This IS the Mad Hatter's Tea Party!
Twas
brillig and the slivey toves
did gyre and gimble in the wabe.
All mimsy were the borogroves
And the mome raths
outgrabe!
The argument pressed by the Bush Administration to the United States
and to the world will have two effects. In the days leading up to
the second war in Iraq, the buzz throughout the American
corporate-controlled, mainstream media was about Weapons of Mass
Destruction and their danger to the world- at-large and the inability of
the UN Weapons Inspectors to find the fearsome cache.
Secretary of State Colin Powell dramatically presented these fears to
the world with fake anthrax, inconclusive satellite data, speculative
graphics, and vague intercepted telephone calls. The blatant propaganda
and outright lies cut a wide swath through an American population
ill-prepared to sort fiction from fact, to recognize the difference
between advertising rhetoric and true information. It prepared the way for
Congress to give away its war-making to an executive that had already
manipulated them into giving away the Constitutional rights of their
constituents in lieu of an honest and independent investigation of the
events of September 11, 2001.
In the jingoistic fervor that some mistake for patriotism, freedom of
speech was effectively curtailed and the civic responsibility of dissent
became an imagined threat to national security. Pre-emptive aggression
against another nation was excused as a rational response to an imagined
threat made into a real fear in the mass consciousness. NAZI-style
propaganda laid the foundation for a NAZI-like aggression that a
generation ago was scorned in the Trials at Nuremburg.
With a clarion call to arms, the Bush Administration launched a billion
dollar armada to end the threat of Saddam Hussein's use of WMD against us
and his neighbors. Now the sword swings back and we can see more clearly
the intent of the Bush Administration in its rush to war in Iraq. As the
US/UK Coalition swept across Iraq, troops were sent to secure the oil
fields and the Ministry of Petroleum in Baghdad. No one was sent to secure
the major WMD sites, not even the Tuwaitha Yellowcake Storage Facility or
the Baghdad Nuclear Research Center. Since the greatest fear was
that Saddam Hussein might provide terrorists with WMD, looters might
accomplish the same objective. Barton Gellman, Washington Post staff
writer, describes the frustration of the Site Survey Team 3, lead by Army
Lt. Col. Charles Allison:
On April 10, the day after
Hussein's statue tumbled out of its boots on Firdaus Square in Baghdad,
Allison was dispatched to two of Iraq's most important nuclear sites. One
was called the Tuwaitha Yellowcake Storage Facility, where the
International Atomic Energy Agency keeps track of tons of natural and
partially enriched uranium. Close by stood the forbidding berm walls of
the Baghdad Nuclear Research Center, where Israel bombed the Osirak
reactor in 1981 and the United States bombed a Russian-built reactor 10
years later. Between them, the two facilities entombed most of Iraq's
former nuclear weapons program.
Just that morning, according
to U.S. and U.N. sources, the Vienna-based IAEA had sent an urgent message
to Washington. The twin complexes at Tuwaitha, the message said, were "at
the top of the list" of nuclear sites requiring protection of U.S. and
British forces.
A Marine engineering company
had found the sites abandoned a few days earlier. The captain in command
reported looters to be roaming the compounds. Allison's task was to
measure the radiation hazard.
"We couldn't get close
because we were receiving too high a dose" of radiation, Allison recalled.
But the team found disturbing signs, even from a distance. The door to a
major storage building, one of three known jointly as Location C, stood
wide open.
Deal's personal dosimeter
warned him to leave the scene, but first he shot a few seconds of
videotape, by reaching his hand with the camera around the doorframe. The
jerky images showed office debris strewn alongside scores of buried drums.
Those drums, and others nearby, were supposed to contain 3,896 pounds of
partially enriched uranium and more than 94 tons of yellowcake, or natural
ore.
Looters had plainly been
inside. At a minimum, they had exposed themselves and their families to
grave health risks. More ominously, they might have taken some nuclear
materials with them.
"There were also containers
of what looked like medical isotopes on the ground," Allison said. "We
backed off because we didn't have the capability to deal with radiation
that high."
Before Team 3 could complete
its survey, Allison received a "frago" -- a fragmentary order -- to leave
at once. Tuwaitha was at the center of an unresolved dispute between the
Bush administration and the IAEA, which monitors compliance with the
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty, and Bush's advisers were divided among
themselves. Until it had clear instructions, the headquarters for U.S.
ground forces in Iraq wanted nothing to do with the site.
Standing under the desert sun
with an Iridium satellite telephone at his ear, Allison raised his voice
in angry protest at orders to leave the nuclear center unprotected.
