Informant admits that he lied about Iraq's WMD program

[Sheaf Saint]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war

 

As if we didn't already know, now it has been confirmed by the 'source' that he lied to the US/UK intelligence services.

 

Now it begs the question: were the people involved so incompetent that they failed to verify the intel that he gave them, or were the authorities so determined to carry out the invasion that they didn't feel the need to bother?

[mickn]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war

 

As if we didn't already know, now it has been confirmed by the 'source' that he lied to the US/UK intelligence services.

 

Now it begs the question: were the people involved so incompetent that they failed to verify the intel that he gave them, or were the authorities so determined to carry out the invasion that they didn't feel the need to bother?

 

Probably both if it involves us and the Yanks

[Verbal]

Such old news, this. The only new bit, as far as I can tell, is his confession that he lied - something which everyone else around seems to have known for donkey's. There's a a book about him, called Curveball (after his code name), and Oliver Stone is supposed to be making the movie.

[solentstars]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war

 

As if we didn't already know, now it has been confirmed by the 'source' that he lied to the US/UK intelligence services.

 

Now it begs the question: were the people involved so incompetent that they failed to verify the intel that he gave them, or were the authorities so determined to carry out the invasion that they didn't feel the need to bother?

 

old news its been known for ages

[Saintandy666]

Saddam Hussein did want to make it look like he had WMD's though.

[Verbal]

Saddam Hussein did want to make it look like he had WMD's though.

 

Which is one reason why curveball was so readily believed.

[Saintandy666]

Which is one reason why curveball was so readily believed.

 

Indeed.

 

I'm not saying in retrospect the decision is right, but you have to look at it in the context of the time which many people don't. It was an incredibly hard decision to make, but I genuinely believe Blair did fear for this countries security and the stability of the middle east(which has great effect on us). All the intelligence pointed towards it.

[Sheaf Saint]

Indeed.

 

I'm not saying in retrospect the decision is right, but you have to look at it in the context of the time which many people don't. It was an incredibly hard decision to make, but I genuinely believe Blair did fear for this countries security and the stability of the middle east(which has great effect on us). All the intelligence pointed towards it.

 

When you say 'all the intelligence', do you mean 'one guy with a grudge against Saddam'?

[Saintandy666]

When you say 'all the intelligence', do you mean 'one guy with a grudge against Saddam'?

 

No, I mean Saddam's actions, aerial photographs and other intelligence we do not know about.

[scotty]

No, I mean Saddam's actions, aerial photographs and other intelligence we do not know about.

 

Iraq spent weeks putting together a file on their weapons stock, and the coalition dismissed it out of hand as soon as it was presented. Saddam did not try to suggest he had WMD, for the simple and obvious reason that WMD was the excuse being used for the impending invasion. They did not have them, and if they had we would have known about it as Iraq had been heavily monitored since the first gulf war. We knew more about Iraq's weapons capability than of any other country in the region.

 

The Iraq invasion was carried out because the US wanted to do it for their own reasons. We went along with it because Blair wanted to be seen to be backing them. I am convinced that David Kelly and Robin Cook were absolutely correct when they said that our government were fully aware that Iraq posed us no threat from WMDs as they did not have any.

[Saintandy666]

Iraq spent weeks putting together a file on their weapons stock, and the coalition dismissed it out of hand as soon as it was presented. Saddam did not try to suggest he had WMD, for the simple and obvious reason that WMD was the excuse being used for the impending invasion. They did not have them, and if they had we would have known about it as Iraq had been heavily monitored since the first gulf war. We knew more about Iraq's weapons capability than of any other country in the region.

 

The Iraq invasion was carried out because the US wanted to do it for their own reasons. We went along with it because Blair wanted to be seen to be backing them. I am convinced that David Kelly and Robin Cook were absolutely correct when they said that our government were fully aware that Iraq posed us no threat from WMDs as they did not have any.

 

No, Saddam Hussein made it look like he had weapons for years to elevate his position of power in the middle east above what it otherwise would have been.

 

Let us remember he did have weapons in the 90's... he used chemical weapons in a genocide against his own people.

