Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Senate Intel Chair Not Buying Pentagon Whitewash of NeoCon Spy Shop

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:29 PM
Original message
Senate Intel Chair Not Buying Pentagon Whitewash of NeoCon Spy Shop
Edited on Fri Feb-09-07 01:04 PM by leveymg
The Vice-Chair of the Senate Intelligence Committee has announced that he isn't buying into the conclusions reached by a Pentagon report issued yesterday. Senator Rockefeller (D-WV) stated the Office of Special Plans (OSP) operations were "not in compliance with the law."

Yesterday's report by the DoD Inspector General (IG) concluded that the law had not been broken when Douglas Feith set up OSP in September 2002. It did, however, call Feith's actions at OSP "inappropriate" when it went on to produce false and misleading intelligence the White House used to justify the invasion of Iraq. See, http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/special_packages/iraq/16654759.htm

Senate Intel Chair: Pentagon Office DID Break The Law
By Spencer Ackerman - February 8, 2007

As vice chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Jay Rockefeller (D-WV) was often outmaneuvered by GOP chair Pat Roberts (R-KS), when it came to prewar intelligence. In response to the Pentagon inspector general's report on the Office of Special Plans, however, Rockefeller is hinting that era is fully closed. From a Rockefeller statement, just released:

“The IG has concluded that this office was engaged in intelligence activities. The Senate Intelligence Committee was never informed of these activities. Whether these actions were authorized or not, it appears that they were not in compliance with the law.

“In the coming days, I will carefully review all aspects of the report and will consult with Vice Chairman Bond to determine whether any additional action by the Senate Intelligence Committee is warranted.” http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002515.php


The IG Report Executive Summary concludes that Feith did not not break the law when he set up OSP because that had been authorized by then Assistant Secretary of State Paul Wolfowitz. However, the IG faults the head of that office for channeling “policy into intelligence products” that were inaccurate and at “variance with the consensus of the Intelligence Community.” In other words, OSP basically operated as a shadow CIA, undermining the work of the established intelligence agencies.

OSP personnel directly briefed the President on at least one occasion, an intelligence function that is reserved by law to the Agency. Misleading, incomplete or inaccurate materials were then disseminated within the White House and Office of the Vice President to others, including the press.

As the IG report notes, OSP materials sometimes turned out to be wrong on important issues ranging from the an alleged “mature symbiotic relationship” between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda to reports about “reconstituted” Iraq weapons program.

What the IG report doesn’t mention is the fact that Douglas Feith’s lieutenant, Lawrence Franklin, was involved in the unauthorized exchange of classified materials with Israeli intelligence. According to the Franklin indictment, information about Iran “suggested” the Chief of Station of the Israeli Mossad in Washington was being funneled into Pentagon files. Franklin worked as OSP's Iran desk officer. He met on several dozen occasions with Israeli intelligence officers, and removed a large number of classified documents, before he was arrested along with two employees of the American-Israel Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC) by the FBI in May 2005.

***

Questions About DoD IG Competence

The Pentagon report raises issues anew about the competence of agency management in general, and the independence of agency Inspector Generals, in particular. In 2004, the Minority Counsel's Office of the House Government Affairs Committee had concluded:

IG appointments have become increasingly politicized during the administration of President Bush. Whereas President Clinton typically appointed nonpartisan career public servants as IGs, President Bush has repeatedly chosen individuals with Republican political backgrounds. Over 60% of the IGs appointed by President Bush had prior political experience, such as service in a Republican White House or on a Republican congressional staff, while fewer than 20% had prior audit experience. http://oversight.house.gov/story.asp?ID=726&Issue=Administration%2bOversight


This raises a bigger question: are the Bush political appointees at DoD even competent to make such a legal judgment? Even after its reorganization, and the replacement of Donald Rumsfeld, there's serious reason to doubt it.

The issue of legality will have to be revisited, along with questions about the essential competence of those who oversaw this investigation. Consider the (lack of) calibre of Joseph E. Schmitz, who held the office of Pentagon Inspector General from 2002-05 until he was hastily replaced by the temporary appointment of Thomas F. Gimble, a career accountant:

Schmitz as Inspector General

Schmitz was nominated by President George W. Bush to be Defense Department Inspector General on June 18, 2001. His nomination was held up in the Senate Armed Services Committee for unknown reasons until March 21, 2002, when he was confirmed by the full Senate by voice vote. In his confirmation hearings, committee Democrats expressed concern about a letter that Schmitz had written to the Washington Times in 1991 in which he had accused then-candidate Bill Clinton of treasonous actions and had inappropriately signed the letter with his military rank.

