The Official Dana Priest Fan Site
I try to use my reporting to make analytical judgments that I believe are supported by the facts. That's all. It's not my personal opinion as much as my professional judgment ...
... it is looking more and more everyday like we have lost this war, but I can not say that for sure because things might turn around given more time. Straightforwardness does not equal simplicity or one word answers. -- from Dana's 9.28.06 online National Security chat
Dana's recent appearances on Washington Week
Dana Priest writes about national security and intelligence and wrote The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.
Transcript of Recent National Security and Intelligence Online Interactive Chat with
Dana Priest
Washington Post intelligence reporter Dana Priest was online Thursday, Sept. 28, at 12:30 p.m. ET to discuss the latest developments in national security and intelligence.
Dana Priest covers intelligence and wrote " The Mission: Waging War and Keeping Peace With America's Military " (W.W. Norton). The book chronicles the increasing frequency with which the military is called upon to solve political and economic problems.
The transcript follows.
____________________
Dana Priest: Hi everyone. I'm in early today, can you believe it? Let's begin.
_______________________
Raleigh, N.C.: How closely have you been following the situation in Afghanistan? If you had to put a percentage number on it, what are the chances the Taliban will be in control of Afghanistan in five years? What are the chances the Taliban will be gone or ultra-marginalized in 5 years?
And what did you think of Musharaf on the Daily Show? Was that the weirdest thing ever or what?
Dana Priest: Reality trumped fiction this week for sure. Now, if the head of the Taliban appears on the John Stewart Show in five years, that would be weird! I don't think show the Taliban will be in control in five years. I'd bet there is still a struggle for control and that we and NATO become ever more deeply involved--again.
_______________________
Reston, Va.: Are the CIA secret prisons going to be set up again now that Congress is giving the go ahead?
Dana Priest: As far as I can tell, yes, but only if they capture someone really important, alive. I believe the ROE on bin Laden is to kill him so I don't think he'll ever been in a prison. Not sure about Zawahiri and the half a dozen other important AQ figures still out there.
_______________________
Bethel, Alaska: How does this week's release of (most of) the conclusions of the terrorism National Intelligence Estimate compare to the release of (much of the substance of) the Iraq NIE back in fall 2002? Why was it OK to release (some of) the factual details back then, but not to release any of the factual details now?
Or is the terrorism NIE more of a policy document and less of an analysis, so releasing factual details really wouldn't make much difference?
Dana Priest: The NIE is not a policy document. They are not supposed to play that role, ever. Actually, more of the Iraq NIE was released only after the Democrats on the intel committees made a stink about the fact that the portions the administration did release, skewed the analytic picture in favor of the administration's desired policy outcome. In other words, the NIE's analysis became a blatant tool in a political fight.
_______________________
Austin, Tex.: Since the Constitution provides two specific circumstances, rebellion or invasion, for which the writ of habeas corpus may be suspended, if the president signs the "compromise" legislation, will he not be in violation of his oath of office to "preserve protect and defend the Constitution?"
Dana Priest: I believe we'll see this legislation back before the court again, partly for the reason you state.
_______________________
Albany, N.Y.: Is it fair to understand the NIE leak as another case of a "revolt of the professionals" inside the military and intelligence agencies? At least from the outside, it seems that the military and intelligence professionals have fairly deep misgivings about a lot of things and feel that their advice and concerns have been largely ignored by the Bush administration. Anything to this?
Dana Priest: I don't know who shared this with The New York Times,which broke the story. But I agree with the premise of your question, that many, many professionals in the military, CIA and State Department are gravely worried about the implications of our Iraq policy.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Sorry, I left my jargon dictionary at home today -- what is "ROE"?
Dana Priest: Oh sorry. Rules of Engagement. The rules that tell soldiers who to do in a given situation.
_______________________
Harrisburg, Pa.: Obviously, President Bush disagrees with the intelligence report that his policies have spread terrorism. What is the general feeling among the rank and file in the intelligence community: do they believe the White House is ignoring them, or how do they feel about the interpretation of their data by the decision makers?
Dana Priest: Ignoring them. Just read the NIE and decide for yourself. No amount of spin can undo what is written there. It's pretty darn clear.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: National Intelligence Estimate
_______________________
Berkeley, Calif.: The President has said (again and again) that there is "an enemy" that wants to do harm to the US. Of course, there are many, many enemies who want to do us harm, and they don't have the same reasons or methods. Does the President really believe in a monolithic terror threat, or is this just a rhetorical pidgeonhole?
Dana Priest: Actually, I don't think he is saying it's monolithic, although Islamo-facist does lump everyone together. The reality, of course, is that there are threats from groups who are only bond to each other only by their hatred for the US, but not in any other way.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: It's worth mentioning that civil servants, in general, as well as military folks and intel types are loath to deal with the press. The leaks are indicative of just how much people are willing to risk and how important these issues are to professionals in the field.
Dana Priest: Excellent point. There really is a myth about how easy this information is to eek out of people in government.
_______________________
Denver, Colo.: If those individuals detained at the secret CIA prisons were tortured (by international standards), how long do you think it will be until the Red Cross report on their detainment is leaked?
It is my understanding that the ICRC will give their findings from the interviews they are now conducting with the prisoners to our government, and that officially their report will not be published. However, I am willing to bet that people who have devoted their lives to the ICRC will find it difficult to keep their findings secret (should they be gruesome in nature) and that someone is bound to leak their report.
Dana Priest: I wouldn't bet on that. The ICRC is very, very tight.
_______________________
Monroe, Mich.: Was the report on bin Laden's death an attempt to force him to air a video/audio tape so that we may attempt to capture his courier and thus backtrack to bin Laden?
Dana Priest: Who knows. I'd think not. I didn't get any sense of coordination on anyone's part.
_______________________
Burke, Vs.: It seems to me the detainee legislation (torture ok, no habeas corpus) is another al Qaeda recruiting bonanza. Would you agree?
Dana Priest: yes
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: Dana - this is a question on procedure. On one of the Sunday shows Frist said he had not read the NIE and it was submitted in April. Would it have not been submitted to the Senate Majority leader as well as the Intelligence committees? Does Frist not have clearance? Or was it only submitted to the executive branch?
Dana Priest: All members of Congress have a clearance to read the NIEs. Few ever do. They are brought to the House and Senate intelligence committees and kept in a vault on each side. The member has to go read it in a specially-secured room and cannot have staff with them. I'm not sure if they can take notes, probably not.
_______________________
New York, N.Y.: Last week's story of the suspected Canadian terrorist who was mistakenly arrested and then sent to Syria for torture has disappeared from the news. Is there any further information about why the U.S. would send a terror suspect to a country that we claim supports terrorism?
Dana Priest: We've been writing about this case for more than two years. The man, Mr. Arar, tried to sue the US but the judge threw out the case after the government made the case that defending itself in court would mean revealing state secrets that would harm national security. The US government has never answered that question directly and I expect it never will. The Republicans who control the committees are uninterested in using their power to get an answer and the media can only go so far....we haven't been able to get an honest, on-the-record answer from the administration.
_______________________
West Chester, Pa.: Is there any consensus in the rank and file intelligence community about what we should do in Iraq?
Dana Priest: no
_______________________
Pittsburgh, Pa.: Dana, Pres. Bush has released a 3+ page summary of the conclusions of the latest NIE. It does not seem to add much support to his position but he doesn't seem inclined to release anymore. The "findings" would be much more illuminating and that may be the reason he won't release even redacted items, but then he has never wanted to shed much light on his position in Iraq. Your comments please.
Dana Priest: When I first saw the released NIE Key Findings, I thought, haven't' we written this story five times? There was nothing surprising and certainly nothing worth classifying, given the vague, conventional wisdom (by now) statements in the summary. My hunch is there are some details worth keeping classified in the NIE, but probably not that much, given how much about the war, the insurgency and terrorism has already been put on the public record by someone, either in or out of government.
_______________________
San Francisco, Calif.: How quickly can the tribunals be set up at Guantanamo for KSM and bin al Shibh? I'm wondering if that is the October surprise that has been suggested in Kessler's story- have the court cases going in the week leading to election day.
Dana Priest: Interesting idea. The timing makes that a possibility. I do think they could be set up by then.
_______________________
Ann Arbor, Mich.: So I read the excerpts of the key judgments of the NIE and I have to say ... well, duh. Why is this such a big, bad secret? You and every other decent national security reporter have been saying this for months.
Dana Priest: Ahem!
_______________________
Bethesda, Md.: I saw you on C-Span recently, along with Robert Pape, a University of Chicago professor, who wrote an amazing book titled "Dying to Win," a study of suicide terrorism.
Do you think it makes a difference who's calling the shots in Washington, D.C., given that no one here, not the Washington Post, the NYT, or anyone else, will ever call it like it is? We need the oil, we'll do whatever it takes to ensure we get it, and the American electorate is so ignorant, it doesn't matter that the emperor has no clothes....
Dana Priest: Well, I certainly will never call it like you see it, since I don't think that's true.
_______________________
Ann Arbor, Mich.: How do you think Bob Woodward's forthcoming book "State of Denial" will affect the debate on the validity of the Iraq war?
Dana Priest: No clue. Like all his other books, this one has been shrouded in secrecy worthy of an NIE. Guess we'll find out soon, excerpts begin Sunday in the WashPost.
_______________________
Ogden, Utah: From today's Post: BAGHDAD, Sept. 27 -- A $75 million project to build the largest police academy in Iraq has been so grossly mismanaged that the campus now poses health risks to recruits and might need to be partially demolished, U.S. investigators have found.
After world war II one of the reasons we put the marshall plan through was so that people in West Germany could see some actual, on the ground, benefits of democracy. Is there nobody in Iraq who sees the need for that? Is there nobody there who can do anything right?
Dana Priest: That story really seemed to say that nothing gets done. The two situation -- post WWII and Iraq -- are so completely different. The war was over in Europe when the building started and there was little violent civil strife. Obviously not so in Iraq. Still, the level of incompetence is shocking.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: The ROE on Bin Laden is to kill him? Just like that? Surely if he's in a non-threatening posture (or even trying to surrender), they have to take him alive into custody, don't they?
Dana Priest: No, apparently not.
_______________________
New Orleans, La.: Dana, you often answers question directly with a yes or no, even if a matter of opinion? Many journalists on these chats state that as journalists they must refrain from doing so. Clearly a chat is more editorial than news, can't a journalist wear both hats if clear about doing so. That being said, in your opinion have we lost the war in Iraq? I would love a straightforward answer.
Dana Priest: I try to use my reporting to make analytical judgments that I believe are supported by the facts. That's all. It's not my personal opinion as much as my professional judgment has someone who spends most of my waking hours on these subjects. The straightforward answer to you Iraq question is that it is looking more and more everyday like we have lost this war, but I can not say that for sure because things might turn around given more time. Straightforwardness does not equal simplicity or one word answers.
_______________________
Richmond, Va.: The NIE report that is linked in the chat makes mention of "al-Zarqawi" continuing to evade capture. I thought he was killed in Iraq already?
Dana Priest: Yes, it was finalized in April, I believe. He was killed in June.
_______________________
Phoenix, Ariz.: Thank you for taking questions today.
How does the administration's compromise with Senators McCain, Warner and Graham on interrogation and detainment change anything? Isn't it simply one signing statement away from a return to the administration's version of status quo?
Dana Priest: It's the difference between "severe" pain and "serious" pain. Much hairsplitting. I can't make out yet what it really means in practice.
_______________________
Silver Spring, Md.: I was born during WWII so growing up I had a pretty good idea of how we responded to Pearl Harbor. Roosevelt pulled out all the stops, converted consumer production to weapons production (tanks, planes, jeeps etc.), used the draft to build up the military, raised taxes to pay for it, and we beat two horrible enemies in two different theaters in four years.
If we are now in a war for America's very survival, like Bush often infers, why is there such a disconnect between Roosevelt's response to Pearl Harbor (2,400 dead) and Bush's response to 9/11 (3,000 dead)?
Dana Priest: Warfare is sooo different now. Some 62 million people, military and civilians, died in WWII. That was state against state, or really, states against states. This is one state against a vague insurgency, terrorists, remnants of a state. And its asymmetric so invading armies can't necessarily win by overwhelming force.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: I think Mike Barnicle on Hardball pointed out one thing demonstrably wrong in the April NIE is that the death of Zarqawi would hurt the momentum of the insurgency and terror in Iraq. So, it appears the NIE is may be not pessimistic enough!
Dana Priest: Exactly.
_______________________
Washington, D.C.: Ms. Priest, given that it's been almost a year since you published the secret CIA prisons story, are you now prepared to publish the list of countries in which those prisons exist(ed)?
Surely this information can't hurt national security anymore, since the prisons have been emptied by Bush of all inmates.
Dana Priest: No, we're not going to name the countries. The argument is, and has always been, that the countries involved would cease cooperating with the CIA in other (less controversial ways and more productive) were they to be exposed.
_______________________
West Chester, Pa.: I've followed the debate on the detainee treatment and trials pretty closely and understand most of the issues discussed publicly thus far. But one issue that seems to have been ignored is whether we need a bill to try any of the detainees. Couldn't they be tried in existing civilian or military courts following existing civilian or military rules? And if so, why the need for a new bill?
Dana Priest: They could, but the administration does not want to use either of those systems. They both guarantee suspects far more rights than the administration believes is appropriate for these detainees. Others disagree.
_______________________
Valley Forge, Pa.: If you believe we have lost this war - what are, in your opinion, the long-term implications?
Dana Priest: I didn't say that. I said we are headed in that direction. The long-term implications are harrowing, that's way it's important not to lose.
_______________________
Pittsburgh, Pa.: On Arar: the Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police apologized to Mr. Arar today in a statement to a committee investigating the issue. (link - RCMP chief apologizes to Arar for 'terrible injustices' , ( CBC News, Sept. 28, 2006 )
Dana Priest: Good for them. I cannot for the life of me understand why the USG has not done the same.
_______________________
Dana Priest: Thanks Ann Arbor. And for everyone else, nice to have spent this hour with you. Until next week.....Enjoy the fine weather,
Dana
Original Source: Washington Post 9/28/2006, 12:30 PM