Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

It's not that we knew they wanted war. WE KNOW THEY FIXED FACTS!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:05 PM
Original message
It's not that we knew they wanted war. WE KNOW THEY FIXED FACTS!
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 05:09 PM by Brotherjohn
It takes an Italian Collective to publish the obvious? Where the F$%# is our media?!?

"On March 3, 2003 Newsweek published a leaked transcript (http://www.fair.org/extra/0305/kamel.html ) of Iraqi defector Hussein Kamel testifying that all Iraq’s weapons had been destroyed- yet in August ’02 Dick Cheney claimed that Kamel told us the exact opposite. Recall the British Chief said the "facts were being fixed" just a month before... this seems to be a smoking gun case of Cheney "fixing the facts" to make the case for war."

http://www.uruknet.info/?p=m12762&l=i&size=1&hd=0

This is only one of many "smoking guns" proving they "fixed facts".

- The above lie of omission from the Kamel Hussein testimony (both Cheney and Powell are guilty of this one).

- Ignoring all available evidence on aluminum tubes (including their own), and claiming their "only" possible use for the production of nuclear weapons (Rice, at least, used the word "only", a clear contradiction to the October 2002 NIE on Iraq).

- Ignoring all available evidence, including repeated warnings from the CIA, and repeatedly stating that Iraq was trying to obtain uranium from Africa (Bush in his 2003 State of the Union address, and others elsewhere).

- Ignoring all available evidence and repeatedly claiming a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda where none existed (the whole gang, but Cheney was most the egregrious offender in this respect).

- Etc., etc., etc...

The media would like to think the relevant issues here center around whether or not the Bush administration was set on war with Iraq before they claimed.

But the relevant issue here is whether or not the Bush administration "fixed the facts and intelligence" to justify a war!

The answer is obvious to anyone who has paid attention.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Quakerfriend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:10 PM
Response to Original message
1. Very well said. While listening to a freeper station the other
night, they were trying to say that the meaning of the word "fixed" is different in Britain than it is in the US!

What nonsense!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. There are now several leaked British documents that give a very...
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 05:26 PM by Brotherjohn
... detailed picture of what the plan was. It's not as though the only words in the documents were "intelligence and facts were being fixed".

It is VERY clear from these documents (which have been multiply authenticated) that the U.S.:

1) Wanted war no matter what and were simply using the U.N. as a cover.

2) Had no case, so were going to make one up.

Not to mention reams of previous evidence from high level insiders from within the Bush administration and our own intelligence community backing up these assertions.

As some are starting to ask: What more do we need?

We're not going to get a tape from inside the White House, with Bush stating "So what if I lie! So what if Saddam couldn't swat a fly off a camel's butt with his so-called WMDs!! I want this war, and I'm gonna have it!".

That ain't gonna happen. But official records from the highest levels of government of our chief ally, saying basically the same thing (though less colloquially)? Well, that indeed is something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ailsagirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:11 PM
Response to Original message
2. They're trying their hardest to brush it off and divert our attention
What do you think's going to happen? Do you think this will
continue to grow or drop off the radar screen altogether?

:shrug:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Quakerfriend Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:19 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. I think that an avalanche will occur - Hopefully, sooner
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 05:20 PM by Quakerfriend
rather than later.

The most horrific pics/videos from Abu Graib are due out in another few weeks.

We shall see. Praying for our country every day now. We must stand up to this administration!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Brotherjohn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:21 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. I'm pessimistic about specifically Downing St. sticking to them. But...
... as people grow more disenchanted (with the war, the economy, the scandals), it may indirectly bring Bush down.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
evermind Donating Member (833 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Jun-20-05 05:25 PM
Response to Original message
6. A good summary of the Kamel material
Edited on Mon Jun-20-05 05:26 PM by evermind
is at http://www.middleastreference.org.uk

I can reproduce it in full, since the author, Glen Rangwala (a Cambridge (UK) University Iraq expert) gives permission: " There are no restrictions on re-using information from this site, but if reprinting sizeable parts of any of the above sections, please quote the original source: these pages are frequently updated and corrected, and therefore a reference to this site may prove valuable to other interested individuals."

The interview with Hussein Kamel: the text of the transcript is here



Gen. Hussein Kamel, the former director of Iraq's Military Industrialization Corporation, in charge of Iraq's weapons programme, defected to Jordan on the night of 7 August 1995, together with his brother Col. Saddam Kamel. Hussein Kamel took crates of documents revealing past weapons programmes, and provided these to UNSCOM. Iraq responded by revealing a major store of documents that showed that Iraq had begun an unsuccessful crash programme to develop a nuclear bomb (on 20 August 1995). Hussein and Saddam Kamel agreed to return to Iraq, where they were assassinated (23 February 1996).

The interview was conducted in Amman on 22 August 1995, 15 days after Kamel left Iraq. His interviewers were:

* Rolf Ekeus, the former executive chairman of Unscom (from 1991 to 1997).

* Professor Maurizio Zifferero, deputy director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and head of the inspections team in Iraq.

* Nikita Smidovich, a Russian diplomat who led UNSCOM's ballistic missile team and former Deputy Director for Operations of UNSCOM.