According to an AP report dated December 5, 2001, the Inspector General's office had recently failed a "peer review" audit in which it was shown that IG officials had destroyed documents relating to an investigation. Iowa Republican Senator Charles Grassley, a supporter of the Schmitz nomination and critic of the IG's office, commented that "nce President Bush's nominee for the IG job is in place, he will need to clean house from top to bottom. Heads must roll," because of the document destruction.

Upon taking office, Schmitz hired L. Jean Lewis, a Republican operative and whistleblower in the Whitewater Affair. Lewis, a former Resolution Trust Corporation investigator, was a pivotal figure in publicizing the alleged financial misdeeds of President Bill Clinton and wife Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton. She marketed products with pictures of Mrs. Clinton and the logo "B.I.T.C.H.: Bill, I'm Taking Charge. Hillary." Schmitz eventually created the position of "Chief of Staff" for Lewis.

Insight Magazine, in its September 30, 2002, issue, reported that shortly after his arrival at the IG, Schmitz ordered a "bottom-up review" that was conducted by Military Professionals Resources, Inc. (MPRI), a defense contractor based in Alexandria, Va. The review resulted in the removal of a number of senior civil servants in the agency. Sen. Grassley quoted by Insight, said, "The new inspector general, Mr. Joe Schmitz, has already started to clean house. Heads have started to roll with more to come . . . Based on what I've heard and seen, the Independent Review Team appears to be on the right track. The team appears to see the very same problems that I see and seems to be headed toward a hard-hitting final report." According to the September 23, 2002 issue of Defense Week, the removed civil servants filed a complaint with the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, a government agency that investigates whistleblower complaints and Hatch Act violations. In its June 23, 2003 issue, Defense Week reported that the matter was settled to the satisfaction of both parties involved, but suggested that the removed civil servants had been vindicated.

According to the Los Angeles Times (September 25, 2005), Schmitz had an "unusual fascination" with Baron Friedrich Wilhelm von Steuben, a Prussian officer appointed Inspector General of the Continental Army by George Washington. "The Nation" (September 25, 2005) magazine reported that Schmitz spent three months redesigning the seal of the Inspector General's office to include elements of von Steuben's family crest, including the von Steuben family motto, Sub Tutela Altissimi Semper, "Under the Protection of the Almighty." (Schmitz was quoted in the LA Times article as saying that the eagle of the previous seal looked "like a chicken".) Schmitz authored an article in the in-house journal of the federal inspectors general about Von Steuben and mentioned him in virtually every speech he made while in office ("The Enduring Legacy of Inspector General von Steuben," Public Inquiry, F/W 2002, <1>. "He was consumed with all things German and all things Von Steuben," said a government official quoted in the LA Times article. "He was obsessed."

Schmitz also took an unusual interest in the sex slave trade. His office investigated the involvement of the U.S. military in the sex trade in South Korea, Bosnia, and Kosovo, but found little beyond the propensity of soldiers to frequent brothels, an inexcusable moral lapse, according to Schmitz's testimony before Congress and an article he wrote that was published on the website of the World Security Network. <2>.

Schmitz's downfall apparently began when he and John A. "Jack" Shaw, former DoD Deputy Undersecretary for International Technology Security signed an agreement giving Shaw authority to investigate telecommunications contracting fraud in Iraq sometime in 2003. According to the Los Angeles Times (September 3, 2005), Shaw used the results of his investigation to steer contracts to friends. When confronted with the case, Schmitz referred it to the FBI for investigation, even though IG agents claimed they had enough evidence of Shaw's illegal activities for prosecution.

The Los Angeles Times article also claims that Schmitz interfered in other investigations of senior officials:

The Air Force Academy sex scandal, in which senior Air Force Academy officials were accused of failing to investigate rape allegations by female cadets.

A contracting scandal involving the Air Force and Boeing Corporation, in which senior Air Force officials, including former Air Force Secretary James Roche, were accused of steering contracts to the Boeing Corporation. Before presenting his report to Congress, Schmitz allegedly sent it to the White House for review. The names of several White House officials were reportedly redacted from the report. Sen. Charles Grassley was quoted by the Los Angeles Times as saying to Schmitz, "That decision ... raises questions about your independence." Testimony by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, in which he blamed his lack of oversight on incompetency, was deleted, said Schmitz, because Rumsfeld had not said anything relevant. <3>

Grassley, who had become disillusioned with Schmitz, was particularly upset by Schmitz's plans to travel to Potsdam, Germany at taxpayer expense, where he was to speak at a ceremony commemorating Baron von Steuben. Schmitz was forced to cancel the trip.

Resignation

Schmitz resigned as Defense Department Inspector General on September 9, 2005 in order to take a position with the Prince Group a holding company for Blackwater USA, which provides security services and training to the U.S. military in Iraq and elsewhere. In a letter dated June 15, 2005, and posted on the Inspector General's website on September 2, 2005, Schmitz recused himself from investigating all matters related to Blackwater.

The Los Angeles Times quoted Danielle Bryan of the Project on Government Oversight as saying, "He's a person who did not put the appearance of ethics above all else . . . That is not the way the government should function. These are the kind of things that make the general public distrust government."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_E._Schmitz
http://www.defenselink.mil/bios/schmitz_bio.html
(Hat-tip to KoKo01 for posting this Wiki extract earlier)


Henry Waxman's Minority Counsel to the House Committee on Oversight and Investigative Reform found a generalized pattern of cronyism and politicized appointments during this Administration in a report, Politicization of Inspectors General.

Specifically, Waxman's report tells us that Schmidt said about Halliburton overbilling practices in 2004, "I haven't seen any deliberate gouging of the taxpayers." He also remarked after returning from an inspection trip to Abu Ghraibh prison that the problems there were the result of "a few bad apples." See, pp. 10-12. http://www.oversight.house.gov/Documents/20050111164847-37108.pdf

Schmidt's replacement, Acting IG Thomas F. Gimble, is a career DoD auditor. While Gimble is undoubtedly far more competent to track the Department's finances, it is unclear whether he has the sort of in-depth criminal investigative and counter-intelligence experience required to fully unearth the crimes of espionage and cooked intelligence committed at OSP. Mr. Gimble's DoD biography here: http://www.dodig.osd.mil/BIOs/gimble_bio.html

A summary search showed that Mr. Gimble is the author of DoD manuals on organization, staffing and budget but returned no references to publications he might have authored on subjects specific to intelligence investigations or intelligence law. There's every reason to believe that the current IG is honest and diligent with a a great deal of experience spotting contracting irregularities. But, there is little to give one confidence that Mr. Gimble is the best equipped to look into the OSP case and make a legal judgment about it.

Curiously, in his prepared testimony given to the House Armed Services Committee on January 18, 2007, Mr. Gimble did not even reference the OSP investigation when he discussed matters related to intelligence probed by his office. http://armedservices.house.gov/pdfs/Gimble_Testimony_011807.pdf.

When we take a look at his testimony and news sources that mention Mr. Gimbel and the DoD IG's office related to intelligence, we see that his work has been on contracting fraud rather than investigations of criminal activity of the sort evident in the OSP-AIPAC case. The DoD IG has not in the past been required to make independent judgments about the legality of intelligence operations, that sort of decision either being made by JAG military lawyers or referred to the FBI and the US Attorneys Office, as it was in the Plame case.

This suggests that the DoD Office of the Inspector General may not have made a thorough assessment of the legal and counter-intelligence issues raised by Mr. Feith's activities. The fact remains, however, that the scandal at OSP has already produced the conviction of Lt. Col. Larry Franklin, on espionage charges that he conspired with the head of Mossad Chief of Station in Washington to spike Pentagon files with information "suggested" by Israeli intelligence. That certainly presents evidence that something criminal was indeed afoot in Douglas Feith's Pentagon policy shop. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/2/2/14024/94613 ; http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/2/1/183411/6866

Conclusion

The IG's report clearly lacks the objectivity, independence and expertise required to reach such an important judgment. It should not be considered by the Senate, or anyone else, the definitive word on illegalites committed by Feith and his co-conspirators at OSP.

The role of OSP in fabricating fraudulent intelligence, and the question of whether espionage played a major role in America's decision to go to war, will indeed require in-depth Congressional hearings with an eye toward appointment of a Special Counsel.
_______________________________
2007. Mark G. Levey
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
napi21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. This baby has Rummy written all over it!
Hmmm, ya don't supposeRummy left because he knew the chair was going to get too hot do ya?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ktlyon Donating Member (733 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:45 PM
Response to Original message
2. OSP should be closed
Edited on Fri Feb-09-07 12:48 PM by ktlyon
It is not an intelligence organization, it is a PR propaganda machine
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:58 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. It was closed in June 2003
Right after the Pentagon's initial 5/27/03 assessment concluded that no WMDs were to be found in Iraq. After he was reassigned, Franklin continued his contacts with Mossad, wearing an FBI wire for at least a year, until the operation was finally rolled up two summers later.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leveymg Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 02:07 PM
Response to Reply #4
6. Clarification
Feith wasn't actually fired from DoD until March 2005, a couple weeks after Sy Hersh published an article about OSP in which he revealed,among other things, that while he was still head of the office,Feith had been sitting down with Israeli officers planning targets for attacks against Iran. Larisa has an article about that.