[aintforever]

Indeed.

 

I'm not saying in retrospect the decision is right, but you have to look at it in the context of the time which many people don't. It was an incredibly hard decision to make, but I genuinely believe Blair did fear for this countries security and the stability of the middle east(which has great effect on us). All the intelligence pointed towards it.

 

Rubbish, I definitely remember Saddam repeatedly saying he didn't have any WMDs.

[scotty]

No, Saddam Hussein made it look like he had weapons for years to elevate his position of power in the middle east above what it otherwise would have been.

 

Let us remember he did have weapons in the 90's... he used chemical weapons in a genocide against his own people.

 

And with the Americans having deliberately left him in power after the first gulf war, they/we closely monitored what their weapons capability was subsequently. Dont kid yourself, we knew he had no WMD. That was never the real reason for the invasion.

[Verbal]

No, Saddam Hussein made it look like he had weapons for years to elevate his position of power in the middle east above what it otherwise would have been.

 

Let us remember he did have weapons in the 90's... he used chemical weapons in a genocide against his own people.

 

It was more ambiguous than that I think. Saddam was constantly being convinced by his underlings that they had as much chemical armoury has they had in the 80s and early 90s (when they used it against Iranians and Kurds). No one wanted to tell him the cupboard was bare - so spun all these stories. At the same time, he was denying having any chemical capability - unaware he was telling the truth!

[Jonnyboy]

Iraq spent weeks putting together a file on their weapons stock, and the coalition dismissed it out of hand as soon as it was presented. Saddam did not try to suggest he had WMD, for the simple and obvious reason that WMD was the excuse being used for the impending invasion. They did not have them, and if they had we would have known about it as Iraq had been heavily monitored since the first gulf war. We knew more about Iraq's weapons capability than of any other country in the region.

 

The Iraq invasion was carried out because the US wanted to do it for their own reasons. We went along with it because Blair wanted to be seen to be backing them. I am convinced that David Kelly and Robin Cook were absolutely correct when they said that our government were fully aware that Iraq posed us no threat from WMDs as they did not have any.

 

This 100%

 

It was frickin obvious to any normal person. You had professional, expert, neutral UN observers (Hans Blix, David Kelly etc) all saying there was no threat. Kelly even topped himself FFS from the guilt of the impending carnage.

 

Interesting how (hopefully) democracy is arising through a popular uprising in an Arab country at the moment. Shame Iraq wasnt allowe to do this over time...

[anothersaintinsouthsea]

SaintAndy666 knew better than Hans Blix!

[Saint in Paradise]

Actually a lot of people now think that Mr Kelly didn't kill himself, he was murdered by a person or

persons unknown. I can't be bothered to link to the names and the stories but there are lots.

[Saintandy666]

SaintAndy666 knew better than Hans Blix!

 

Of course I did.

[Wade Garrett]

This is old news. We all know it was about oil, and that the Government lied.

[Saintandy666]

This is old news. We all know it was about oil, and that the Government lied.

 

Yes, of course. The USA government spent trillions of dollars so as to secure much less valuable oil for private american companies like BP (DERP DERP DERP). The oil which will run out in 50 or so years anyway. Yes, it was ALL about the oil, despite the fact Saddam would sell to us anyway.

[Sheaf Saint]

Yes, of course. The USA government spent trillions of dollars so as to secure much less valuable oil for private american companies like BP (DERP DERP DERP). The oil which will run out in 50 or so years anyway. Yes, it was ALL about the oil, despite the fact Saddam would sell to us anyway.

 

He wasn't playing the game the way the Americans wanted it played though. Unlike every other oil-producing nation (except Venezuala who have also felt the brunt of US foreign policy as a result), he was insisting on being paid in euros instead of dollars.

[Pancake]

Kelly even topped himself FFS from the guilt of the impending carnage.

 

Now thats another can of worms...

[Wurzel]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/15/defector-admits-wmd-lies-iraq-war

 

As if we didn't already know, now it has been confirmed by the 'source' that he lied to the US/UK intelligence services.

 

 

2 can play at that game - we'll just say we never really invaded, the news footage was all done in a studio just like the moon landings.

