PDA

View Full Version : US officials knew in May Iraq possessed no WMD



Pink Spider
02-02-2004, 12:07 AM
US officials knew in May Iraq possessed no WMD

Blair comes under pressure as Americans admit it was widely known that Saddam had no chemical arsenal

Peter Beaumont, Gaby Hinsliff and Paul Harris

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5613.htm

Sunday February 1, 2004: (The Observer) Senior American officials concluded at the beginning of last May that there were no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq, The Observer has learnt.
Intelligence sources, policy makers and weapons inspectors familiar with the details of the hunt for WMD told The Observer it was widely known that Iraq had no WMD within three weeks of Baghdad falling, despite the assertions of senior Bush administration figures and the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.

The new revelation came as White House sources indicated that President George Bush was considering establishing an investigation into the intelligence, despite rejecting an inquiry the previous day.

The disclosure that US military survey teams sent to visit suspected sites of WMD, and intelligence interviews with Iraqi scientists and officials, had concluded so quickly that no major weapons or facilities would be found is certain to produce serious new embarrassment on both sides of the Atlantic.

According to the time-line provided by the US sources, it would mean that Number 10 would have been aware of the US doubts that weapons would be found before the outbreak of the feud between Number 10 and Andrew Gilligan, and before the exposure of Dr David Kelly as Gilligan's source for his claims that the September dossier had been 'sexed up' to exaggerate the Iraqi threat.

It would suggest too that some officials who defended the 24 September dossier in evidence before the Hutton inquiry did so in the knowledge that the pre-war intelligence was probably wrong. Indeed, comments from a senior Washington official first casting serious doubt on the existence of WMD were put to Downing Street by The Observer - and rejected - as early as 3 May.

Among those interviewed by The Observer was a very senior US intelligence official serving during the war against Iraq with an intimate knowledge of the search for Iraq's WMD.

'We had enough evidence at the beginning of May to start asking, "where did we go wrong?",' he said last week. 'We had already made the judgment that something very wrong had happened [in May] and our confidence was shaken to its foundations.'

The source, a career intelligence official who spoke on condition of anonymity, was also scathing about the massive scale of the failure of intelligence over Iraq both in the US and among its foreign allies - alleging that the intelligence community had effectively suppressed dissenting views and intelligence.

The claim is confirmed by other sources, as well as figures like David Albright, a former UN nuclear inspector with close contacts in both the world of weapons inspection and intelligence.

'It was known in May,' Albright said last week, 'that no one was going to find large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons. The only people who did not know that fact was the public.'

The new disclosure follows the claims last week by Dr David Kay, the former head of the Iraq Survey Group, a hawk who believed Iraq retained prohibited weapons, that he now believed that the alleged stockpiles 'had never existed'.

It also comes as the House and Senate intelligence committees, which have been hearing evidence on why no weapons have been found, prepare to publish their reports this month.

Although it is expected that they will conclude that there was no political interference in the intelligence process, as some critics have alleged, the reports are expected to be damning about the quality of the intelligence that led to war.

The revelation is likely to lead to increased pressure both in Britain and the United States for an inquiry into the intelligence marshalled in favour of war.

In recent weeks Bush has come under concerted pressure over the issue, with Democratic presidential candidates accusing both him and Vice-President Dick Cheney of manipulating pre-war intelligence to make the case for invasion.

White House sources said that President Bush is considering the formation of an independent panel to investigate pre-war intelligence on Iraq that he used to justify going to war.

Aides are discussing it with congressional officials, sources familiar with the discussions said last night.

Bush had rejected an independent investigation amid White House fears of a political witch-hunt by Democrats hoping to unseat him in elections this year, but began in recent days to reconsider the position.

'I want the American people to know that I, too, want to know the facts,' Bush told reporters on Friday.

The sources, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said a range of options for such a panel was being explored and that an agreement was hoped for soon.

The White House would not comment.

Arizona Republican Senator John McCain broke party ranks to join Democratic demands for an independent probe into how US intelligence got it wrong, given the failure by searchers to find weapons of mass destruction.

Viking
02-02-2004, 01:01 AM
I still think it's all in Syria now.

Cathedral
02-02-2004, 01:25 AM
Oh jeeze, Ya know it is no surprise to me why foreigners hate us so much. Half of our country wants to end peoples pain and suffering while the other half bitches that we did.

That has to be a comforting thought to those we have liberated.

I don't give a damn about the WMD issue, those people needed our help and they got it.

It is stories like these that makes me lean towards re-electing Bush.
I don't really know if i like him at this point but he is the best option considering the alternatives.

ELVIS
02-02-2004, 02:01 AM
I usually agree with most of what you say Cat.. but the Iraqi people were not liberated...

That's a crock...

:elvis:

Cathedral
02-02-2004, 02:28 AM
Splain?

Viking
02-02-2004, 03:27 AM
Yeah - I have my issues with Bush, but if Dean or Kerry are the answer, it must be a stupid fucking question to begin with. :D :D :D

Cathedral
02-02-2004, 08:34 AM
You can say that again, and again, and again....Until the rest of the country hears you.

Pink Spider
02-02-2004, 12:19 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral
Splain?

There are no elections, a puppet government, no chance of Kurdish autonomy, hostility from the Shiites, rising US and civilian deaths (and this is not mainly from Ba'ath party remnants) and complete loss of economic control over their economy. Oh, and the impending civil war, can't leave that out.

Our government never said it was over "liberation". The supposed "threat of WMD", which now we see was false like everything else they say, just isn't there. No big surprise.

In the real world, governments don't do anything productive without a profit motive. Do you honestly believe that they would have been "liberated" without the oil reserves?

Cathedral
02-02-2004, 12:36 PM
I must be a tree huggin mo fo because i don't give a damn about the oil or WMD.
I care about humans and supporting an end to their torment.

If only Van Halen thought that way about their fans, lol.

Pink Spider
02-02-2004, 12:49 PM
I care too. However, I don't think another tormenter can end torment. Fact: The US government has killed more people with WMD than Saddam could ever dream of.



And here comes the spin...

knuckleboner
02-02-2004, 02:26 PM
Originally posted by Cathedral

I don't give a damn about the WMD issue, those people needed our help and they got it.



so you're in favor of us going to war with every country that oppresses its people? quite a bit of african countries to throw in, in addition to north korea, china, and much of the middle east.

to be honest, i'm not 100% against this. the bleeding heart in me doesn't like when ANYONE is suffering.

however, i don't think our foreign policy is going to change to where we're attacking every oppressive regime in the world. in which case, while i'm happy for the iraqis, who WILL be better off in the long run, i don't think our decision to go to war at the time was the proper one.



though, i did agree with this:


The disclosure that US military survey teams sent to visit suspected sites of WMD, and intelligence interviews with Iraqi scientists and officials, had concluded so quickly that no major weapons or facilities would be found is certain to produce serious new embarrassment on both sides of the Atlantic.

no shit it's embarrassing for us. if we thought that it would take only 3 weeks to conclude that there were no WMD in all of iraq, then we truly are stupid.

John Ashcroft
02-03-2004, 08:11 AM
Originally posted by Pink Spider
I care too. However, I don't think another tormenter can end torment. Fact: The US government has killed more people with WMD than Saddam could ever dream of.



And here comes the spin...

Yeah, we suck. How can you stand to live here?

Pink Spider
02-03-2004, 11:30 AM
Originally posted by John Ashcroft
Yeah, we suck. How can you stand to live here?

Like Sesh pointed out when he owned you, you're not part of the "we". :)

John Ashcroft
02-03-2004, 12:54 PM
Touche'

But still, does the U.S. do anything remotely right in your opinion?