The FBI's probe of AIPAC goes back at least to 1999. Franklin's involvement with others with OSP stretches before and after his stint at OSP. Franklin travelled with Harold Rhode, another OSP figure to Italy on December 2001 and again in June 2003 to meet with Manoocher Ghorbanifar and Michael Ledeen. The stovepiping of the Niger yellowcake forgeries -- which are implicated in Bush's "sixteen deadly words" misrepresentation during the 2003 SOTU address -- are alleged to have come out of the earlier of those two trips.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
starroute Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. But the same people are back, working on Iran
http://www.rawstory.com/news/2006/Pentagon_confirms_Iranian_directorate_as_intelligence_0615.html

Pentagon confirms Iranian directorate as officials raise new concerns about war

Larisa Alexandrovna
Published: Thursday June 15, 2006

“As a counterpart to the State Department's new Office of Iran Affairs, the Department of Defense has split off a new directorate for Iran-related policy issues from the existing Directorate of Northern Gulf Affairs in the Office of Near East and South Asia Affairs (NESA),” he added. “These regional policy offices fall within the Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Affairs.”

Venable also confirmed that the new directorate falls under the policy side -- more specifically -- under the new number three at the Pentagon, Eric Edelman. Edelman, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy, holds the same position that Douglas Feith held when he ran OSP at the Pentagon in the lead-up to the Iraq war.

Moreover, sources say that the Iranian Directorate is staffed with many of the same people, including OSP’s former director Abram Shulsky, and receives expert analysis from such controversial figures as Project for the New American Century member Reuel Marc Gerecht, who by all accounts was a failure as a CIA field officer. It also includes military personnel such as Ladan Archin, who appears to be serving in the Larry Franklin analyst role among a sea of think-tank operatives and neoconservative war hawks.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
npincus Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:52 PM
Response to Original message
3. the clock is ticking...
2008 and B*shco closes shop.

In-depth Congressional hearings with an eye toward appointment of an Independent Cousnel sound like it will take quite awhile, with as much WH and Reepublican obstruction along the way to run the clock...isn't there a way to expedite this (Independent Counsel)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
porphyrian Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 12:59 PM
Response to Original message
5. I'll kick that. - n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 02:18 PM
Response to Original message
7. K&R
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mod mom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
8. UK Guardian (July '03) shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in DC to second-guess CIA
The spies who pushed for war


Julian Borger reports on the shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force

Thursday July 17, 2003
The Guardian

As the CIA director, George Tenet, arrived at the Senate yesterday to give secret testimony on the Niger uranium affair, it was becoming increasingly clear in Washington that the scandal was only a small, well-documented symptom of a complete breakdown in US intelligence that helped steer America into war.
It represents the Bush administration's second catastrophic intelligence failure. But the CIA and FBI's inability to prevent the September 11 attacks was largely due to internal institutional weaknesses.
This time the implications are far more damaging for the White House, which stands accused of politicising and contaminating its own source of intelligence.
According to former Bush officials, all defence and intelligence sources, senior administration figures created a shadow agency of Pentagon analysts staffed mainly by ideological amateurs to compete with the CIA and its military counterpart, the Defence Intelligence Agency.

-snip
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.h...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Morgana LaFey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 03:29 PM
Response to Original message
10. "not in compliance with the law" -- is that like
Edited on Fri Feb-09-07 03:29 PM by Morgana LaFey
ILLEGAL or something?

Jeez, dontcha wish these people could call a fucking spade a SPADE???
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
slipslidingaway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 10:36 PM
Response to Original message
11. K&R thanks. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Independent_Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-09-07 11:57 PM
Response to Original message
12. K&R!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobthedrummer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 08:36 AM
Response to Original message
13. kick
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
H2O Man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 08:55 AM
Response to Original message
14. Well said.
The guy is one of the worst criminals from the Bush-Cheney administration. He needs to be held to account for his crimes.

Nominated.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
salin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Feb-10-07 09:00 AM
Response to Original message
15. Three Cheers (and thousands more) for Sen. Rockerfeller.
Keep digging - keep getting media - get the public wise this wasn't incompetent inel this wasn't sorta manipulated intel - this was intentionally skewed intel used to manipulate the public and the Congress (and the UN). And it seems to be happening again and the healthy skepticism that should be in the press and out of the mouths of politicians - isn't yet there. THESE HEARINGS and the media coverage are vital to preventing yet another bushco catastrophy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Apr 25th 2024, 03:48 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC