| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: Politix |
| Senate report blast CIA intel on Iraq |
| 2004-07-09 |
| The CIA failed to penetrate Saddam Hussein’s regime sufficiently before the war to find out what weapons Iraq possessed, and agency analysts applied faulty logic to the sketchy information they did have to conclude Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, a Senate committee report due out today says. On the eve of the scheduled release of the report highly critical of his agency, CIA Director George Tenet bade an emotional farewell to agency employees Thursday, calling the criticism "the nature of a tough, essential business." Though the report focuses on the CIA and does not discuss the White House role, Senate Democrats charge that the Bush administration is also to blame for overplaying shaky prewar intelligence on Iraq. Michigan Sen. Carl Levin, the No. 2 Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said Thursday that a newly declassified CIA finding shows that the administration exaggerated prewar reports asserting links between al-Qaeda and Saddam’s regime. The 560-page Senate Intelligence Committee report was described in broad terms by 10 officials with knowledge of its contents, including committee members, staffers and U.S. intelligence officials. The aides and intelligence officials requested anonymity because of the sensitivity of the subject. The report examines the intelligence gathering process on Iraq, including the failure to find any of the chemical and biological weapons that the CIA said Saddam possessed. Those weapons were one of the justifications for war in Iraq. "The report finds that the intelligence community’s reporting on Iraq was not reliable," said Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., a member of the panel. "That is a terrible condemnation of an agency that is our first line of defense." Among the issues explored: • CIA field officers who intercepted aluminum tubes bound for Iraq reported that the tubes were for use in uranium centrifuges to make nuclear bomb fuel, even though the officers had no expertise in bombmaking. Agency analysts and outside experts hired by the CIA then faced bureaucratic opposition to the suggestion that the tubes might have been bought to build ordinary rockets."This is a matter of the American people’s right to know if there ever was one," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., vice chairman of the committee. "It’s not going to be a happy report." Tenet’s last day on the job is Sunday, the seven-year anniversary of his swearing-in. He departs as the second-longest-serving director, behind Allen Dulles, who served 1953-61. About 1,500 agency employees, joined by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, FBI Director Robert Mueller and others, attended a send-off ceremony Thursday at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va. "These have been eventful years, filled with exhilaration and triumph, with pain and sorrow, and, yes, with questions about our performance," Tenet said. President Bush has not chosen a successor but is considering former Navy secretary John Lehman, a member of the Sept. 11 Commission who has sharply criticized the CIA, and Rep. Porter Goss, R-Fla., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, which said the CIA’s human intelligence operations must be completely revamped. Tenet has rejected claims that the CIA’s failures stemmed from organizational problems. That attitude prompted Pat Roberts, R-Kan., the Senate panel’s chairman, to say the CIA was "in denial." Tenet was not backing off Thursday. He told CIA employees that "if people or leaders want to take you back in a different direction, then it is your voices that must be heard to say, ’We know better, and we’re not going to put up with it.’ " Although the Senate committee’s report was approved unanimously, committee Democrats planned to make public "additional views" to argue that Bush administration officials exaggerated Iraq intelligence and must share the blame for faulty prewar judgments. Levin said Thursday that a response by Tenet to a committee query supported that claim. In the July 1 reply, Tenet addressed repeated assertions that Sept. 11 hijacker Mohamed Atta met in Prague with Iraqi intelligence officer Ahmed al-Ani five months before the terrorist attack. "Although we cannot rule it out, we are increasingly skeptical that such a meeting occurred," Tenet wrote, noting "the absence of any credible information that the April 2001 meeting occurred." Before the war, Vice President Cheney said the meeting was "pretty well confirmed." Last month, Cheney said the meeting "has never been proven; it’s never been refuted." |
| Posted by:Dan Darling |
| #3 Sorry Oldspook, but the bloodletting really began with Stansfield Turner and the dismissal of hundreds of field men. (We didn't have a single CIA man in Afghanistan when the Russians invaded in December 1989.) He and Carter were convinced of the over-riding importance of technical intelligence. And, by the way, they didn't listen to their people when the Shah was poised to fall. |
| Posted by: Tancred 2004-07-09 10:01:02 AM |
| #2 Read the report - and search the internet for what has happened to the CIA since the late 1980's. The CIA has had its nuts in a vice since the early to mid 1990's when its HUMINT sections were virtually disassembled by budget cuts and well-meaning but stupid laws regarding dealing with "criminal" elements in what we call "Indian Country". Technical stuff came to the forefront because it coudl be done without "messy" human interactions, unsavory characters, and much lower political risks. Problem is our enemy requires much more HUMINT oriented measures to counter. This goes back to a naivte and stupidity of the dis-assembly of the "Black Chamber" (the first US cryptologic group - who were quite proficient in codebreaking and wiretapping) because some pogue Secretary of State declared that "Gentelmen do not read each other's mail". This put the US behind the 8-ball and nearly cost us the war with Pearl Harbor - we only just recovered in time to set up the gamble at Midway by breaking the Japanese codes. We did that to ourselves again, this time in the HUMINT field in the early-mid 1990's, and have not bothered to try to repair it until 9/11 showed just how badly Congress/Clinton had screwed up. In the former Baathist/Sammist Iraq, or in places like Somolia, Afghanistan or Iran or North Korea, by definition anyone not ideologically driven (who would come to us anyways) will have to be gought off - and by nature those sorts are seldom clean of criminal conduct in their nation. But laws and budgets precluded us from fielding an effective fore - or even putting adequate number of analysts and resources. And this report is a capper - it shows just how bad the CIA has been - and how they bled off talent due to budget cuts, leaving them with they best they coudl afford, instead of the very best and brightest. It will take 5 years to even get a semblance of what we need, and 8-10 years to get an effective and operative capability in key nations and regions. And it will take budget money -something Congress seems unwilling to supply. Seems they'd rather dump it into pork projects for bases we don't need (undoubtably another "Robert Byrd" building or 2 in W.Va). As for the Dem trying to make this another "Bash Bush" vehicle, thats all too typical - they caused the problems we are now facing with their irresponsible cuts a decade ago that are jsut now becoming evident - and instead of offering up an apology - or a solution, the immediately try to play politics and smear other for political gain. The Democrat Pary had become despicalbe - they have put personal political power gains ahead of the good of the nation. The bastards. |
| Posted by: OldSpook 2004-07-09 2:47:43 AM |
| #1 If you want to get good HUMINT, you are going to have to build up a network. That will take time. You will also have to be willing to get your hands dirty. We are collectively too PC to do it right now. Thanks to the LLL congressmen who put politics above the security of this nation. |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul in Fairbanks 2004-07-09 12:41:06 AM |