Posted on 02/15/2016 6:12:20 PM PST by VitacoreVision
If any doubt remained that the U.S. and British governments’ case for invading Iraq was based almost entirely on lies, the Guardian has just put such doubt to rest. The British newspaper published a story based on interviews with Iraqi defector Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi, code name “Curveball,” in which Janabi admitted “that nearly every word he had told his interrogators from Germany’s secret service, the BND, was a lie.”
The tales Janabi wove about Saddam Hussein’s supposed mobile biological weapons program formed the basis of much of then-U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell’s 2003 presentation to the United Nations Security Council in which he laid out the case for war against Iraq, saying:
We have firsthand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails….
The source was an eyewitness, an Iraqi chemical engineer who supervised one of these facilities. He was present during biological agent production runs. He was also at the site when an accident occurred in 1998. Twelve technicians died.
He reported that when UNSCOM was in the country and inspecting, the biological weapons agent production always began on Thursdays at midnight because Iraq thought UNSCOM would not inspect on the Muslim Holy Day, Thursday night through Friday. He added that this was important because the units could not be broken down in the middle of a production run, which had to be completed by Friday evening before the inspectors might arrive again.
In fact, says the Guardian, “everything [Janabi] had said about the inner workings of Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program was a flight of fantasy,” yet the U.S. government swallowed it whole despite the fact that prior to Powell’s speech, according to Janabi, “he had not met a U.S. official, let alone been interviewed by one.” (At the time he was living in Germany, having been granted asylum; he and his family, with an assist from the BND, have since become German citizens and have remained in the country.) Moreover, Janabi had already been exposed as a liar in 2000, so any allegations he made should have been considered highly suspect. Nevertheless, there was Powell, telling the entire world that Iraq was teeming with weapons of mass destruction, using “diagrams that [Janabi] knew had been prepared from his fraudulent descriptions.” The paper aptly dubs Janabi’s snow job “one of the greatest confidence tricks in the history of modern intelligence.”
The path to success was, however, made much smoother for Janabi by the fact that the Bush administration, along with the government of British Prime Minister Tony Blair, so desperately wanted to find an excuse to invade Iraq that it grasped at the flimsiest of straws that could be used to build its case. It is known, for example, that both the U.S. and U.K. governments tried to provoke Saddam into firing the first shot in the war and that the Blair government had, in the words of BBC correspondent Andrew Gilligan, “sexed up” its intelligence dossier supposedly proving the existence of Iraq’s WMD incontrovertibly. As the so-called Downing Street Memo put it, “the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.” A ready-made source of such phony intelligence was simply too good to pass up.
That these governments were looking for “facts” to support their war policy is evident from Janabi’s statements to the Guardian. Janabi says that he “thought his story about the mobile trucks had been discounted” in 2000 after both German and British intelligence confronted him with evidence to contradict his assertions, at which point he readily admitted he had been wrong. He did not speak to his handlers again until May 2002, when they began asking him questions unrelated to the alleged mobile biological weapons labs. Then, in January 2003, they suddenly began questioning him about the mobile labs again — “the first time they had talked to me about this since 2000,” Janabi said. The paper writes that Janabi “says it was clear to him that the drums of war were beating ever louder” at that time. The next month everything Janabi had related about the supposed mobile labs showed up in Powell’s speech.
What else can one conclude but that the American and British governments sought out Janabi’s “intelligence” to bolster their case for war, ignoring all evidence to the contrary? They were certainly not above using other suspect intelligence for the same purpose, such as the obviously phony documents that supposedly proved that Saddam had sought to purchase yellowcake uranium from Niger.
Further evidence that this is precisely what happened has been provided by Tyler Drumheller, who was the chief of CIA covert operations in Europe at the time of Powell’s presentation. Drumheller, who also saw through the yellowcake documents and reported that Iraq had no WMD program, told the Guardian that “right up to the night of Powell’s speech” he had been warning then-CIA Director George Tenet that Janabi’s intelligence was unreliable but (obviously) was ignored.
The newspaper adds:
[Drumheller] recalled a conversation he had with John McLaughlin, then the CIA’s deputy director. “The week before the speech, I talked to the Deputy McLaughlin, and someone says to him, ‘Tyler’s worried that Curveball might be a fabricator.’ And McLaughlin said, ‘Oh, I hope not, because this is really all we have.’ And I said, and I’ve got to be honest with you, I said: ‘You’ve got to be kidding? This is all we have!’”
Asked whether Powell … could have made a public case for war without Curveball, he said: “Not at the time they did ... it would have been a lot less dramatic and there would have been a lot more debate in Congress in the U.S. than if you have a source who says, for example, they can drop anthrax over the city of London.”
Tenet has denied that Drumheller ever made an official warning to CIA headquarters, insisting that he only found out about Janabi’s unreliability in 2005. Powell, meanwhile, is calling for an investigation into why the CIA and the Defense Intelligence Agency failed to inform him of Janabi’s unreliability prior to his speech.
The use of defector intelligence with no corroboration is not accepted practice at intelligence agencies, argues Carne Ross. Ross, who says he “was Britain’s Iraq expert at the U.N. Security Council and responsible for liaison with the weapons inspectors” during the years just prior to the Iraq war, writes that because “defectors had a powerful incentive to exaggerate the nature of Iraq’s development of WMD,” they were considered “the least convincing sources” of intelligence. Therefore, their allegations, as with all other intelligence, were always “subjected to rigorous cross-checking before inclusion in overall analyses.” “In the years I worked on the subject (1997-2002),” Ross maintains, “the picture produced by this method was very clear: there was no credible evidence of substantial stocks of WMD in Iraq.”