Eventually his superiors agreed to allow Marines to stay. Allison's report
later that day said that even so "the maneuver commander did not have
sufficient forces to secure both sites."
"I hope somebody has done
something," Allison said, recounting the story some time afterward,
"because a lot of that [material] is just laying around." Sunday,
May 18, 2003; Page A01
Surely such a facility would be at the top of the list of sites to be
secured. Why would the Coalition Forces wait for a call from IAEA?
After all, what is the purpose of invading Iraq to find and secure Weapons
of Mass Destruction if in the ensuing chaos and lawlessness these sites
are looted and WMD gets into the hands of terrorists? The Bush and
Blair team will have ensured the result they had originally used to
frighten their constituencies. They, in effect, removed the
effective security of sanctions, UN Weapons Inspectors, and the Hussein
regime itself. Gellman of the Washington Post reports:
"Supposedly the weapons
were a primary goal," said Anderson, a Navy cryptologic and nuclear
specialist whose job at home is to verify arms control pacts. In comments
echoed strongly by others, he added: "I mean, the president said, 'Go find
the weapons of mass destruction.' But it has become a secondary mission."
Not only showing no focus on securing these sites immediately, they
sent people who could not even speak or read Arabic. As a result
much time was wasted investigating things that would not raise any
suspicion if there were someone in the team who could read Arabic. Flying
into a field in northern Iraq in twin CH-46 helicopters Team 3
tested compounds found by a Marine officer and found that it was not
anthrax nor was it any known toxic substance. Puzzled by the Arabic
writing on lined paper, they brought the paper back to their headquarters
for translation and found that it was a science project of an Iraqi high
school student.
Even the quality of "intelligence" was remarkable for its inaccuracy
and lack of reliability. Allison's team dug up a children's playground
looking for an underground storage facility. At the Malab Ashab Chemical
Co., suspected of concealing an underground store of weapons or their
ingredients, Team 3 found an Olympic swimming and diving complex. The
Dhubbat Chemical Storage Site, another of the Top 19 sites suspected of
WMD, turned out to be a factory for metal signs. Team 3 found thousands of
license plates where looters had trampled them. Ruben Bannerjee reported
in Al Jazeera, April 5, 2003, that in a radio interview, British Home
Secretary, David Blunkett, admitted on Saturday that no chemical,
biological or nuclear weapons of mass destruction may after all be found.
but that he would in any
case rejoice the "fall'' of Saddam Hussein and his regime -- regardless of
whether any weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq or not. A
facility in Najaf that a US officer had said might finally be "smoking
gun" evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons production turned out to contain
pesticide, not sarin gas. A previous suspected WMD site was a petrol
warehouse and the one before that was a bakery....white powder, you know.
Can we go home now?
With no WMD found in over two months of looking, the Bush Administration
spin doctors, otherwise called propagandists, began to give several
explanations for their failure to produce the evidence for the threat for
which they violated international law, the UN Charter, the Nuremburg
Principles, and the Geneva Conventions: 1) that the Iraqis finally
destroyed their weapons as the attack began, 2) The WMD was secretly
transported into Syria or wherever they would like to attack next, despite
US satellite and reconnaissance technology, 3) that the WMD will
eventually be found, especially if no one is looking and they "throw down"
implicating evidence, 4) that two trucks discovered by US forces might
have been capable of producing biological weapons, 5) that three ships
sailing around the Persian Gulf or the Indian Ocean have the WMD evidence
aboard.
Now comes the most amazing piece of propaganda from Maj. Gen. Keith
Dayton, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency's human intelligence
service. He will lead a new team of more than 1,000 experts to search for
evidence of banned weapons. The day before the Pentagon announcing this
team, Dayton suggested that it is possible
that Iraq deliberately misled U.S. intelligence agencies, making them
think that weapons were being produced and deployed even as the Iraqis were
secretly destroying them.
Now picture this: the largest, most powerful,
most dangerous military machine in the world is threatening to descend
upon Iraq for the second time in 12 years after continued air
strikes had kept them at bay for over a decade. Can you imagine
someone in Iraq thinking: "Let's just make them THINK that we are making
weapons of mass destruction. Meanwhile we will be secretly
destroying them." Does that sound totally logical to you? If we could find
ANYONE in Iraq who could think such a thought, they should be placed under
psychiatric care as a danger to themselves and society. Now, for one of
our leaders in Military Intelligence to suggest such a thing is not only
ludicrous but frightening. Brings new light on the concept of
"military intelligence."
The WMD issue has provided those who are wary of
party line doctrine a fairly obvious insight into the Bush Administration
manipulations. Whereas Weapons of Mass Destruction got the attention
and support of the American public which permitted the Bush Administration
to commit war crimes in their name, the issue now shows their true agenda
and motivation in Iraq--and it had nothing to do with WMD.
