DOD Statement on news reports of Al-Qaida & Iraq connections

Department of Defense web site ^ | November 15, 2003 | Seeking the Truth

[Seeking the truth]

DoD Statement on News Reports of al-Qaida and Iraq Connections News reports that the Defense Department recently confirmed new information with respect to contacts between al-Qaida and Iraq in a letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee are inaccurate.

A letter was sent to the Senate Intelligence Committee on October 27, 2003 from Douglas J. Feith, Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, in response to follow-up questions from his July 10 testimony. One of the questions posed by the committee asked the Department to provide the reports from the Intelligence Community to which he referred in his testimony before the Committee. These reports dealt with the relationship between Iraq and al-Qaida.

The letter to the committee included a classified annex containing a list and description of the requested reports, so that the Committee could obtain the reports from the relevant members of the Intelligence Community.

The items listed in the classified annex were either raw reports or products of the CIA, the NSA, or, in one case, the DIA. The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the Intelligence Community. The selection of the documents was made by DOD to respond to the Committee’s question. The classified annex was not an analysis of the substantive issue of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaida, and it drew no conclusions.

Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal.

-END-

[Seeking the truth]

Will someone please explain this as it seems to contradict what the Weekly Standard was reporting re: Feith's memo to the Senate Intelligence Committee?

What's going on in the DOD?

[chiller]

It could be that DoD doesn't want this information to be thought of as accurate so as to protect sources?

[chiller]

Why deny their own data? Something is seriesly screwed up.

[Maelstrom]

They aren't.

Read it closely. They are only claiming that no conclusions were drawn, contrary to the claims of the various articles reporting the memo.

[Pikamax]

the data is real, just no conclusions have been written.

[Maelstrom]

Bingo

[meenie]

There is nothing more disconcerting to the enemy than being confused by someone who is confused. The marvels of modern warfare rely on confusing statements from both sides. Naturally we have become the world's only remaining super-power by being totally confused most of the time. By being totally confused it gives us a great advantage over the rest of the world by confusing them. This confusing statement is meant to confuse anyone who reads it in the hopes that more confusion will only confuse those that aren't confused such as I. Confusion reigns supreme in a confused world.

[browardchad]

The items listed in the classified annex were either raw reports or products of the CIA, the NSA, or, in one case, the DIA. The provision of the classified annex to the Intelligence Committee was cleared by other agencies and done with the permission of the Intelligence Community.

Individuals who leak or purport to leak classified information are doing serious harm to national security; such activity is deplorable and may be illegal.

The DOD is protecting its own, and Feith's, rear end; the material (an index of references) leaked to the Weekly Standard was a)classified; and b)not intended as an analysis (although it may be speculated that Feith's July testimony, to which this document was a follow-up, was in the form of an analysis.)

The message is that neither the DOD nor Feith leaked the info, not that the info wasn't accurate.