'Classified' Iraq Corruption Report Posted Online

September 27, 2007 10:51 AM

Justin Rood Reports:

Iraq_parliament_study_main The State Department thinks the Iraqi government is larded with corrupt officials who protect their own at the expense of their country. But they don't want you to know they think that.

Amid a clash with Congress over details on the problem of corruption in Iraq, the State Department classified a previously unclassified new report which details the pervasiveness of fraud, intimidation and misdirection within Iraqi ministries.

However, the "Secret" stamp appears to have come down too late: a watchdog group obtained an early version of the report, stamped "Sensitive but Unclassified," and published it online.

Iraqi officials' malfeasance undermines the legitimacy of the Iraqi government and hamstrings its anti-corruption efforts, according to the version of the State Department report posted by the Federation of American Scientists, the group which made the document public.

"Currently, Iraq is not capable of even rudimentary enforcement of anti-corruption laws," it states.

How bad is it?  The anti-corruption advisor to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki refuses to disclose his own financial holdings, the report says. Routine investigative reports by government anti-corruption watchdogs "cannot be trusted to truthfully reveal criminal activity against anyone protected by the violent or the powerful."

The report, which was first disclosed by the Nation magazine, details problems in nearly two dozen Iraqi government ministries as well as nongovernmental organizations.

Click Here for Full Blotter Coverage.

Steven Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists said he had not been contacted by the State Department about the report, which he posted to his group's Web site on Wednesday. 

"No one has asked me to take it down," Aftergood told the Blotter on ABCNews.com, "and in the absence of a persuasive security rationale, we wouldn't."

The State Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The department classified the report in the middle of a spat with House Government Reform and Oversight Committee Chairman Henry Waxman, D-Calif. Waxman has been pressing the State Department to make several documents and officials available for a hearing on corruption in Iraq, including the anti-corruption report.

Waxman has postponed his hearing on the topic to Oct. 4.

Click Here to Register to Receive Blotter Alerts.

To Blotter Homepage

September 27, 2007 | Permalink | User Comments (48)

User Comments

The most glaring thing about this is that the failed STATE DEPARTMENT could say the exact same things about the loser in the WHITEWASH HOUSE, and his regime. So I guess we have the trickle down theory in play here...

Posted by: daddy | Sep 27, 2007 11:52:25 AM

Internal memo from FX: "We're starting to look like full-fledged idiots in our support for this moron. Let's turn it down until the bad new passes."

Posted by: Murdoch | Sep 27, 2007 12:26:08 PM

The drive-by media ought to stop publishing all this Anti-Iraq stuff soon...otherwise the Democrats that y'all support will be mighty angry if they take office in 09'. CAUSE GUESS WHAT...they ain't pulling out of Iraq...they've known this all along! The Democrats and the drive-bys have duped millions of you foil-hat wearing fools!

Posted by: Gunpowder | Sep 27, 2007 12:26:14 PM

They should really look-up to the current US asministration for lessons on anticorruption. /sarcasm

Posted by: tony hart | Sep 27, 2007 12:38:48 PM

Their congress is full of corrupt rich people looking out for their own personal interests? Big surprise! Look who they're modeled after!

Posted by: Guy D | Sep 27, 2007 12:41:39 PM

Is there any wonder why? After all they have had the best of those who have perfected corruption to learn from.

Posted by: GC | Sep 27, 2007 12:45:28 PM

I'm sure those in Washington are quite experienced with corruption.

Posted by: Rick McDaniel | Sep 27, 2007 12:55:57 PM

"Our administration is concerned about deficits, and the way they deal with deficits is you want to control spending. And I hope Congress lives up to their words. When they talk about deficits, they can join us in making sure we don't overspend. They can join us and make sure that the appropriations process is focused on those issues that -- those items that are absolutely necessary to the American people. I'm pleased that members of the Congress are talking about deficits. It means they understand their obligations not to overspend the people's money."
President Bush

The Cost of Iraq War calculator is set to reach $456 billion September 30, 2007, the end of fiscal year 2007. The Cost of Iraq War calculator is occasionally reset based on new information and new allocations of funding. The numbers include military and non-military spending, such as reconstruction. Spending only includes incremental costs, additional funds that are expended due to the war. For example, soldiers' regular pay is not included, but combat pay is included. Potential future costs, such as future medical care for soldiers and veterans wounded in the war, are not included. It is also not clear whether the current funding will cover all military wear and tear. It also does not account for the Iraq War being deficit-financed and that taxpayers will need to make additional interest payments on the national debt due to those deficits.

