The source Duelfer didn't quote

[acmavm]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1323424,00.html

The head of the Iraq Survey Group knows regime change was the aim

Scott Ritter
Saturday October 9, 2004
The Guardian

<snip>

During this week of American election debates, Charles Duelfer, the former deputy executive chairman of the UN weapons inspectors and current head of the CIA's Iraq Survey Group, delivered to Congress his much-anticipated report on Iraq's WMD capabilities. Among his controversial conclusions is that, contrary to pre-war assertions by both the George Bush administration and Tony Blair's government, Iraq had neither stockpiles of WMD nor dedicated programmes for the manufacture of WMD. Duelfer's report did note that Iraq maintained so-called "dual-use" facilities (those with legitimate civilian and/or military functions, but which could be configured for proscribed use), but his ISG has found no evidence that any such conversion had taken place.

One would expect the ISG's conclusions to take the wind out of the sails of those who repeat the mantra that Iraq was a grave and growing threat. But Duelfer has provided a convenient escape from such criticism, by concluding that Saddam Hussein in fact fully intended to convert his "dual use" factories into WMD production facilities once UN weapons inspectors left. In one fell swoop, Duelfer has provided the ideal cover for the justification of the war.

<snip>

Charles Duelfer has to date provided no documentation to back up his assertion regarding Saddam's "intent". Nor has he produced any confession from Saddam Hussein or any senior Iraqi official regarding the same. What has been offered is a compilation of hearsay and conjecture linked to unnamed sources whose identities remain shrouded in secrecy.

<snip>

The mission of this intelligence unit was to discern the true intent of the UN weapons inspectors. Conventional thinking would hold that this was being done so that Iraq might better hide its WMD stockpiles. The Iraqi officer has long denied this, stating that instead his job was to find out why the UN refused to accept the Iraqi version of events, and to determine if the UN weapons inspectors were operating inside Iraq for purposes other than the disarmament.

This officer claims to have intercepted conversations between Charles Duelfer, during the time he served as deputy executive chairman of the UN inspection teams, and senior US government officials, in New York and Baghdad, where a US agenda (supported by the British) for removing Saddam Hussein was discussed. I can confirm that such discussions frequently took place.

-MORE-

[teryang]

1. Duelfer's presentation in the Senate was sickening

...last week. The recipient of 900 million dollars of funding was a waffling dissimulator. His goal is the truth? I guess it was until the repuke world got wind of his findings. Warner, McCain et al put the spin on it. Duelfer spent most of his time justifying the war and supporting the assholes who wanted it. His only concession to Iraq was that Saddams reactions were perfectly understandable given the intimidation and threats that were being brought to bear. His circuituous logic justifies the neo con rationale that the weapons inspections could not be maintained successfully given the political environment. What was that environment? That the US was bulldozing the security council and its allies and amassing an invasion force on Iraq's doorstep. Continued weapons inspections were untenable in this context. Who's fault was that?

The establishment then rolled out David Boies and Bush's cousin on CSPAN justifying Bush's interpretation of evidence of mass destruction trying to imply that the war was started "in good faith." John Ellis said that not one government agency disagreed with the intelligence estimates that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction. If you're gonna lie....

Ritter is a voice of truth in a wilderness of lies.