AN/TMQ-42 Hydrogen Generator (HG)
DESCRIPTION:
The Hydrogen Generator (HG) is a mobile system that will produce the gas
necessary for inflating meteorological balloons used by artillery Met
sections. The system will produce 150 cubic feet of gas per hour, and
store 300 cubic feet. It will be skid mounted on a HMMWV in units equipped
with the AN/TMQ-41 Met Measuring Set (MMS).
http://sill-http://www.army.mil/TNGCMD/mat/MET/hg.htm
Oct
24, 2004
Bush's unilateral attempts at preventing
WMD has violated US treaty on non-proliferation
Oct 15, 2004
Iraq n-sites were stripped methodically and with
big equipment under the unwatchful eye of the occupation
Now it's even more clear that WMD was a facade to
an illegal War of Aggression. Not only had the US FAILED to SECURE the
WMD facilities at Tuwaitha, they have CONTINUED to permit the wholesale
dismantling and demolition of the nuclear facility permitting tons of
dual purpose equipment to be looted and sold to "who knows" on the world
market. Had there been a SINCERE INTENT to secure the "WMD" in Iraq they
would have continued the surveillance and security maintained by the UN
Weapons inspectors. The lie is transparent to all but who close their
eyes to not see it.
Oct 13, 2004
US admits nuclear material Is missing from Iraq
But US claims they moved quickly to stop
looting of Tuwaitha nuclear facility! It took over two weeks. By that
time the place had been nearly stripped bare. They also place the burden
on their puppet Iraqi government.
Oct 12, 2004
CIA Report: Saddam Assumed the US Knew He Didn't Have WMDs
April 11, 2004
Australian government advisor sacked after
refusing to write WMD media propaganda
April 10, 2004
The War in Iraq is a Nuclear War and DU IS WMD
"Depleted uranium is a
nuclear weapon and it
is a Weapon of Mass Destruction under the U. S. government's definition
of weapons of mass destruction" US Murder Inc is using WMD in a Nuclear
War against civilians. Is there a hotter place in hell for such demonic
war criminals. Are there WMD in Iraq? YES! Ours! Has the US used these
on their own people? YES! The men and women hired by US Murder Inc
to "liberate" Iraq will come home exposed to a horror that will not go
away.
April 5, 2004
David Kay
knew within days that Bush 'wrong' on WMD
Jan 9, 2004
Colin Powell and CNN: misleading the public of the world
You would think that this has to be very embarrassing for the US corporate
media to have to report that there were no WMDs after all. But they don't
even blink as they tell you that oops, didn't find any. When the Bush
Administration (including Powell) first made the claim, thousands of
Internet websites blew the lid off the lie immediately at once while the
mainstream media ( their broadcast licenses from Colin's kid at FCC) stood
there with a straight face repeating an outdated, plagiarized student
report and showing blurry photos of trucks and loading docks as seen from
space and artistic graphics of British balloon inflators. How many times
can folks be lied to before they start figuring it out.
The corporate media won't even try to recover their credibility. They will
just report the story now and go on as though nothing happened, confident
that most folks won't really remember what was really said. But a lot of
folks have learned that to get the truth you can't depend upon a
corporation that's been bought and paid for by the international bankers
and their agents, and that the truth of the WMD matter was not to be found
on ABCNNBCBS, but on web sites like this one and the others listed in blue
on the right. The same for 9/11 and a host of other vital issues facing
Americans and people of the world.
Powell's 'thick file' described before UN is looking
very thin
How does Powell's pivotal U.S. indictment look from the
vantage point of today? Powell has said several times since February that
he stands by it, the State Department said Wednesday. Here is an
Associated Press review of the major counts, based on both what was known
in February and what has been learned since
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits
Wolfowitz 30 May 2003
The Bush administration focused on alleged weapons of mass destruction as
the primary justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force because it
was politically convenient, a top-level official at the Pentagon has
acknowledged.
The extraordinary admission comes in an interview with Paul Wolfowitz, the
Deputy Defence Secretary, in the July issue of the magazine Vanity Fair.
Mr. Wolfowitz also discloses that there was one justification that was
"almost unnoticed but huge". That was the prospect of the United States
being able to withdraw all of its forces from Saudi Arabia once the threat
of Saddam had been removed. Since the taking of Baghdad, Washington has
said that it is taking its troops out of the kingdom. "Just lifting that
burden from the Saudis is itself going to the door" towards making
progress elsewhere in achieving Middle East peace, Mr Wolfowitz said. The
presence of the US military in Saudi Arabia has been one of the main
grievances of al-Qa'ida and other terrorist groups.
"For bureaucratic reasons we settled on one issue, weapons of mass
destruction, because it was the one reason everyone could agree on," Mr.
Wolfowitz tells the magazine.
The comments suggest that, even for the US administration, the logic that
was presented for going to war may have been an empty shell. They come to
light, moreover, just two days after Mr. Wolfowitz immediate boss, Donald
Rumsfeld, the Defence Secretary, conceded for the first time that the arms
might never be found.
Feb 10, 2004
Maj. Scott Ritter had it right all along. NO WMD!!!
Bush Lied!!!! Time for BoobGate--and I
don't mean
Janet Jackson.
The Bush Liars' Club, the majority
of Congress and to most of the talking heads - including the pre-Iraq War
NBC analyst David Kay, who reported WMDs (weapons of mass destruction)
behind every Iraqi sand dune - blew it big-time when it came down to the
awesome arsenal that Saddam didn't really have. Now WorldNetDaily finally
prints the truth...nearly a trillion dollars, thousands of lives too late.
You were lied to. You know you were
lied to. The whole world knows you know you were lied to. And now they
wait to see what Americans are truly made of. Will you allow yourself to
be lied to again and again.
April 6, 2004
Before and during hostilities
US tried to plant WMDs, failed
Whistleblower
Nelda Rogers is a 28-year veteran debriefer for the
DoD. She has become so concerned for her safety that she decided to tell
the story about this latest CIA-military fiasco in Iraq. "Ms Rogers is
number two in the chain of command within this DoD special intelligence
office. This is a ten-person debriefing unit within the central
debriefing office for the Department of Defense."
The information was "obtained while in Germany heading up the
debriefing of returning service personnel involved in intelligence work
in Iraq for the DoD and/or the CIA. "According to Ms Rogers, there was a
covert military operation that took place both preceding and during the
hostilities in Iraq,"
The WMD lies--a most thorough documentation and
analysis of the deadly scandal
"Smoking gun" WMD site in Iraq turns out to
contain pesticide...STILL no Weapons of
Mass Destruction! NEAR NAJAF, Iraq (AFP) - A facility near Baghdad that a US officer had
said might finally be "smoking gun" evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons
production turned out to contain pesticide, not sarin gas as feared.
[Previous suspected WMD site was a petrol warehouse and the one before
that was a bakery....white powder, you know. Can we go home now?]
The fact that the coalition forces have come up with no clear evidence
of WMD after capturing much of Iraq in 19 days of fighting has raised
questions over the war's justification.
Britain Admits There May Be No WMDs in Iraq
5 April 2003
Well into the war that was supposed to rid Iraq of its alleged stockpile
of weapons of mass destruction, a senior British official admitted on
Saturday that no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons of mass
destruction may after all be found.
Making the startling confession in a radio interview, British Home
Secretary, David Blunkett, added in the same breath that he would in any
case rejoice the "fall'' of Saddam Hussein and his regime -- regardless of
whether any weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq or not.
The confession reconfirms the worst fears of opponents of the war that
"weapons of mass destruction'' is only a ruse for the US and the British
to go to war against Iraq.
January 26, 2004
Attorney General Ashcrofts
lends HIS "credibility" in defense of the lies about WMD: God is watching
you, John.
25 January 2004
UK Sunday Herald asks "Iraq's
WMD: the big lie?" Now will US mainstream media "fess up" to hiding the
lie
Before Gulf War II, Iraqis answered charges of WMD
with a 12,000 page report to the UN: Ali Baba Bush illegally intercepted
it and stole 8,000 pages
January 28, 2004
Bush Liar's Club denies that it said or meant Iraqi
WMD was "imminent" threat.
But they DID say "immediate," " mortal," " urgent" and
confirmed that this meant "imminent."
February 2, 2004
$600 million for what? Bush knew in May 2003 that
there were no WMD to be found.
The Observer is
reporting (or
here)
that senior American officials were aware at the beginning of May 2003
that Iraq did not possess weapons of mass destruction. For political
reasons, the Bush Administration has been pretending that such weapons
would be found, and the pretending didn't stop until David Kay came out
with his recent surprising admissions (Kay did say that there would be
some surprises in his report, but the fact there are no weapons has to be
the ultimate surprise!).
