« previous | MUCK HOME | next »
State Dep't Classifies Publicly-Available Corruption Document
Another triumph for the State Department!
You'll recall that yesterday, Rep. Henry Waxman wrote to Condoleezza Rice to complain, among other things, that her department promptly classified internal assessments of corruption in the Iraqi government when it learned that his House Oversight and Government Reform Committee sought them out. Among those documents: an 80-page U.S. Embassy-Baghdad report on pervasive Iraqi corruption leaked to The Nation's David Corn.
As it turns out, Steve Aftergood of the Federation of American Scientists obtained a copy of the document last week -- before State had it classified -- and posted it on the FAS webpage. Click here to read the document that State doesn't want Waxman -- or, for that matter, you -- to read.
Here's a characteristic excerpt:
In his letter yesterday, Waxman called State's newfound realization that the document's release will jeopardize national security "absurd."
Comments (18)
Scott wrote on September 26, 2007 4:15 PM:What do you expect from State? Rice has been with jr from the beginning.
oldtree wrote on September 26, 2007 4:36 PM:I am surprised, I figured TPM would have at least placed a eulogy for the constitution today. Since it has finally been laid to rest, it would have been fitting
Punditry has a way of corrupting. Much like absolute power perhaps. It makes the act more important than the goal. You have realized your end game, for your have delivered the punch line.
Today, both houses of congress agreed that free speech is not important. America is no more.
goodbye to those that have forgotten this warning of the fascism to come. Embrace it if you will, but do it alone
sailmaker wrote on September 26, 2007 4:45 PM:Remember how there was 'no room for auditors' in Iraq according to Condi? http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002733.php
This 'classification' of the report on the grounds of national security is the same stuff, different day.
michael valentne wrote on September 26, 2007 4:48 PM:Well wouldn't full-out corruption in Iraq be an indictment of the war and the economic and political underpinnings of the rational for war.
It is also an indictment of the whole Friedman school of economics.
Let these neocons answer for their mistaken assumptions in a court of international justice.
Filthy social pigs playing with the lives of nations for profit. Shameless pigs like Rummy who takes no blame for anything that went wrong.
sailmaker wrote on September 26, 2007 4:49 PM:Remember how Condi would not allow the GAO into Iraq, and then reluctantly allowed them in for 2 weeks?
http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/002733.php
ed wrote on September 26, 2007 5:06 PM:Same stuff different day.
NPR did a piece on Iraq corruption within the last month. Unbelievable, or not.
nolo wrote on September 26, 2007 7:16 PM:my nightly nolo video is
on precisely this topic, tonight!
s h e e s h !
". . .makes me wanna' holla'!"
click my name to see it.
Joe wrote on September 26, 2007 7:19 PM:"Iraq is not capable of even rudimentary enforcement of anti-corruption laws."
Neither is America under George Bush, Dick Cheney and the Skull and Bones society.
Carolyn wrote on September 26, 2007 7:20 PM:Waxman is a miracle man. I've sent him one admiring email. May be about time to send another. Too bad the msm gives him no attention. How many times should he have been page one news?
KestrelBrighteyes wrote on September 26, 2007 7:53 PM:It's sooo much harder to play "CYA" when you've got internet, and thousands of people who can save a copy of this before it's scrubbed.
anon wrote on September 26, 2007 7:57 PM:This is hardly a new observation but...
When FDR's administration set up a massive nation (re)building program while under some fire for the opposition party, they put lots of well-known Republicans in charge of oversight, accounting, etc. There were, of course, lots of small corruption scandals during the New Deal but since the GOP was doing a good part of the policing, they couldn't complain too much and ended up getting drawn into the programs in a fairly deep way. Smart politics.
If the Bushies had brains they would have done similar stuff with Iraq, put the Dems in charge of water and electricity and then let them take the blame. Instead they put Iraq around their necks, stoke up a good rubber fire, and then deny that they are stinking up the neighborhood.
OneCrankyDom wrote on September 26, 2007 9:55 PM:Nice to see others check the Secrecy site. I posted the same link in a diary at dkos earlier today and had sent it to ThinkProgess in hopes of becoming a paid intern. The pdf is quite read. I'm glad to see you picked up the story and ran with it.
xargaw wrote on September 27, 2007 12:35 AM:How can you classify something that is already posted on the web. Isn't the process of classifying to keep something secret from unauthorized view. This is like classifying the phone directory after it has been distributed. Hopefully, Waxman will take the document and use it as his committee intended. These peopel are comitting crimes before our eyes everyday. Someone, somehow, someway has to hold them accountable bigtime!
Winston Smith wrote on September 27, 2007 7:46 AM:I wonder if Condolliar consulted with her boss, Dana Perino, before making this decision.
parrot wrote on September 27, 2007 1:36 PM:Yeah, it's a state secret how badly and how illegally the United States has behaved and continues to behave in Iraq. It's a state secret that the rest of the world and most of the United States is aware of. Wonder who will do something about it first?
paul wrote on September 27, 2007 3:31 PM:Misuse of classification authority in an attempt to evade oversight is almost certainly a criminal act. Not that that matters any more...
tekel wrote on October 16, 2007 5:42 PM:soap, ballot, jury, ammo.
I know we're supposed to use them in that order. Somebody remind me- which one are we on again?
litigatormom wrote on October 16, 2007 10:17 PM:Just saw a hilarious debate involving former Cheney aide Ron Christie and some other, more rational guy, in which the question was, "Has Condi Rice been a success or failure." Christie, predictably, argued that she's a great success because she has Bush's confidence. The rest of the world, not so much, but who cares when Dear Leader trusts you?