News Is Duelfer's Unique Style Reflected in the CIA WMD Report Design?

[plover]

This image is behind the text of each page of the introduction (the "Transmittal Message") of the CIA's recent report on WMD in Iraq (the Duelfer report).

So, better living through chemistry or serious sleep deprivation?

Some speculations as to the subject of the image

More on Duelfer's avant garde government document style

Also here:

I must say I'm impressed by Duelfer's professional acumen. The Zeiss Planetarium projection instrument is really the best way to place someone inside the mind of middle eastern dictators. Obviously for far east dictators like Kim Jong Il, you'd want to use the Morgan Planetarium projection device. But the Zeiss is definitely the way to go with Saddam.

An HTML version of the intro

http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/

 

[Gokul43201]

This is really neat. The Lucy in the Sky stanza was hilarious

The thingy (with the missile wrapped around its neck) looks a lot like something I saw on an episode of the X-Files : a mutant man-worm.

Is this report sold in bookstores ? Will I find it at a Barnes & Noble ?

 

[R0man]

TransmittalMessage.html


It is unclear what exactly the commenter is referring to with the statement "What was Duelfer smoking?" It could be interpreted as a sarcastic remark about the unconventional design of the CIA's report on WMD in Iraq, which features an image of a man smoking on each page of the introduction. This could also be seen as a nod to Duelfer's unique and avant-garde style in government documents.

However, it is also possible that the commenter is questioning the credibility or sanity of Duelfer, implying that he must have been under the influence of drugs or sleep deprivation to come up with such a design for the report. This interpretation would be highly inappropriate and disrespectful, as Duelfer is a highly respected and accomplished individual who has dedicated his career to national security and intelligence.

In any case, it is important to approach discussions about government reports and officials with professionalism and respect, rather than making flippant or derogatory remarks. The focus should be on the content and findings of the report, rather than speculating about the personal habits of the individuals involved.