February 5, 2004
There was no failure of intelligence behind the Bush
lies
Bruce Hardcastle was a senior officer for the Middle East for the Defense
Intelligence Agency (DIA). When Bush insisted that Saddam was actively and
urgently engaged in a nuclear weapons program and had renewed production
of chemical weapons, the DIA reported otherwise. According to Patrick
Lang, the former head of human intelligence at the CIA, Hardcastle "told
[the Bush administration] that the way they were handling evidence was
wrong." The response was not simply to remove Hardcastle from his post:
"They did away with his job," Lang says. "They wanted only liaison
officers ... not a senior intelligence person who argued with them."
April 3, 2004
Powell No Longer Sure Trailers Were Labs: The Lie
Is Exposed
Excellent
Xymphora
blog on the spin doctors in the White House and at the Washington Post.
Friday, June 13, 2003
The rationale for Bush's attack on Iraq, and the method by which it
was fitted into its procrustean bed of international law, was that the
United States had the right of self-defense against imminent attack and
was allowed to use a preemptive war to defend itself. This wasn't much
of an argument, but for it to fly at all it was essential that the Bush
Administration have actual evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass
destruction which could be used immediately. Otherwise, there was
absolutely no reason not to allow the United Nations weapons inspectors
to finish their jobs. In the absence of any weapons of mass destruction,
and the absolutely consistent stories of all credible Iraqis that such
weapons did not exist, the Bush Administration has been scrambling for a
substitute rationale for the war. Bush has apparently settled on the
idea that Saddam had a 'program' to build WMD. Leaving aside the fact
that this is so vague as to be meaningless, it also will not do for the
purposes of saving the White House. A 'program' is no imminent threat,
and it is absolutely essential for Bush's war argument to work that the
threat be imminent. The use of preemptive war is so far outside the
norms of international law that, at the very least, the war has to be
the only possible means of avoiding being attacked. Obviously, by
definition, Iraq's having had a 'program' entails that it was not in a
position to attack the United States. From an excellent
article "Not buying revisionist sales job on Iraqi weapons" by Jules
Witcover:
". . . the pertinent question has always been whether, as the Bush
administration insisted in launching the invasion, those weapons were in
hand and so ready for use as to constitute a clear and present danger
requiring immediate military action."
and
"Understating the importance of the existence or absence of WMD at
the time of the invasion won't settle the critical question of whether
administration officials hyped government intelligence about the threat
to win congressional support for launching pre-emptive war. Without WMD,
what was being pre-empted?"
posted
4:35 AM
The pinning of the blame on the CIA by the Bush Administration for
the Bush lies about Iraq continues to develop. The story is now centered
on the clumsily forged documents which purported to show that Saddam had
arranged to buy uranium from Niger:
- In an
article dated June 12 in the Washington Post Walter Pincus
wrote:
"A key component of President Bush's claim in his State of the
Union address last January that Iraq had an active nuclear weapons
program - its alleged attempt to buy uranium in Niger - was disputed
by a CIA-directed mission to the central African nation in early 2002,
according to senior administration officials and a former government
official. But the CIA did not pass on the detailed results of its
investigation to the White House or other government agencies, the
officials said."
Pincus is here clearly describing the White House defense - that
the CIA knew but didn't tell the Administration.
- In an
article dated June 13, Pincus sets out the CIA's response to this
claim:
"The CIA, facing criticism for its failure to pass on a key piece
of information that put in doubt Iraq's purported attempts to buy
uranium from Niger, said yesterday it sent a cable to the White House
and other government agencies in March 2002 that said the claim had
been denied by officials from the central African country."
Pincus then goes on to present the White House rebuttal to the CIA
defense, which is the rather weak claim that the CIA cable did not
refer to the name of the former ambassador that the CIA had sent to
Niger to investigate the matter, or to the fact that he had been sent
there by the CIA. This is obvious quibbling as the cable was
apparently completely clear that the claim had been denied by
officials from Niger, thus at the very least making the allegations
questionable until they were further researched, but the White House
went ahead anyway and used the Niger allegations as one of the key
parts of its WMD lie. Pincus, who writes his article as if he was
being paid by the White House (one of the keys to understanding the
parlous state that the United States is currently in is the
simultaneous utter debasement of both the Washington Post and
the New York Times), continues:
"An administration official said yesterday that the CIA report was
only one of many such cables received by the White House each day. The
official said that other information received after March 2002
supported claims that Iraq was actively attempting to buy uranium.
Because of the anonymous nature of the source cited in the CIA report,
it was not considered unusual or very important and not passed on to
Condoleezza Rice, the president's national security adviser, or other
senior White House officials."
Pincus then quotes Rice's denial:
"Maybe someone knew down in the bowels of the agency, but no one in
our circles knew that there were doubts and suspicions that this might
be a forgery."
