a maxim of the law that a person may be taken to intend the reasonably forseeable consequences of his actions. Since much of the foreign policy train wreck of the past five years was completely forseeable, by courtroom standards Rice can be taken to have intentionally screwed the pooch. By the rule of qui bono?, she can be taken to have done so at the behest of the obvious beneficiary, China.
Thus the data-miners, and the process of data-mining, are not only vindicated but can be seen to have done the country a great service by revealing the disloyalty of the Secretary of State.
Yes, I know that by this logic Tenet, Rumsfeld, Bolton, and many others also fit the profile of Chinese agents of influence. (The only one we're sure doesn't work for the Chinese is Bush himself, who obviously works for the Saudis.)
Clever those Chinese.