« Previous | Main | Next »

The Iraq Assessment You Don't Get to See

Share

April 07, 2008 6:16 PM

ABC News' Z. Byron Wolf reports from Capitol Hill:

Coincidental to the very public testimony tomorrow by Army General David Petraeus and US Ambassador to Iraq Ryan Crocker, lawmakers with security clearance on Capitol Hill also got another, very secret assessment of Iraq last week -- this one a National Intelligence Estimate prepared by the US intelligence community.

And while the testimony of Petraeus and Crocker is sure to be grist for news on Iraq for some time, don't look for the Intelligence Committee assessment in the public anytime soon. Despite pleas last week from Democratic lawmakers that an unclassified summary of the classified document be released this week to go along with the Petraeus/Crocker testimony, National Intelligence Director Mike McConnell, decided... well, we don't know what he decided, because his reasoning for keeping the NIE secret is secret.

The lawmakers who asked for an unclassified version of the NIE for public consumption -- Armed Services Chairman Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich, and Teddy Kennedy, D-Mass, - issued a statement today which complained there is no reason an unclassified version should be released and complaining about the "For Official Use Only" marker on McConnell's letter to them denying the request for the NIE to be released.

The Senators take the "official use" marker to mean they can't release the letter from McConnell and they're a little miffed at the clampdown.

"It is incomprehensible that the reply sent to us is labeled ‘For Official Use Only,’ thus not even permitting the public to see the reasons given for hiding this information from public view," Kennedy and Levin wrote in a statement this afternoon.

McConnell said recently during a speech in Baltimore that releasing even an unclassified version of the NIE would show the hand of the US to potential enemies.

"At minimum I'm telling a foreign power what I know about him." he said, which could lead the foreign power to switch up, do things differently, and make things difficult for the intelligence community.

April 7, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (12)

User Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Well all it would be is lies on how the surge is working and that the Iraq govt officials are making progress on running their own country,same old lies americans have been hearing for the last 5 years.The republicans are masters at it.

Posted by: merle7 | Apr 7, 2008 7:26:13 PM

McCain is clear that he wants to stay in Iraq long term.

Obama is unclear on what he wants to do.

Clinton is clear. She will start the shutdown within 60 days.
========================================
Hillary's very clear 60 days has my vote!
========================================

Posted by: WestCoastMessenger | Apr 7, 2008 8:36:44 PM

Why stop there, Neo Politicus?
Include Iraqis and coalition forces, and the count climes to somewhere between 500,000 and 1 mill.

When is your success criteria met?

Posted by: Niels | Apr 7, 2008 9:02:42 PM

westCoatsMessanger, Hillary the Bosnian General has voted for the war in Irak and said it was a mistake, then voted for Bush's bill to go to war against Iran, and said again it was a mistake, and then spoke about her 1996 Bosnian experience landing under sniper fire and said it was a mispoke. Do you think that her position to withdraw troops in 60 days is not a mispoken mistake? God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08.

Posted by: BKMC | Apr 7, 2008 9:10:31 PM

McCain says he supports the war not because he loves war, but because he hates war. This might sound like "straight talk" to some, but, to me, what he is really saying is like doing this very evil and heinous act exactly because one finds it evil and heinous. Now, if this is not masochism, I just wonder what is. It's not necessarily a bad thing--only sadistic. Somebody needs a shrink.

Posted by: TK | Apr 7, 2008 10:28:39 PM

Clinton has more military support from decision makers than McCain. Clinton has always provided measured responses. Obama is a parrot who is unqualified to render an opinion much less a plan that is viable - he continues to flip flop because he has no clue. Clinton has my complete support and confidence to end the Iraq occupation responsibly.

Posted by: DCVoter | Apr 7, 2008 11:36:04 PM

Neo Politicus wrote:

The only valid assessment is the bodycount. 4,000 soldiers have been murdered by terrorists supported by the Liberals and the News Media.

