P
Patriot Games
Guest
http://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/NIE_report/2008/02/06/70688.html
Mike McConnell: I Would Change Iran Nuke Report
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell took careful steps to
reconsider key portions of a controversial National Intelligence Estimate on
Iran's nuclear weapons program on Tuesday under sharp questions from members
of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
McConnell was grilled on the NIE's disputed conclusion that Iran had shut
down its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003 under international
pressure by both Democrats and Republicans.
Sen. Kit Bond, the ranking Republican on the committee, chided McConnell for
allowing the NIE to be used as a "political football," and pointed out that
the real revelation of the NIE was just the opposite of how it has been
portrayed in news accounts at home and abroad.
"The main news of the NIE was the confirmation that Iran had a nuclear
weapons program, not that it had halted it temporarily," he said.
Even the presumed, temporary halt was open to question, Bond added. "The
French defense minister said publicly that he believes the program has
restarted. Now if our government comes to that assessment, then we have set
ourselves up to release another NIE or leak intelligence, because this last
one has given us a false sense of security."
John Bolton, the former undersecretary of state for Arms Control and
Nonproliferation, blasted McConnell and the NIE on the morning of the
hearing in a sharply-worded oped appearing in The Wall Street Journal.
"Few seriously doubt that the NIE gravely damaged the Bush administration's
diplomatic strategy," Bolton wrote.
The NIE was driven by policy considerations, not actual intelligence, and
put the community's credibility and impartiality on the line, Bolton argued.
"Mr. McConnell should commit the intelligence community to stick to its
knitting - intelligence - and return its policy enthusiasts to agencies
where policy is made," Bolton added. He called for the reassignment of the
three State Department policy-makers who had authored the NIE.
McConnell tried to dismiss Bolton's comments, then began to seriously
back-pedal.
Once he realized that the intelligence community had turned up information
that directly contradicted public statements he and his predecessor, John
Negroponte, had made about Iran's nuclear weapons program, McConnell said he
was in a bind.
"So now my dilemma was, I could not not make this unclassified," he said,
even though his preference had been to keep the entire 140 page estimate out
of the public eye.
Senior Bush administration officials who have read the entire classified NIE
have told Newsmax they were "appalled" at the thin sourcing and shoddy
analysis.
A former career CIA analyst commented, "I have never seen an intelligence
analysis this bad. It is misleading, politicized, and poorly written."
In a column entitled "Stupid Intelligence on Iran," the former defense
secretary, James Schlesinger, wrote, "Clearly, the key judgments in the NIE
were overstated . . . and thus incautiously phrased."
Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger warned (in a Dec. 13, 2007 Op-Ed
in The Washington Post) that the authors of the NIE saw themselves as "a
kind of check on, instead of a part of, the executive branch," and
excoriated them for seeking to become "surrogate policy-makers and
advocates."
Newsmax first revealed that the NIE's main author, Vann Van Diepen, fled the
State Department for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
after he was investigated for insubordination.
Van Diepen's superior at State, none other than John Bolton, had to bring in
an attorney to force Van Diepen to implement sanctions on countries that
were engaged in WMD-related technology transfers; that is, to ensure that
Van Diepen followed the law after he refused to do so.
I identified Van Diepen as a key "shadow warrior" within McConnell's
Directorate of National Intelligence in my recent book of the same title.
McConnell pleaded lack of time for what he acknowledged was careless wording
in the unclassified version of the NIE that was ultimately released to the
public on Dec. 3, 2007.
"So now we're in a horse race. I've got to notify the committee. I've got to
notify allies. I've got to get unclassified out the door," he said. "So if I'd
had until now to think about it, I probably would have changed a thing or
two."
Asked what specifically he would have changed, McConnell said he "would
change the way that we described the nuclear program."
For a bureaucrat, such wording amounts to "a significant walk back," a
congressional source who followed the hearing told Newsmax.
The opening sentence of the NIE set the tone for the controversy. It states:
"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear
weapons program."
McConnell acknowledged that the decision to relegate the explanation of what
his analysts meant by "nuclear weapons program" to a footnote was
misleading.
"I think I would change the way that we described the nuclear program," he
said. "I would argue, maybe even the least significant portion - was halted
and there are other parts that continue."
Armed with McConnell's admission, Democrat Evan Bayh then rephrased the key
conclusions of the NIE as stating that the Iranians could recommence their
nuclear program "at any point in time" and "ultimately they're likely to be
successful."
When McConnell agreed, Bayh then blasted him for releasing a document to the
public that was misleading, contradictory, and had "unintended consequences
that, in my own view, are damaging to the national security interests of our
country."
McConnell will face renewed grilling on the NIE on Thursday when he faces
the House intelligence panel for a similar hearing.