[scotty]

2 can play at that game - we'll just say we never really invaded, the news footage was all done in a studio just like the moon landings.

 

technically, that is a possibility.

 

 

on second thoughts, couldnt we just do what we always used to and blame the russians?

[mack rill]

The imaginary WMDs gave baby Bush the excuse to try and FIX the phux-Parr that daddy Bush left after promising 10,0000 odd chuckle Bunny's (stick with us and Weill get shot of the big ogre Saddam,) Instead once they joined in Daddy Bush phuxed off back to uncle Sam's and left them in the sh*ter, A few massed graves latter reveled what happened to em,

Baby Bush and sooty should be tried in a Kangaroo court and Shot!

[Verbal]

The imaginary WMDs gave baby Bush the excuse to try and FIX the phux-Parr that daddy Bush left after promising 10,0000 odd chuckle Bunny's (stick with us and Weill get shot of the big ogre Saddam,) Instead once they joined in Daddy Bush phuxed off back to uncle Sam's and left them in the sh*ter, A few massed graves latter reveled what happened to em,

Baby Bush and sooty should be tried in a Kangaroo court and Shot!

 

Run that by me again.

[dubai_phil]

The imaginary WMDs gave baby Bush the excuse to try and FIX the phux-Parr that daddy Bush left after promising 10,0000 odd chuckle Bunny's (stick with us and Weill get shot of the big ogre Saddam,) Instead once they joined in Daddy Bush phuxed off back to uncle Sam's and left them in the sh*ter, A few massed graves latter reveled what happened to em,

Baby Bush and sooty should be tried in a Kangaroo court and Shot!

 

Remarkably well put, it's so hard typing with the webbed hands

 

Meanwhile, out of interest, just how many people got sacked for this whole malarky? Oh sorry stupid question.

[aintforever]

Yes, of course. The USA government spent trillions of dollars so as to secure much less valuable oil for private american companies like BP (DERP DERP DERP). The oil which will run out in 50 or so years anyway. Yes, it was ALL about the oil, despite the fact Saddam would sell to us anyway.

 

Because Iraq’s proven oil reserves of about 112 billion barrels, the world’s second largest behind Saudi Arabia, couldn't possibly be motivation.

[Jonnyboy]

Actually a lot of people now think that Mr Kelly didn't kill himself, he was murdered by a person or

persons unknown. I can't be bothered to link to the names and the stories but there are lots.

 

Ive read all that, they recently declassified a bunch of files to try to put the conspiracy theories to bed

[Saintandy666]

He wasn't playing the game the way the Americans wanted it played though. Unlike every other oil-producing nation (except Venezuala who have also felt the brunt of US foreign policy as a result), he was insisting on being paid in euros instead of dollars.

 

So how does it make economical sense to spend trillions of dollars to save a few billion for US and non-US *private* companies?

[scotty]

Ive read all that, they recently declassified a bunch of files to try to put the conspiracy theories to bed

 

I dont suppose they chose which ones to declassify, did they. Any more than they cherrypicked which intelligence to publish/omit in the dodgy dossier either, it was all published whether or not it supported the case for invasion......

[Wade Garrett]

Yes, of course. The USA government spent trillions of dollars so as to secure much less valuable oil for private american companies like BP (DERP DERP DERP). The oil which will run out in 50 or so years anyway. Yes, it was ALL about the oil, despite the fact Saddam would sell to us anyway.

 

I take it you don't agree with me, you patronising c*nt.

[Saintandy666]

I take it you don't agree with me, you patronising c*nt.

 

:'( Why can't we all just... be... friends...????

[Sheaf Saint]

So how does it make economical sense to spend trillions of dollars to save a few billion for US and non-US *private* companies?

 

It doesn't I guess. But then the oil was only part of the prize. Look how many squillions of dollars Haliburton made out of the re-building contracts.

 

The thing is though Andy, we now know that the whole WMD thing was a smoksecreen. We know that the people responsible for planning and carrying out this 'intervention' (as they like to dress it up as) were fully aware that they didn't exist. So there was obviously another more important motivation. So if it wasn't WMD, and it wasn't about gaining control of the world's second largest oil reserve, then what was it really about?