Frankly, I have to wonder if New Politicus' parents had any children who lived because he/she/it cannot be living on the same planet that I am. Yeah, 4,000+ soldiers have been killed and thousands more wounded fighting the "terrorists" in Iraq WHO WERE NOT THERE BEFORE WE INVADED!!!

Posted by: TommyReb | Apr 8, 2008 12:48:33 PM

Saddam did have extensive ties to terror groups--funding, arming, training, sheltering.

A Pentagon review of about 600,000 documents captured in the Iraq war attests to Saddam Hussein's willingness to use terrorism to target Americans and work closely with jihadist organizations throughout the Middle East. The report, titled "Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents," finds that:

• The Iraqi Intelligence Service in a 1993 memo to Saddam agreed on a plan to train commandos from Egyptian Islamic Jihad, the group that assassinated Anwar Sadat and was founded by Al Qaeda's second-in-command, Ayman al-Zawahiri.

• In the same year, Saddam ordered his intelligence service to "form a group to start hunting Americans present on Arab soil; especially Somalia." At the time, Al Qaeda was working with warlords against American forces there.

• Saddam's intelligence services maintained extensive support networks for a wide range of Palestinian Arab terrorist organizations, including but not limited to Hamas. Among the other Palestinian groups Saddam supported at the time was Force 17, the private army loyal to Yasser Arafat.

• Beginning in 1999, Iraq's intelligence service began providing "financial and moral support" for a small radical Islamist Kurdish sect the report does not name. A Kurdish Islamist group called Ansar al Islam in 2002 would try to assassinate the regional prime minister in the eastern Kurdish region, Barham Salih.

• In 2001, Saddam's intelligence service drafted a manual titled "Lessons in Secret Organization and Jihad Work—How to Organize and Overthrow the Saudi Royal Family." In the same year, his intelligence service submitted names of 10 volunteer "martyrs" for operations inside the Kingdom.

• In 2000, Iraq sent a suicide bomber through Northern Iraq who intended to travel to London to assassinate Ahmad Chalabi, at the time an Iraqi opposition leader who would later go on to be an Iraqi deputy prime minister. The mission was aborted after the bomber could not obtain a visa to enter the United Kingdom.

Posted by: carl | Apr 8, 2008 1:23:38 PM

Congress questioned Big Oil about big prices at the pump too.

Posted by: x32792 | Apr 8, 2008 7:54:53 PM

Congress questioned Big Oil about big prices at the pump too and we all can see how much good that did.

Posted by: x32792 | Apr 8, 2008 7:55:21 PM

Well, Tommyreb, you certainly bring up a lot of unsubstantiated claims made by an administration well known for claims that turn out to be LIES - which is how they got the US into these wars.

I hope that you will exercize the same thoroughness in examining and reporting on the lies, torture and criminal actions of Bush, Cheney, FBI, CIA and their "black sites" - and especially the actions of one of the world's greatest terrorist states - ISRAEL - who massively funds terrorist operations against the Palestinians, Iraq, Iran- mostly with US money and backing - and have been repeatedly cited and condemned by the UN for their terrorist activities. Israel also has been caught in espionage against the US - an inconvenient fact.

I really wish that the right-wing extremists would stop making excuses for the Bush/Cheney criminals and their thugs - and look at the degradation they have brought on the US at home and abroad - and how every one of their actions have wound up benefitting the wealthy and hurting the rest of US, but rattling off another of Rove's Talking Points is certainly easier that looking at the horrible results of your support for these criminals

Posted by: sarastro33 | Apr 9, 2008 1:17:19 PM

Good post Carl. They won't respond. The only criticism of you will see on ABC will come from the left and from a Dem point of view. They know Saddam was linked to al Qaeda and they did a big special on it in 98 but bringing it up again might risk a Dem winning the White House so that stuff has to be kept hush hush and ignored until then.

Posted by: Ike Markz | Apr 10, 2008 12:48:55 PM

Post a comment