June 25 House Report on Intelligence Funding

2 comments to June 25 House Report on Intelligence Funding

• Anonymous

  June 29, 2004 at 9:08 am Log in to Reply

  The section on strengthening oversight discusses the Chalabi affair and Abu Ghraib. The section is very near the end of the report. A short excerpt:

  The abuses of Iraqi detainees at Abu Ghraib were
  reprehensible. Equally stunning was the executive branch’s
  failure to inform this Committee of the abuses at Abu Ghraib.
  Members of this Committee were in Baghdad in mid-February, just
  when Major General Taguba was undertaking his investigation.
  There was no mention of any problems.
  There are numerous other examples of incidents and problems
  that should have been brought forward to this Committee but
  never were–until they were revealed in the media.
  Witnesseshave been asked pointed questions. Members on both sides of
  the aisle have urged them to be forthcoming. Yet, still we find a
  shocking lack of candor.

  And, regarding Chalabi:

  In the case of Ahmed Chalabi, the Committee must find out
  why the executive branch invested so much political and
  financial capital in a man with such a checkered past.
  
  <…>
  
  Mr. Chalabi has undermined U.S. national security in a
  number of ways. For example, there are indications that he and
  his associates led the Administration to believe the Iraqi
  people would welcome U.S. soldiers as liberators. There are
  also strong indications that he or his organization provided
  false information on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction
  programs prior to the war.

  The foreign language section is somewhat uplifting, however. New requirements are being introduced for all members of the US intelligence community, and especially those in Senior Intelligence Service, for “having professional speaking and reading proficiency of at least level 3″. Unfortunately, there’s a loophole, “The Director of Central Intelligence is tasked with
  providing to Congress a report explaining which positions, if
  any, should be exempt from this requirement.”.

• Anonymous

  June 29, 2004 at 9:16 am Log in to Reply

  On Ms. Eshoo’s amendment to withhold 100% of funds
  authorized for certain intelligence related activities of the
  Under Secretary of Defense for Intelligence until such time as
  the Committee receives a report and documents relating to the
  funding and activities of Ahmed Chalabi, the Committee rejected
  the amendment by a vote of 8 ayes to 10 noes.

  On that vote, the Members present recorded their
  votes as follows: Mr. Goss (Chairman)–no; Mr.
  Bereuter–no; Mr. Gibbons–no; Mr. LaHood–no; Mr.
  Cunningham–no; Mr. Hoekstra–no; Mr. Burr–no; Mr.
  Everett–no; Mr. Gallegly–no; Mr. Collins–no; Mrs.
  Harman–aye; Mr. Reyes–aye; Mr. Boswell–aye; Mr.
  Peterson–aye; Mr. Cramer–aye; Ms. Eshoo–aye; Mr.
  Holt–aye; Mr. Ruppersberger–aye.