Ross continues:
And it was this method — clearly — that was abandoned in advance of the war. Instead of a careful cross-checking of evidence, reports that suited the story of an imminent Iraqi threat were picked out, polished and formed the basis of public claims like Colin Powell’s presentation to the U.N. Security Council, or the No. 10 dossier. This was exactly how a false case for war was constructed: not by the deliberate creation of a falsehood, but by willfully and secretly manipulating the evidence to exaggerate the importance of reports like Curveball’s, and to ignore contradictory evidence. This was a subtle process, elaborated from report to report, in such a way that allowed officials themselves to believe that they were not deliberately lying — more editing, perhaps, or simplifying for public presentation.
… Others of my former colleagues in the [Ministry of Defense] and Foreign Office have freely admitted to me that this is precisely what took place. Yet, for all its subtlety and secrecy, we should name this process for what it was: the manufacture of a lie.
It is probably too much to expect any Bush or Blair administration officials to pay the price for their deliberate deceit. Indeed, as Ross points out, “We can expect that those who constructed it — Tony Blair, Dick Cheney et al. — will now amend their usual arguments to suggest that they were innocently misled by evidence such as Curveball’s.” They will also no doubt fall back on the old standby that the world is better off without Saddam — something that Curveball himself is counting on to salvage his reputation, telling the Guardian that while he is “very sad” about the tens of thousands of Iraqis civilians who have been killed as a direct result of his lies, “there was no other way to bring about freedom to Iraq.”
Curveball, have you seen any news out of Egypt lately?
Bad intel based on one source?
Yeah...those Kurdish children probably died from eating too much candy. No WMDs at all.../s
You know I can’t think of anyone on FR that wasn’t convinced at one time that all the truck convoys and flights out of Iraq and into Syria were for the transfer of the non existent WMD’s.
Even if this article is to be believed (Guardian, after all), the FACT is that the data source told the lies and the governments acted in good faith on information they believed to be true.
In short .... BUSH DID NOT LIE, Iraq did.
No.
“One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line.” President Clinton , Feb. 4, 1998.
“If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction program.” President Clinton , Feb. 17, 1998.
“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face .” Madeline Albright , Feb 18, 1998.
” He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983 .” Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
“[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq’s refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs.” Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.
“Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process.” Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.
“Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” Madeline Albright , Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999.
“There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.
“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.
“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” Al Gore , Sept. 23, 2002.
“Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” Al Gore , Sept. 23, 2002.
“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeing and developing weapons of mass destruction.” Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.
“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons...” Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.
“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force “ if necessary “ to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.
“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,
“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do.” Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. “[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ... Sen. John F. Kerry (D, M
What, you don’t believe Bush was able to manipulate intelligence with foreign intelligence services and the intelligence from before he ever took office, like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7n3ivH3pCQ Surely you jest...
Confessions of an Arab a dozen years later, reported in the most anti-American news source in the world. A few lines may be true, but the conclusions warrant many grains of salt.
A combination of forged documents and a lying informant.
Niger uranium forgeries
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niger_uranium_forgeries
Curveball (informant)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Curveball_%28informant%29
In a February 2011 interview with the Guardian he “admitted for the first time that he lied about his story, then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war.”
“Trump, as he has done multiple times throughout this presidential race, invoked the Iraq War as a way to criticize Jeb Bush for his brotherâs actions. âThe World Trade Center came down during your brotherâs reign, remember that,â Trump told Jeb, eliciting boos from the audience. Then regarding former president Bush starting the unpopular Iraq war, he said, âThey lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction and there were none. And they knew there were none.â - Donald Trump
The Washington Post reports that in a 2008 interview with CNNâs Wolf Blitzer, Trump said that Nancy Pelosi, who was Speaker of the House at the time, should have pushed for Bushâs impeachment because of his management of the Iraq war. When asked why, Trump replied, for â[getting] us into the war with lies,â a sentiment he repeated on Saturday night. However, the next morning during an appearance on ABCâs This Week, he said, âI donât even think about it.â - Donald Trump
Though he previously depicted Bushâs actions as deliberate, on Sunday morning he distanced himself from those statements. On NBCâs Meet the Press, Trump backed away from his past impeachment calls, saying, âIt may not have been impeachable because it was a mistake.â - Donald “Tell it like it is” Trump
This wound is open and infected. It was coming sooner , I thought but it is here now and it is not going away. The entire illegal invasion was based on a contrived premise. We know that because bush would not allow the IAEA inspectors to finished their reports. They were days away. Why not? 14 UN WMD inspectors going everywhere in Iraq trying to find violations of UN resolutions. They were even allowed access into the Houses of Saddam . This is the absolute and undeniable truth. I watched in horror as we prematurely “ ordered the inspectors out”and started bombing on a lie that there were WMD. We now know the truth and the aftermath. Trump is dead right.
It won’t be long before the Trump supporters start praising Valerie Plame and Joseph Wilson.
Their comments are like an invasion from DU.
Bush did the right thing. What went wrong? The 2008 election.
You got that right.
Pretty sure he had them, because we are the ones who sold them to him during the Iran-Iraq war.
Insanity reigns supreme around here anymore.
Jaundiced reading of the story ... It is plainly stated that both the Bush and Blair Administrations massaged and exaggerated the “intelligence,” that they ignored protocol in not thoroughly vetting and cross checking ... In more honest circles of discussion this is otherwise known as “lying.”
Just look at that post from WENDLE above. Wonder how many times he was zotted in the mid 2000s posting things like that?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.