How did they not know if the CIA had sent them a warning cable? Who
is the gatekeeper who conveniently insulates high-level officials from
important CIA intelligence information? We have to look elsewhere than
the Washington Post to avoid the heavy White House propaganda
spin.
- An
article entitled "White House was warned of dubious intelligence,
official says"
by Jonathan S. Landay for Knight Ridder Newspapers is more
helpful:
"A senior CIA official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity,
said the intelligence agency informed the White House on March 9, 2002
- 10 months before Bush's nationally televised speech - that an agency
source who had traveled to Niger couldn't confirm European
intelligence reports that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium from the
West African country."
and
"Three senior administration officials said Vice President Dick
Cheney and some officials on the National Security Council staff and
at the Pentagon ignored the CIA's reservations and argued that the
president and others should include the allegation in their case
against Saddam."
How could they ignore the CIA reservations if, as Rice claims, they
didn't even know about them? A fourth official is quoted as saying
that the most recent allegations "were not central pieces of the case
illustrating Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction and
their WMD programs." This is, of course, nonsense: not only were the
Niger allegations central to the case, as time goes on it has become
clear that these allegations were the only evidence that the
Bush Administration had. The CIA sent its warning not only to the
White House, but also to the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, the Justice Department and the FBI. In the months
before Bush's state of the union address, where he made much of the
Niger uranium, the CIA also told its doubts to the State Department,
National Security Council staffers and members of Congress (which
contradicts Pincus's June 12 article that "the CIA did not pass on the
detailed results of its investigation to the White House or other
government agencies"). If the White House didn't know, they were
practically the only people in the whole U. S. government who didn't
know! And finally, the truth:
"Among the most vocal proponents of publicizing the alleged Niger
connection, two senior officials said, were Cheney and officials in
the office of Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld. The effort was led
by Robert G. Joseph, the top National Security Council staff official
on nuclear proliferation, the officials said."
Cheney and Rumsfeld. Remember those names (and put Robert G. Joseph
in the back of your mind for future reference; nuclear proliferation
is important as the main part of the greater Cheney-Rumsfeld
conspiracy is the removal of all restrictions on full use by the
United States of nuclear weapons on the ground and in space). The
grand finale, returning us to now familiar ground:
"The use of the false evidence despite the CIA warning raises
questions about why some officials chose to believe the story despite
the widespread skepticism in the intelligence community.
One possibility, one senior official suggested Thursday, is that some
officials at the Pentagon and in the vice president's office were
getting their own intelligence from Iraqi exiles who the CIA and the
Defense Intelligence Agency warned couldn't be trusted.
Exile leader Ahmad Chalabi of the Iraqi National Congress told
lawmakers Thursday that his group had turned three Iraqi defectors
over to U.S. officials. One of the three, Chalabi said, was an Iraqi
scientist who was involved in separating isotopes for Iraq's nuclear
weapons program."
The truth is revealed! We are back to lies concocted by Cheny and
Chalabi and Rumsfeld, which is the starting point for understanding
the propaganda basis for the attack on Iraq. Note also that this
article points out that although the name of the ambassador was not in
the CIA cable, the names of all the Niger officials he talked to were
included, making it a much more impressive refutation.
- The CIA
claims (or
here) that it has provided documentation to congressional
oversight committees which would show it "did not withhold information
from appropriate officials" about Iraq's purported attempt to buy
uranium in Niger.
This is all very important in understanding the structure of the flow
of information in the White House. Knowing where and how the lies
originated will not only allow us to understand the lies which led to
the attack on Iraq, but also the background to what happened on
September 11. Cheney and Rumsfeld are the protagonists, Rice is a
professional liar to protect the deep structure of the information flows
(information flows are the key to conspiracies), and Bush is essentially
irrelevant.
Whistleblower
Says the WMD Scandal Could Be Worse Than Watergate
John Dean, a FindLaw columnist, is a former counsel to the president of
the United States and whistleblower on the Watergate Scandal..
Editor's Note: This article first appeared on Findlaw.com on June 6, 2003
President George W. Bush has got a very serious problem. Before asking
Congress for a Joint Resolution authorizing the use of American military
forces in Iraq, he made a number of unequivocal statements about the
reason the United States needed to pursue the most radical actions any
nation can undertake -- acts of war against another nation.
Now it is clear that many of his statements appear to be false. In the
past, Bush's White House has been very good at sweeping ugly issues like
this under the carpet and out of sight. But it is not clear that they will
be able to make the question of what happened to Saddam Hussein's weapons
of mass destruction (WMD) go away -- unless, perhaps, they start another
war.