Mike McConnell: I Would Change Iran Nuke Report
Wednesday, February 6, 2008
Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell took careful steps to
reconsider key portions of a controversial National Intelligence Estimate on
Iran's nuclear weapons program on Tuesday under sharp questions from members
of the Senate Intelligence Committee.
McConnell was grilled on the NIE's disputed conclusion that Iran had shut
down its nuclear weapons program in the fall of 2003 under international
pressure by both Democrats and Republicans.
Sen. Kit Bond, the ranking Republican on the committee, chided McConnell for
allowing the NIE to be used as a "political football," and pointed out that
the real revelation of the NIE was just the opposite of how it has been
portrayed in news accounts at home and abroad.
"The main news of the NIE was the confirmation that Iran had a nuclear
weapons program, not that it had halted it temporarily," he said.
Even the presumed, temporary halt was open to question, Bond added. "The
French defense minister said publicly that he believes the program has
restarted. Now if our government comes to that assessment, then we have set
ourselves up to release another NIE or leak intelligence, because this last
one has given us a false sense of security."
John Bolton, the former undersecretary of state for Arms Control and
Nonproliferation, blasted McConnell and the NIE on the morning of the
hearing in a sharply-worded oped appearing in The Wall Street Journal.
"Few seriously doubt that the NIE gravely damaged the Bush administration's
diplomatic strategy," Bolton wrote.
The NIE was driven by policy considerations, not actual intelligence, and
put the community's credibility and impartiality on the line, Bolton argued.
"Mr. McConnell should commit the intelligence community to stick to its
knitting - intelligence - and return its policy enthusiasts to agencies
where policy is made," Bolton added. He called for the reassignment of the
three State Department policy-makers who had authored the NIE.
McConnell tried to dismiss Bolton's comments, then began to seriously
back-pedal.
Once he realized that the intelligence community had turned up information
that directly contradicted public statements he and his predecessor, John
Negroponte, had made about Iran's nuclear weapons program, McConnell said he
was in a bind.
"So now my dilemma was, I could not not make this unclassified," he said,
even though his preference had been to keep the entire 140 page estimate out
of the public eye.
Senior Bush administration officials who have read the entire classified NIE
have told Newsmax they were "appalled" at the thin sourcing and shoddy
analysis.
A former career CIA analyst commented, "I have never seen an intelligence
analysis this bad. It is misleading, politicized, and poorly written."
In a column entitled "Stupid Intelligence on Iran," the former defense
secretary, James Schlesinger, wrote, "Clearly, the key judgments in the NIE
were overstated . . . and thus incautiously phrased."
Former secretary of state Henry Kissinger warned (in a Dec. 13, 2007 Op-Ed
in The Washington Post) that the authors of the NIE saw themselves as "a
kind of check on, instead of a part of, the executive branch," and
excoriated them for seeking to become "surrogate policy-makers and
advocates."
Newsmax first revealed that the NIE's main author, Vann Van Diepen, fled the
State Department for the Office of the Director of National Intelligence
after he was investigated for insubordination.
Van Diepen's superior at State, none other than John Bolton, had to bring in
an attorney to force Van Diepen to implement sanctions on countries that
were engaged in WMD-related technology transfers; that is, to ensure that
Van Diepen followed the law after he refused to do so.
I identified Van Diepen as a key "shadow warrior" within McConnell's
Directorate of National Intelligence in my recent book of the same title.
McConnell pleaded lack of time for what he acknowledged was careless wording
in the unclassified version of the NIE that was ultimately released to the
public on Dec. 3, 2007.
"So now we're in a horse race. I've got to notify the committee. I've got to
notify allies. I've got to get unclassified out the door," he said. "So if I'd
had until now to think about it, I probably would have changed a thing or
two."
Asked what specifically he would have changed, McConnell said he "would
change the way that we described the nuclear program."
For a bureaucrat, such wording amounts to "a significant walk back," a
congressional source who followed the hearing told Newsmax.
The opening sentence of the NIE set the tone for the controversy. It states:
"We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear
weapons program."
McConnell acknowledged that the decision to relegate the explanation of what
his analysts meant by "nuclear weapons program" to a footnote was
misleading.
"I think I would change the way that we described the nuclear program," he
said. "I would argue, maybe even the least significant portion - was halted
and there are other parts that continue."
Armed with McConnell's admission, Democrat Evan Bayh then rephrased the key
conclusions of the NIE as stating that the Iranians could recommence their
nuclear program "at any point in time" and "ultimately they're likely to be
successful."
When McConnell agreed, Bayh then blasted him for releasing a document to the
public that was misleading, contradictory, and had "unintended consequences
that, in my own view, are damaging to the national security interests of our
country."
McConnell will face renewed grilling on the NIE on Thursday when he faces
the House intelligence panel for a similar hearing.