Question: Where are the bad guy(s)?

Iraq is a mess!

Posted by: sue from texas` | Sep 27, 2007 1:15:12 PM

Uhhh, Gunpowder....I hope you're not really serious with your comment. Of course the Democrats will not be able to fully pull out of Iraq. We, as a nation (Democrats,Republicans and Independants )are stuck in Iraq. Because we were led into what the administration thought would be an easy victory we are now stuck there and cannot pull out and leave them to their own devices. It would be immoral for us to do so, and a serious startegic mistake. We made this mess, and now we must pay. The real dilemma here is that we have placed ourselves in jeopardy as a nation. We know we are going to have to face a real battle (possibly nuclear)with the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Pakistan and Shia fascism in Iran. We have squandered our valuable resources (our brave men and women serving in a volunteer military), not to mention the billions of dollars that could have been used to solidify our military force in the face of these new challanges. We're also lucky that North Korea has backed down for the time being. So hey! Have some common sense will ya? It's got nothing to do with political party affiliations, and everything to do with knowing that the Iraq war strategy has been a total failure. We replaced a stable, sectarian middle eastern country (totalitarian yes, but stable)with a corrupt and an unstable beeding ground for Islamofascists. But hey, at least our contractor are making some money.

Posted by: Dave Davenport | Sep 27, 2007 2:18:50 PM

I don't know which is worse. The fact that the White House has been caught lying once again, or the fact that they are classifying reports for political purposes to keep us from finding out that they are lying to us.

Posted by: Tammy Stickers | Sep 27, 2007 2:56:03 PM

Now our boys an girls in Iraq, who are being maimed, know they are at least throwing their lives and futures away for more than one corrupt government. That should be of some small consolation to their parents and Fox News.

Posted by: geneonlbk | Sep 27, 2007 3:04:59 PM

We MUST start making plans NOW on how to get our troops out of Iraq safely, and plan what to do after they withdraw. I would like to see a full diplomatic effort to try to broker some kind of deal between the various Iraqi factions and I would like peacekeepers placed in Iraq to help protect the innocents as our troops withdraw. I would be willing to support US military as part of peacekeeping unit (to help clean up the mess WE made), but I do not support a continuation of the present course.

Posted by: Marilyn | Sep 27, 2007 3:07:49 PM

Lets get it straight who's lying and whose just covering their tails. This is a report made by THE STATE DEPARTMENT, not President Bush. If it had come form him, it would have his name all over it. The first failure here is of officials not knowing what to classify and when. Frankly, there are a lot of things the public DOES NOT NEED to know. All deference to my good bud Stevie After-your-goods, but making a living off of leaking info, whether that info has any relevance or causes an embarassement to the government or not, well,... too bad he couldn't have gotten a real job all those years ago.

Posted by: Don | Sep 27, 2007 3:26:27 PM

Bush and Cheney are war criminals, plain and simple. We didn't go into Iraq for any purpose any nobler than to control the oil in the region. That was what Osama bin Laden wanted to do; it's why Saddam Hussein could never have been an ally with OBL, and it is why there are now 14 permanent bases built or being built in Iraq - we are never leaving. . As an honorably discharged Army veteran, it is very hard for me to have to say that.

Posted by: bob crawford | Sep 27, 2007 3:27:13 PM

When we see the people of Myanmar marching in protest against a corrupt and inept regime, many of us think of ourselves as being far removed from the events depicted in the news. The truth is that our own government treats the law and citizens of this land with complete disdain. If we will not march in the streets in protest, at least we can hope that more than 50% of the US voters will turn out next year and prevent our leaders in Washington from forgetting who they represent.