CIA officer: Bush ignored warnings
WASHINGTON
- Making his case for war with Iraq, President Bush in his
State of the Union address this year accused Saddam Hussein of trying to
buy uranium from Africa, even though the CIA had warned White House and
other officials that the story did not check out.
A senior CIA official, who spoke on the condition of
anonymity, said the intelligence agency informed the White House on March
9, 2002 -- 10 months before Bush's nationally televised speech -- that an
agency source who had traveled to Niger could not confirm European
intelligence reports that Iraq was attempting to buy uranium from the West
African country.
Looting of Iraqi nuclear facility indicts U.S. goals
If we feared the loss of radioactive materials, why not guard them?
TUWAITHA, Iraq - On a dusty road, just outside of Baghdad, lies one of the
great mysteries of the Iraq war.
Just off the road behind fences and berms sits the 23-acre complex of
Tuwaitha, Iraq's main nuclear facility. It's now defunct, but it's still a
storage area for 3,000 barrels of low-grade uranium and other more
dangerous radioactive materials.
The Bush administration claimed, contrary to reports by U.N. weapons
inspectors, that Saddam still had an active nuclear weapons program. The
Bush administration claimed that the danger of Iraq's handing off nuclear
materiel to terrorists was a key reason for regime change.
The administration knew full well what was stored at Tuwaitha. So how is
it possible that the U.S. military failed to secure the nuclear facility
until weeks after the war started? This left looters free to ransack the
barrels, dump their contents, and sell them to villagers for storage.
How is it possible that, according to Iraqi nuclear scientists, looters
are still stealing radioactive isotopes?
The Tuwaitha story makes a mockery of the administration's vaunted concern
with weapons of mass destruction. The U.S. military hastened to secure the
Ministry of Oil in Baghdad from looters. But Iraq's main nuclear facility
was apparently not important enough to get similar protection.
Experts Accuse U.S. of Misrepresentation
(Original Headline. Even in a story of whistleblowers outing the Bush lies, they shift the
story ever so slightly to "U.S." and "misrepresentation." I didn't
misrepresent anything, did you? Who is the U.S.? Not Bush and his cronies!
They are our employees! The Bush Administration did.
Americans are so numbed out and dumbed down that most don't see the
sleight of hand manipulation, the give a little take a lot back trick.)
(Accurate Headline) Intelligence Experts Accuse Bush
Administration of Misrepresenting WMD Facts
By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer
WASHINGTON - As President Bush and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld
defended their invasion of Iraq a group of arms control experts accused
the administration of misrepresenting intelligence information to justify
the war.
When the war began in March, Iraq posed no threat to the United States or
to its neighbors, a former senior State Department intelligence official
said Wednesday.
Its missiles could not reach Israel, Saudi Arabia or Iran, said Greg
Thielmann, who held a high post in the Bureau of Intelligence and
Research.
But Thielmann, one of four critics at a session held by the private Arms
Control Association, said the Bush administration had formed a
"faith-based" policy on Iraq and took the approach that "we know the
answers; give us the intelligence to support those answers."
At the Arms Control Association session Wednesday, Gregory V. Treverton, a
senior analyst at Rand, a government-financed research group, challenged
what he said was the administration's persistent description of
intelligence as evidence when it often is a qualified judgment.
But the administration extracted from the data the "best bumper stickers"
it could fashion, said the former vice chair of the National Intelligence
Council.
Thielmann said the administration had distorted intelligence to fit its
policy purposes. He said Iraq had no active nuclear weapons program and
that while CIA Director George Tenet told Congress Iraq had Scud missiles,
the intelligence finding actually was that the missiles could not be
accounted for.
Joseph Cirincione, a proliferation expert at the Carnegie Endowment for
International Peace, credited U.N. inspectors with doing a good job of
finding weapons in Iraq and having them dismantled.
But he said the administration in its statements made the inspectors "look
like fools" and went far beyond U.S. intelligence findings on Iraq.
March 13 2004
U.S. unloading WMD in Iraq at night:
Hang on Sheeple, WMD discovery is on the way just in time for elections.
The weapons were probably transferred in
vans to an unknown location somewhere in the vicinity of Basra
overnight. "Most of these weapons are of Eastern European origin and
some parts are from the former Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc. The
U.S. obtained them through confiscations during sales of banned arms
over the past two decades," he said.
Keep this available to check out the new WMD
discovery in a few months
March 18,
2004
Polish President: "they
deceived us about the weapons of mass destruction"
White House Silenced Experts Who Questioned Iraq Intel Six Months Before
War
June 12, 2003
Six months
before the United States was dead-set on invading Iraq to rid the country
of its alleged weapons of mass destruction, experts in the field of
nuclear science warned officials in the Bush administration that
intelligence reports showing Iraq was stockpiling chemical and biological
weapons was unreliable and that the country did not pose an imminent
threat to its neighbors in the Middle East or the U.S.