During the interview, Major Izz al-Din al-Majid (transliterated as Major Ezzeddin) joins the discussion (p.10). Izz al-Din is Saddam Hussein's cousin, and defected together with the Kamel brothers. He did not return with them to Iraq in 1996, moving instead to Jordan and now to an unknown European country.

In the transcript of the interview, Kamel states categorically:

"I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed" (p. 13).


Kamel specifically discussed the significance of anthrax, which he portrayed as the "main focus" of the biological programme (pp.7-8). Smidovich asked Kamel: "were weapons and agents destroyed?"

Kamel replied: "nothing remained".

He confirmed that destruction took place "after visits of inspection teams. You have important role in Iraq with this. You should not underestimate yourself. You are very effective in Iraq." (p.7)

Kamel added: "I made the decision to disclose everything so that Iraq could return to normal." (p.8)

Furthermore, Kamel describes the elimination of prohibited missiles: "not a single missile left but they had blueprints and molds for production. All missiles were destroyed." (p.8)

On VX, Kamel claimed: "they put it in bombs during last days of the Iran-Iraq war. They were not used and the programme was terminated." (p.12).

Ekeus asked Kamel: "did you restart VX production after the Iran-Iraq war?"

Kamel replied: "we changed the factory into pesticide production. Part of the establishment started to produce medicine [...] We gave insturctions [sic] not to produce chemical weapons." (p.13).

Despite the significance of these claims, it was not known that Kamel made this assertion until February 2003. Kamel's claim was first carried on 24 February 2003 by Newsweek, who reported that Kamel told U.N. inspectors that Iraq had destroyed its entire stockpile of chemical and biological weapons and banned missiles, as Iraq claims (Newsweek, 3/3/03). Newsweek reported that the weapons were destroyed secretly, in order to hide their existence from inspectors, in the hopes of someday resuming production after inspections had finished. The CIA and MI6 were told the same story, Newsweek reported.

However, these facts were "hushed up by the U.N. inspectors" in order to "bluff Saddam into disclosing still more", according to Newsweek.

CIA spokesman Bill Harlow angrily denied the Newsweek report. "It is incorrect, bogus, wrong, untrue," Harlow told Reuters the day the report appeared (Reuters, 24 February 2003).

On Wednesday (26 February 2003), a complete copy of the Kamel transcript -- an internal UNSCOM/IAEA document stamped "sensitive" -- was obtained by Glen Rangwala.

The Significance of Hussein Kamel



Kamel's departure from Iraq was the major turning point of the inspections saga. As UNSCOM said in their final substantive report:

" the overall period of the Commission's disarmament work must be divided into two parts, separated by the events following the departure from Iraq, in August 1995, of Lt. General Hussein Kamal".

(25 January 1999 letter to U.N. Security Council, Enclosure 1, para.12).

Kamel's defection has been cited repeatedly by President Bush and leading officials in both the UK and US as evidence that (1) Iraq has not disarmed; (2) inspections cannot disarm it; and (3) defectors such as Kamel are the most reliable source of information on Iraq's weapons.

* Prime Minister Tony Blair in his statement to the House of Commons on 25 February 2003, said: "It was only four years later after the defection of Saddam's son-in-law to Jordan, that the offensive biological weapons and the full extent of the nuclear programme were discovered."

* President Bush declared in a 7 October 2002 speech: "In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing millions."

* Colin Powell's 5 February 2003 presentation to the UN Security Council claimed: "It took years for Iraq to finally admit that it had produced four tons of the deadly nerve agent, VX. A single drop of VX on the skin will kill in minutes. Four tons. The admission only came out after inspectors collected documentation as a result of the defection of Hussein Kamal, Saddam Hussein's late son-in-law."

* In a speech on 26 August 2002, Vice-President Dick Cheney said Kamel's story "should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection regime itself".

Hussein Kamel was not in the process of providing excuses for the Iraqi regime. Much of the interview is taken up with his criticisms of its mistakes: "They are only interested in themselves and not worried about economics or political state of the country. [...] I can state publicly I will work against the regime." (p.14). And yet, when it comes to prohibited weapons, Kamel is unequivocal: Iraq destroyed these weapons soon after the Gulf War.

The Significance of the Kamel Transcript



The above quotes from President Bush, Prime Minister Blair and Secretary Powell refer to material produced by Iraq before the 1991 Gulf War. The administration has cited various quantities of chemical and biological weapons on many other occasions -- weapons that Iraq produced but which remain unaccounted for. All of these claims refer to weapons produced before 1991. According to Kamel's transcript, Iraq destroyed all of these weapons in 1991.

Kamel's statement casts into new light the claims made by the Iraqi government that it destroyed its non-conventional weapons in the period immediately after the end of the Gulf War. This topic remains highly potent, with Hans Blix declaring that "[o]ne of three important questions before us today is how much might remain undeclared and intact from before 1991" (statement of 27 January 2003 to the Security Council). If Kamel is to be taken as seriously as the UK and US administrations have previously held him to be, then his claim that "[a]ll weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed" should be taken seriously.

-----------------------------------

This briefing was produced by Glen Rangwala. Thanks to Seth Ackerman of FAIR for his assistance in putting it together.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Apr 24th 2024, 05:04 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC