(U) Conclusion 73. Some of the information supplied by the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), but not used in Secretary Powell's speech, was incorrect. This information should never have been provided for use in a public speech.

(U) Conclusion 74. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) should have alerted Secretary Powell to the problems with the biological weapons-related sources cited in the speech concerning Iraq's alleged mobile biological weapons program.

Conclusion 75. The National Imagery and Mapping Agency (NIMA)31 should have alerted Secretary Powell to the fact that there was an analytical disagreement within the NIMA concerning the meaning of activity observed at Iraq's Amiriyah Serum and

Vaccine Institute in November 2002. Moreover, agencies like the NIMA should have mechanisms in place for evaluating such analytical disagreements.

(U) Conclusion 76. Human intelligence (HUMINT) gathered after the production of the National Intelligence Estimate (NIE), did indicate that Iraqi commanders had been authorized to use chemical weapons as noted in Secretary Powell's speech.

VIII. INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY COLLECTION ACTIVITIES

AGAINST IRAQ'S WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION

(U) The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence focused its work in reviewing U.S. intelligence on the quality and quantity of intelligence analysis, the objectivity and reasonableness of the Intelligence Community's (IC) judgments, and whether any influence was brought to bear to shape that analysis to support policy objectives. The Committee also examined the role of intelligence collectors in providing the fundamental information upon which the intelligence analysts based their assessments of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD) capabilities. To understand how intelligence collectors worked to obtain information on Iraq's WMD capabilities, what the IC's collection efforts entailed, and whether those efforts produced tangible results, Committee staff interviewed the Assistant Director of Central Intelligence for Collection (ADCI/C) and various members of the National Intelligence Collection Board (NICB)32. Committee staff also interviewed Iraqi collection officers in the Central Intelligence Agency's (CIA) Directorate for Operations and National Security Agency (NSA) Iraqi signals intelligence analysts to gain further insight into the IC's post-Gulf War human and signals intelligence collection strategies for Iraq. Committee staff also reviewed the National Human Intelligence (HUMINT) Collection Directives on Iraq, which are intended to prioritize and guide collection, to determine where IC collectors were requested to focus their collection efforts.

(U) The NICB told Committee staff that prior to the Gulf War there had been a robust, U.S., all-source intelligence collection program against Iraq and its WMD programs. After the Gulf War, however, most of the IC's knowledge of Iraqi WMD programs was obtained from, in conjunction with, and in support of the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) inspections. NICB members and IC analysts told Committee staff that information from UNSCOM provided a significant portion of the information the IC had on Iraq's WMD programs and capabilities. One NICB representative told Committee staff, "it's very difficult to overstate the degree to which we were focused on and using the output from the U.N. inspectors."

While inspectors were in Iraq from 1991 through 1998, the IC was not aggressively pursuing collection against the WMD target and most of the assets tasked for Iraqi

32 The NICB comprises the most senior collection managers from each intelligence discipline (human intelligence [HUMINT], signals intelligence [SIGINT], imagery intelligence [IMINT], and measurement and signature intelligence [MASINT]).