Posted by: Diogenes | Sep 27, 2007 3:32:53 PM

It is an easy read if you stay away from the MAINSCREAM media and ferret out your own news. NEWSFLASH-shelf life on embassy being built in Iraq???? 30 years...Years before the Downing St.Memo is reported again by the MAINSCREAM media...don't hold your breath...number of scares reported by MAINSCREAM media before November 2008????...don't want to know and counting...

Posted by: daddy | Sep 27, 2007 3:38:25 PM

Could it be that our beloved "President" has lied to us AGAIN? How shocking.

Posted by: eric donovan | Sep 27, 2007 4:22:07 PM

Let Bush explain.

Posted by: eric | Sep 27, 2007 4:39:12 PM

Fox News finally calls it a day. Get out the puppets.

Posted by: Murdoch | Sep 27, 2007 4:48:17 PM

I cannot brook those who parrot the "We can't leave Iraq because... yadda, yadda, yadda." Like hell we can't leave.... Matter of fact, just enact compulsory military service and we'll be out of there so fast it'll make your head swim. But, as long as we can sit on our fat, lazy arses here at home and it's only the "volunteers" who are coming home in boxes... we'll continue the same old boloney. Get out now! There is nothing in the Mideast (oil and Israel included) that are worth the life of my next door neighbor's kid.

Posted by: Dutch | Sep 27, 2007 4:50:30 PM

Sorry but I don't see anything to gain by sticking around in Iraq. We should help those that want to leave get out and let the rest of them go at it. It is inevitable that Iraq will split into 3 states. The real battle is going to be over the country's oil so no matter what we do to establish peace as soon as we leave the fighting will continue. This war is a horrendous blunder that only the Iraqi’s can finish. The only way the U.S. can win in the Middle East is to start an all out technology war on oil.

Posted by: Van Go | Sep 27, 2007 5:00:20 PM

I regretfully submit a vote of "no confidence" in my country's government.

Posted by: oobe | Sep 27, 2007 5:08:57 PM

How com you all hate Prezident Bush? He is the greatest thing to happen to our country! He is our king, and is saving us. You heathens should just leave and go to canadia. I am sad to be here on this great american soile with you.

Posted by: a REAL american! | Sep 27, 2007 5:09:24 PM

Dave Davenport: You're partly correct. The war in Iraq is a mess. But our staying only prolongs the sectarian violence and postpones the inevitable: a full-blown civil war which will eventually result in some form of stability. In other words, the sooner we leave, the sooner Iraq will reach a modicum of peace.

Also, I agree we may face a problem if Islamists manage to take over Pakistan, but we face NOTHING with Iran. If we pre-emptively go to war there, the US alone will be the cause of the next world war. Iran and its nuclear ambitions pose no threat to us, as a nuclear attack on Iran's part against Israel or the US would be suicide. Iran's leaders know that, which is why--as Abizaid said--we can "live" with a nuclear Iran.

Posted by: Greg8898 | Sep 27, 2007 5:14:35 PM

"...and cannot pull out and leave them to their own devices. It would be immoral for us to do so, and a serious startegic mistake."

Dave, while I understand why you make that statement, it indicates you really don't understand the conflict between the Sunni and Shia that drives everything. Before you go branding the Shia in Iran as fascists, it would help if you study the map.

Iran, which is predominately Shia, is surrounded by Aghanistan,Pakistan, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the United Arab Emirates, and so on. ALL of those countries are predominately Sunni. And trust me, they'd just as soon destroy Iran as look at them. When we invaded Afghanistan and Iraq, the Iranians were probably rooting for us because we destroyed their 2 biggest enemies...the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. Plus, they knew the instability that would occur and they could take advantage of that. The Bush Administration sees that as "meddling", which is as they would see it. But to the Iranians and all the Sunni monarchs and dictators in those countries, Iraq is about who is going to get a foothold and become a greater regional power (Iran) or maintain their regional power base (the Saudis, etc.)