But the dissenters were told to keep quiet by high-level administration
officials in the White House because the Bush administration had already
decided that military force would be used to overthrow the regime of
Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, interviews and documents have revealed.
U.S. Won't Probe Secret Iraqi Documents
Jun 3, 2003
BAGHDAD, Iraq - More than a decade of suspicions about Iraq's missile industry and its capabilities for delivering weapons of
mass destruction could be investigated quickly now that American forces
control the country.
But no U.S. weapons hunters or intelligence officials have visited the
heart of Iraq's missile programs - the state-owned al-Fatah company in
Baghdad, which designed all the rockets Saddam Hussein's troops fired in 1991 and again this year. Not only
that, it's not even on their agenda.
"We have the most sensitive documents here," said Marouf al-Chalabi,
director-general of al-Fatah. "We were sure the Americans would target us
but they haven't even dropped by."
Iraqi mobile labs nothing to do with germ warfare,
report finds
June 15, 2003
An official British investigation into two trailers found in northern Iraq
has concluded they are not mobile germ warfare labs, as was claimed by
Tony Blair and President George Bush, but were for the production of
hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, as the Iraqis have continued to
insist.
The conclusion by biological weapons
experts working for the British Government is an embarrassment for the
Prime Minister, who has claimed that the discovery of the labs proved that
Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going
to war against Saddam Hussein.
Ex-Envoy: U.S. Twisted Iraq Intelligence on WMD
Sunday, July 6, 2003
WASHINGTON - An envoy sent by the CIA to Africa to investigate allegations
about Iraq's nuclear weapons program contends the Bush administration
manipulated his findings, possibly to strengthen the rationale for war.
That conclusion came on Sunday from Joseph Wilson, former U.S. ambassador
to the West African nation of Gabon, who was dispatched in February 2002
to explore whether Iraq tried to buy uranium from Niger. That desert
country is the world's third-largest producer of mined uranium.
Writing in a New York Times op-ed piece, Wilson said it did not take him
long "to conclude that it was highly doubtful that any such transaction
had ever taken place."
In an interview on NBC's "Meet the Press," Wilson insisted his doubts
about the purported Iraq-Niger connection reached the highest levels of
government, including Vice President Dick Cheney's office.
In fact, he said, Cheney's office inquired about the purported Niger-Iraq
link.
"The question was asked of the CIA by the office of the vice president.
The office of the vice president, I am absolutely convinced, received a
very specific response to the question it asked, and that response was
based upon my trip out there," said Wilson.
Kelly "Suicided?"
It was absurdly easy to murder Dr. David Kelly. His regular
habit of walking through the quiet fields to nearby Longworth Hill saw to
that. The report that "She didn't use the
word 'depressed', but she said he was very stressed and unhappy about what
had happened, and this was really not the kind of world he wanted to live
in" leaves careless readers with the
impression that he WAS depressed and subliminally white becomes black.
The police response was quite casual given the stakes, no dogs or
helicopters till the following day. Did they know he was already
dead?
America silences Niger leaders in Iraq nuclear row
Last week. Mr Hamadou said that the Niger government
had never had discussions with Iraq about uranium and called on Tony Blair
to produce the "evidence" he claims to have to confirm that Iraq sought
uranium from Niger in the 1990s.
American officials denied that there had been any attempt to "gag" the
Niger government. The Niamey official, however, said that there was "a
clear attempt to stop any more embarrassing stories coming out of Niger".
White House Claims Add to Contradictions
- The White House
attempt to defuse criticism over President Bush's now-discredited claim of
Iraqi uranium shopping in Africa has produced shifting explanations of how
the assertion landed in his State of the Union speech.
Italian Journalist Decides the Niger
Uranium Documents Were Forgeries, Gave them to the US Embassy--Bush
Administration Decides They Are Good Enough to Use to Scare Congress and
American People into an Illegal War
Wolfowitz Committee Instructed White House
To Use Iraq/Uranium Ref In Pres Speech:
The Senators and the CIA official said they could be forced out
of government and brought up on criminal charges for leaking the
information to this reporter and as a result requested anonymity.
This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which
has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is
distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in
receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.
For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml. If you wish to use
copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go
beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
March 10, 2004
Zionist Doug Feith admits skirting the CIA to
provide intelligence analysis to NSA and Vice President.
How can the GOP blame the CIA for bad intelligence when the Bush
Administration allows a traitor to circumvent national security
procedures?
