1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

McConnell retreats on NIE

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by basso, Feb 6, 2008.

  1. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,775
    Likes Received:
    6,453
    http://www.nysun.com/article/70818

    I know some of you want to pretend Iran isn't a problem, but they're not going away.

    [rquoter]U.S. Spy Chief Retreats on Iran Estimate

    BY ELI LAKE - Staff Reporter of the Sun
    February 6, 2008
    URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/70818

    WASHINGTON — The director of national intelligence is backing away from his agency's assessment late last year that Iran had halted its nuclear program, saying he wishes he had written the unclassified version of the document in a different manner.

    At a hearing yesterday of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, the intelligence director, Michael McConnell, said, "If I had 'til now to think about it, I probably would change a few things." He later added, "I would change the way we describe the Iranian nuclear program. I would have included that there are the component parts, that the portion of it, maybe the least significant, had halted."

    Mr. McConnell was referring to the specific Iranian program to design potential nuclear warheads, which the December estimate said had halted in 2003. But in his opening testimony, Mr. McConnell noted that two other components of the nuclear program were moving ahead — the enrichment of uranium, which he said was the most difficult part of making a bomb, and the development of long-range missiles capable of hitting North Africa and Europe.

    The National Intelligence Estimate on Iran's nuclear program released on December 3 distinguished Iran's enrichment of uranium at Natanz and Arak from its formal nuclear weapons program, which it said had halted in 2003 after the American invasion of Iraq.

    Yesterday, Mr. McConnell struck a different tone. "Declared uranium enrichment efforts, which will enable the production of fissile material, continue. This is the most difficult challenge in nuclear production. Iran's efforts to perfect ballistic missiles that can reach North Africa and Europe also continue."

    He went on, "We remain concerned about Iran's intentions and assess with moderate-to-high confidence that Tehran at a minimum is keeping open the option to develop nuclear weapons."

    The release of the December 2007 estimate at best delayed American diplomatic efforts to pass a third U.N. Security Council resolution sanctioning Iran's uranium enrichment, an activity the mullahs have continued for two years despite warnings from all five permanent members of the security council. The estimate also drew rare rebukes from American allies, including Israel, France, and the United Kingdom who said their intelligence agencies did not concur with the American assessment that Iran had frozen its plan to produce an A-bomb.

    The release of the declassified estimate also contradicted Mr. McConnell's own stated policy of keeping intelligence estimates secret. On Tuesday he said that on November 27, when his analysts presented him with the new Iran estimate, he decided he had to make the conclusions public because both he and his predecessor had been on record warning of Iran's nuclear weapons program and the new intelligence in part contradicted that.

    The timing of Mr. McConnell's pivot is also significant. On January 22 in Berlin, all five permanent veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council plus the Germans agreed on a draft third resolution against Iran. Mr. McConnell predicted that it would pass the council this month. At the same time, other members of the Security Council, such as South Africa have recently warned against a third resolution. The Russians last month completed a deal to provide Iran with nuclear fuel for a separate reactor in Bushehr.

    Tuesday's testimony from Mr. McConnell was part of an annual report from his directorate on threats to America. In his testimony, the national intelligence director warned specifically of potential al Qaeda attacks within America.

    He said that America was not immune from the threat of "homegrown" "al Qaeda inspired" cells, similar to those that have sprouted up in Europe. Noting the rise in radical Sunni Islamist Web sites, he said that these cells in America so far have been cruder than the European variety.

    "To date, cells detected in the United States have lacked the level of sophistication, experience, and access to resources of terrorist cells overseas," Mr. McConnell said. "Their efforts, when disrupted, largely have been in the nascent phase, and authorities often were able to take advantage of poor operational tradecraft. However, the growing use of the internet to identify and connect with networks throughout the world offers opportunities to build relationships and gain expertise that previously were available only in overseas training camps."

    Of interest to Democratic senators at yesterday's hearing was the CIA's stance on coercive interrogation and in particular the practice of simulating drowning in terrorist suspects, a practice known as water boarding. For the first time in public, the CIA named the three people it had subjected to the practice, considered a form of torture by the Geneva conventions.

    The three individuals include the main plotter of the September 11, 2001 attacks, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed; the mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole in 2000, Abd al-Rahim al-Nashiri; and another alleged high level al Qaeda operative named Abu Zubaydeh. This last person's significance has been questioned by some journalists and former officials, and he is said by some to have provided bogus information when he was interrogated.[/rquoter]
     
  2. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,953
    Likes Received:
    36,511
    You wish basso.

    And that's the funny part. The self-appointed D&D patriotism credential checker wants Iran to have nuclear weapons, just like he hoped and prayed that Iraq had them before that. Blah blah hate america etc.
     
  3. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,775
    Likes Received:
    6,453
    wrong- i want intel i can trust. and i don't trust iran- if you had any sense, neither would you.
     
  4. SamFisher

    SamFisher Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Apr 14, 2003
    Messages:
    58,953
    Likes Received:
    36,511
    No you don't. You have been here for 5 years defending the Admin on well documented, obvious, and undisputed cherry picking and stove piping of intel on Iraq in order to support their (and your) point of view.

    You blow up every vial of botox into a doomsday device, go into conniptions whenever a 30 year old harmless relic which used to be a chemical shell is found, and for years have clung bravely to the myth propagated in right wing conspiracy circles that "it hasn't been disproven that the weapons are in syria"?

    You want intel you can trust?

    If so, this would mark a complete change in direction. Are you saying you have learned from your past mistakes?
     
  5. HOOP-T

    HOOP-T Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2000
    Messages:
    6,053
    Likes Received:
    5
    Alright you two.....go to your own rooms please. I'll call you when dinner is ready.