Posted by: Ryan | Sep 27, 2007 5:27:28 PM

is this supposed to be news? Have the people posting here just now figured out that a lot of Iraqies are corrupt? Just maybe it has somthing to do with living under a corrupt and ruthless dictator called Saddam. They dont think like normal people, they are in it for them selves, of course come to think of it a lot of the people on this site are the same way. Its all about me.

Posted by: harry | Sep 27, 2007 5:44:12 PM

"Classified" - no anywhere near classified. Of course the press doesn't know any different (ignorant writers who do very little research today...).

The documents get classified from the very first inception of writing such a document, it is classified BEFORE it is even written, not vice versa. You don't disclose name, people, location, etc. etc. If they did, it was written by some kid without any prior experience, or some idiot upper (which is usually the case). As far as corruption goes? Its been that way for millenia, do you think we'd change it in 5 years?

-bix

Posted by: biscuitninja | Sep 27, 2007 6:07:03 PM

Ryan, thanks for the geographical report. It still amazes me that we are abroad, miles and miles away from these countries in many ways - what are we doing over there? What was our primary goal?

The only thing this report indicates to me is there are more similarities than differences with many other governments including ours. We just hide it better.

I have always believed that to be in Washington you have to have a thread of insanity.

It's a mess in Iraq! Nothing is going to happen overnight.

Posted by: sue from texas | Sep 27, 2007 6:27:54 PM

Oops! They let the truth slip out. And we all know how little the Bushies like for the American people to hear or see the actual truth.

Posted by: Todd in Kentucky | Sep 27, 2007 6:42:50 PM

When you think about it, we can't seem to reign in our own corrupt government officials so how in the world do we expect to do it in Iraq.
Man! I want my money back!

Posted by: Todd in Kentucky | Sep 27, 2007 6:46:24 PM

It's better to waste trillions there than here. Either you're with us or against us. If you don't support us throwing away hundreds of billions to Iraqi officials, you don't support our troops!

Posted by: JT | Sep 27, 2007 6:47:08 PM

Boy, got you guys fired up didn"t I?
While I'm well aware of the Sunni presence in the region and the fact that there is no love lost between them and Iran, these countries have neither the resources, nor the will to take on Iran if it were to come to that (let alone the fact that the countries mentioned have their own issues with Sunni Islamofascism). I am not advocating any kind of pre-emptive attack on Iran either. I'm merely emphasiszing the fact that because of this stupid war, Iran is motivated to play an agressive role in the region, particularly Israel, because they know that US resources are depleted and we would have a difficult time repelling any kind of attack they might mount unless we used first strike nuclear weapons to deter them. That's all we have right now besides airpower. We're used up. Iran wants Iraq, plain and simple, and there will be no civil war (actually that's what it's been) after we pull out. Iran will take over. Perhaps not overtly, but with a Shite majority in Iraq, they will own Iraq.
As for branding the Iranian Shia, "fascists", I was referring to the ruling theocracy and their thugs. Maybe it's a misnomer to call a theocracy "fascist", I don't know, but the Iranian Shite theocracy has a similar view of their destiny as does the Sunni based Taliban and Al Qaeda in all of their derivitives. That is, they want to rule the world! End of story. Rule the world dude! We're going to have to fight them sometime, somehow. We have to maintain some sort of presence in Iraq now that we have stirred the hornets nest. I'm not saying it's right. I don't agree with this friggin' mess either. I'm a child of the sixties and I spent a lot of time protesting the Vietnam war which was us supporting a corrupt government like the Shite led Iraqi govt. (although I don"t think it would be much different if it was Sunni led)
We made the same mistakes there in trying to allow the So. Vietnamese Govt. to be self determining. It just doesn"t work. There will be continued sectarian violence regardless of whether we pull out or not. I think our moral obligation now is to stay and prevent this thing from turning into a full blown conflagration against all of the innocent Iraqis (Shia and Sunni Kurds, whatever) that put into this postion by our own corrupt govt. that we as a nation elected. Whether you voted for the idiot or not we're all in this together. We have to make it right. One way or another, We're screwed.