    ;)
     
  6. A_3PO

    A_3PO Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    42,543
    Likes Received:
    5,946
    I'm very glad a new administration will be making a decision on Iran after clearing out the deadwood in the Bush administration.
     
  7. glynch

    glynch Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    17,792
    Likes Received:
    3,395
    Hey, Basso, if we were still occupying ,or even worse fighting in Vietnam, to try to insure a "victory", as you and McCain would have it, (it would still be well less than a hundred years) would that impact our ability to attack Iran?

    Thanks for reminding us why we need to vote against McCain.
     
  8. basso

    basso Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2002
    Messages:
    29,775
    Likes Received:
    6,453
    one wonders why some many are so anxious to be so gullible.

    http://www.nysun.com/article/70864

    [rquoter]Correcting the CIA
    New York Sun Editorial
    February 7, 2008

    What a difference two months make. On December 3, when the director of national intelligence released an estimate of Iran's nuclear program that said the Mullahs had suspended its bomb making in 2003, the left could barely contain its glee. The New York Times featured a front page analysis that said, "Rarely, if ever, has a single intelligence report so completely, so suddenly, and so surprisingly altered a foreign policy debate here." The Majority Leader, Senator Reid took the opportunity of its release to call again for a "surge of diplomacy with Iran." Senator Obama said, "The juxtaposition of this NIE with the president's suggestion of World War III serves as an important reminder of what we learned with the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq: members of Congress must carefully read the intelligence before giving the President any justification to use military force."

    Careful, indeed. It turns out that on Tuesday, as our Eli Lake reported on page one of yesterday's Sun, the director of national intelligence, Mr. McConnell says he now regrets the phrasing of the unclassified estimate that so stirred America's enthusiasts of diplomacy. In testimony before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Mr. McConnell went further. He noted that Iran is developing both the long range ballistic missiles and the nuclear fuel for a potential weapon. What had halted, it turns out, was work to design the actual warhead and secret enrichment activity. The Iranians continued to enrich uranium in the open in Natanz in defiance of two Security Council resolutions.

    As for the secret enrichment and weapons design, Mr. McConnell is not even sure as of mid-2007 whether the Iranians have restarted this work. "We assess with moderate confidence that Tehran had not restarted these activities as of mid-2007, but since they comprised an unannounced secret effort which Iran attempted to hide, we do not know if these activities have been restarted," he told the assembled senators. So why then did the opening sentence of the December 3 assessment state with no equivocation, "We judge with high confidence that in fall 2003, Tehran halted its nuclear weapons program"? Mr. McConnell said that it was because he had to assemble quickly a declassified estimate in late November and that it did not occur to him that this kind of declarative statement would confuse the issue.

    For the unelected intelligence bureaucrats who pushed through December's distortion and the newspapers that cheered them on, the walk back from the director is a serious blow. It's hard to recall a situation quite like it. Only a few lines about Mr. McConnell's testimony on this point appeared in yesterday's New York Times, and that was buried in a story that focused on the improvements Al Qaeda has been making in its ability to strike the home front. Yet for a brief moment the unclassified assessment about which Mr. McConnell now has regrets ended political debate about the urgency of stopping the world's leading sponsor of Islamic terror from obtaining an apocalyptic arsenal.

    * * *

    It's a lesson to remember. Mr. McConnell's regrets came in questioning from Senator Bayh, a Democrat from Indiana who once harbored hopes of running for president before his party was taken over by the likes of moveon.org. Mr. Bayh cited an article about the estimate that was issued Tuesday by the Wall Street Journal and written by John Bolton, the man accused three years ago, when President Bush nominated him to be ambassador to the United Nations, of intimidating all those intelligence professionals. We'd like to think Mr. McConnell's correction will steer the American debate on how best to counter the threat from the Iranians away from the aspirations of our professional diplomats and spies to appease them and back toward an unvarnished view of the danger that is building in Iran.[/rquoter]
     
  9. FranchiseBlade

    FranchiseBlade Contributing Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2002
    Messages:
    48,941
    Likes Received:
    17,538
    I failed to see the part about the weapons program still being active.
     
  10. rimrocker

    rimrocker Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 1999
    Messages:
    22,318
    Likes Received:
    8,178
    Said he to the mirror.
     
  11. Major

    Major Member

    Joined:
    Jun 28, 1999
    Messages:
    41,434
    Likes Received:
    15,867
    Yes, it does. Odd that it took him 2 months to correct something that caused a pretty wide firestorm at the beginning of December. You'd think he'd maybe say something, oh, in mid-December, no?

    Seriously? It didn't occur to him that saying Iran halted it's nuke program in 2003 would cause confusion if, in fact, they hadn't halted their nuke program? I'd think this shows that Mr. McConnell has a serious lack of common sense or analytical ability. Why is someone this stupid our Director of National Intellgience? Has anyone considered asking for his resignation? :confused:
     
  12. Refman

    Refman Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2002
    Messages:
    13,674
    Likes Received:
    312
    How about if we were still fighting the Korean War, or the Nazis, or the British to free the colonies?

    What if the world really is flat, Columbus?

    And you use basso's ill-advised post to springboard an attack on McCain...I guess the game is on. :(
     

Share This Page

  • About ClutchFans

    Since 1996, ClutchFans has been loud and proud covering the Houston Rockets, helping set an industry standard for team fan sites. The forums have been a home for Houston sports fans as well as basketball fanatics around the globe.

  • Support ClutchFans!

    If you find that ClutchFans is a valuable resource for you, please consider becoming a Supporting Member. Supporting Members can upload photos and attachments directly to their posts, customize their user title and more. Gold Supporters see zero ads!


    Upgrade Now