Posted by: Dave Davenport | Sep 27, 2007 6:47:30 PM

It's better to waste trillions there than here. Either you're with us or against us. If you don't support us throwing away hundreds of billions to Iraqi officials, you don't support our troops!

Posted by: JT | Sep 27, 2007 6:52:19 PM

goodness, the iraqis learn from the americans fast!! corrupt officals already? wow. why do we complain, we invented them.

Posted by: john | Sep 27, 2007 7:44:59 PM

I've said it all along: Until the Iraqi government is functional, there will never be stability, let alone peace. It appears to be far from functional. Despite the naysayers who think America has to stay there until 'victory' (whatever the hell that means), American troops should be used as a carrot and the threat of removing them the stick. If the Iraqis can't meet benchmarks in creating a stable, functional government, America should pull out completely. Here's how it works:

We set a deadline for various benchmarks. At that deadline, we evaluate the progress and add time to how long American military support will stay in the country. The more progress, the more time we will stay. The less progress, the less time. Regardless of the progress, we leave one year from the benchmark evaluation date at most. That's simple enough for anyone to understand and certainly long enough for them to get their act together.

Posted by: fatesrider | Sep 27, 2007 8:59:45 PM

I remember being on a visit to Gettysburg when the American idiot started this war. All the vets there were so happy that we were going after the "ones who attacked us on 9/11". I said to my son that we would win the war, but not the peace. I wonder what my son and his friends who are serving in Iraq will say and how they will feel when they read this account of corruption that they know exists. It is not like they do not have internet access. All those mercaneries and the politians that own their companies are the only ones making out. As usual, a rich man's war.....a poor man's fight. General Smedley Butler could not have said it better, "War is a racket."

Posted by: Ltaanderso | Sep 27, 2007 9:44:19 PM

"...and there will be no civil war (actually that's what it's been) after we pull out. Iran will take over. Perhaps not overtly, but with a Shite majority in Iraq, they will own Iraq."

Dave...ABC edited my initial post so I'll try to be less verbose! Maybe they won't cut out everything I say this time.

You're right, it has been a civil war and will continue to be one when we pull out. However, if you think the Sunni states will allow Iran to have complete hegemony in Iraq, you are mistaken. First, Iran doesn't want to "take over" Iraq but simply have a government there who is friendly to them (Remember Saddam and the Iraq/Iran war?). The Iraqi Shia may be Shia like the Iranians but they are ARABS, not Persians (like the Iranians). The Iraqi Shia want a friendly and good relationship with Iran but they do NOT want Iran meddling in their internal affairs. After all, THEY have to live with the Iraqi Sunni! And while the Iraqi Shia would just as soon be in complete control, they know the Sunni states will constantly back insurgency until the Iraqi Sunni are back in control. Hence, some compromise will have to be reached.

But NONE of this can happen until the US leaves. We are trying to operate over there as if we're dealing with a power struggle. It is but it's surrounded by hatred that goes back a thousand years, absolute rulers who want to stay in power, and is wrapped in that most precious commodity, oil.

And really, you need to quit listening to what Ahmedinejad says. Like Kim Jong Il, he's nothing more than a blowhard who craves power. But the Iranian theocracy is much more sophisticated politically than you think. They're like most religious organizations...they top may be "religious" but the guys at the top are all about power and keeping control, regardless of religion. Ahmednejad makes all sorts of outlandish statements because 1) he knows how the world media will spotlight his statements, and 2) it scares the oil markets and raises the price of oil. In other words, he's pure self interest. His threats to Israel, etc. are heartfelt probably but he knows he can't carry it out. As I said in my first post (and it was cut) that Al Qaida and the Taliban are extremists that, like all extremists, really influence very few. What IS common belief among them and the rest of the Arab world (the people that is...not the governments) is they want the US out of the Middle East. And if it wasn't for oil, we would be.

You and I both grew up in the sixties but you have to learn to look at the world from more than just a Western point of view. Our view of Vietnam in the states is very different from how the rest of the world saw our venture there. And it's the same with this war and many of our interactions in the world.

Posted by: Ryan | Sep 27, 2007 10:25:17 PM

So... we have created a new democracy in our own image as ordained by God through Mr. Bush. Holy Mission Accomplished.

Posted by: Rick_VT | Sep 27, 2007 11:29:08 PM

Article says: "The State Department thinks the Iraqi government is larded with corrupt officials who protect their own at the expense of their country." Must have been a typo. That's obviously a State Department report on the REPUBLICAN PARTY.

Posted by: wilder5121 | Sep 27, 2007 11:41:52 PM

General Smedley Butler, sure wish we had him here now rebutting Petraeus and Dubya! They don't make Marines like him anymore!

Posted by: Wizard O'Oz | Sep 28, 2007 1:10:37 AM

Gee thanks Ryan. I'll try to be more understanding of the cultures that are out to eliminate our way of life. Doesn't matter if they are Persians or Arabs. They each have their own form of Islamofascism and who ever gains control of Iraq will have the base of power needed to advance their objectives. As for not listening to Ahmedinejad, Sure, no problem. He doesn't want Iraq. No more than Hitler wanted Austria, Poland and the rest of Europe. No need to heed his proclamations about Iran's desire to restore the glory of the Persian empire. Just like there's no reason to heed Al Qaeda's calls for resoration of Islamic Caliphate's. It will never happen right? All that money that the Sunni Arabs have in oil money will prevent that from happening right?
Good thing we didn't listen to Hitler, and counted on England, France, and the rest of Europe to contain his ambitions.

Posted by: Dave Davenport | Sep 28, 2007 9:48:10 AM

The State Department thinks the American government is larded with corrupt officials who protect their own at the expense of their country. But they don't want you to know they think that.
Change one word, it is still true. And these are the people you want in charge of your health-care?

Posted by: Retired_subsailor | Sep 28, 2007 10:05:01 AM

Whatever, Dave. Sarcasm is always the refuge of a weak position. Glad to see you can understand the world with anything other than a World War II mentality. Since you feel so strongly about the threat to our "way of life" (I take it that's God, Mother, and apple pie), you just go on over there to Iraq and see if you can stop that restoration of that caliphate and all the wannabe world conquerers that you fear over there.

Posted by: Ryan | Sep 28, 2007 12:04:59 PM

Alright, you have a few loons from the far right who don't care how much money is wasted. Everybody else already knew this.

Posted by: WDRussell | Sep 28, 2007 12:28:32 PM

Uhhh.. speaking of sarcasm being the refuge of the weak. You know what they say about opinions, and we both have one. Right? It's the American way. Have a nice life.

Posted by: Dave Davenport | Sep 28, 2007 1:23:17 PM

This report says very much more about Arabs than Americans. It says a great deal about Islam. Clearly ALL the problems in the region are directly related to the failure of the culture and the religion. The regions moral values, moral codes, work ethics and beliefs are clearly revealed in this report. The question is do we want the West corrupted by the East and its madness? And if not why do we continue to allow migration, failed integration and the establishment of education centres that preach the very failures so obvious in Iraq. The people in the West need to awaken from their slumber at home and abroad and see the truth of a failed philosophy based on sand.

Posted by: Tim | Sep 28, 2007 5:06:05 PM

What is really dumb here are the ones who think the whitehouse didn't want this released...This was a way for the whitehouse to criticize Iraq gov indirectly...geez ROFLMAO...from the intel on this board no wonder the Rep. will win in 08

Posted by: Jim | Sep 29, 2007 9:28:43 AM

Sounds like they are learning all the American and Israeli ways. Governments that lie, hide truths, use the poor in the land to aid the interests of those who worship money.

Posted by: 666BEAST666 | Oct 1, 2007 5:08:22 AM

Post a comment