 

Revenge for taunting Daddy and threatening to kill him during Desert Storm? Possible I suppose. Maybe Bush jnr saw his father's failure to remove him as a mistake and felt it his duty to rectify it.

 

Liberating the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator? Don't even try and convince me of that one. What did Bush and Blair care about the ordinary people of Iraq? F***-all that's what. The US and UK were allies of Saddam in the eighties when he famously gassed those Kurds, and both countries are currently supporting much more despotic regimes around the world because it suits their business interests. Blair himself took British forces into action in Kosovo on the basis of 'preventing a humanitarian disaster', while at the same time turning a blind eye to the atrocities being carried out in East Timor by the Indonesian government under Suharto; using weapons and equipment supplied to them by British companies.

 

Creating stability and democracy in the middle east? Well they couldn't have done a worse job if that was the objective. The USA doesn't even have a proper democracy itself, how the hell did they expect to implement it in a country that has for thousands of years been a tribal system like Afghanistan?

 

They tried to fool the public into thinking that Saddam was aiding Al-Qaeda and use that as justification, but everyone knew that was complete nonsense from the start. There was never a single shred of intelligence confirming that Al-Qaeda had been operating in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Ironically, it was our very presence in Iraq that prompted thousands of jihadi fighters to cross the border and wage the holy war against the infidels, so all we achieved there was to create their presence that didn't previously exist. Brilliant job!

[Saintandy666]

It doesn't I guess. But then the oil was only part of the prize. Look how many squillions of dollars Haliburton made out of the re-building contracts.

 

The thing is though Andy, we now know that the whole WMD thing was a smoksecreen. We know that the people responsible for planning and carrying out this 'intervention' (as they like to dress it up as) were fully aware that they didn't exist. So there was obviously another more important motivation. So if it wasn't WMD, and it wasn't about gaining control of the world's second largest oil reserve, then what was it really about?

 

Revenge for taunting Daddy and threatening to kill him during Desert Storm? Possible I suppose. Maybe Bush jnr saw his father's failure to remove him as a mistake and felt it his duty to rectify it.

 

Liberating the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator? Don't even try and convince me of that one. What did Bush and Blair care about the ordinary people of Iraq? F***-all that's what. The US and UK were allies of Saddam in the eighties when he famously gassed those Kurds, and both countries are currently supporting much more despotic regimes around the world because it suits their business interests. Blair himself took British forces into action in Kosovo on the basis of 'preventing a humanitarian disaster', while at the same time turning a blind eye to the atrocities being carried out in East Timor by the Indonesian government under Suharto; using weapons and equipment supplied to them by British companies.

 

Creating stability and democracy in the middle east? Well they couldn't have done a worse job if that was the objective. The USA doesn't even have a proper democracy itself, how the hell did they expect to implement it in a country that has for thousands of years been a tribal system like Afghanistan?

 

They tried to fool the public into thinking that Saddam was aiding Al-Qaeda and use that as justification, but everyone knew that was complete nonsense from the start. There was never a single shred of intelligence confirming that Al-Qaeda had been operating in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Ironically, it was our very presence in Iraq that prompted thousands of jihadi fighters to cross the border and wage the holy war against the infidels, so all we achieved there was to create their presence that didn't previously exist. Brilliant job!

 

Really good post and I'm glad you are putting in the time to respond like this. Sorry if my post doesn't live up to that in length, only I am slightly intoxicated.

 

I don't think it was about rebuilding contracts or oil for private companies, the USA government and economy won't see barely a penny of all this money and the benefits it'll bring to the companies involved. If it was about oil it was nothing to do with the profit of oil, that is for sure.

 

I really think that:

 

A. They believed Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the Middle East region and if the middle east is put into major instability that will affect us all greatly.

B. They believed Saddam Hussein's Iraq had WMD's.

[Jonnyboy]

Really good post and I'm glad you are putting in the time to respond like this. Sorry if my post doesn't live up to that in length, only I am slightly intoxicated.

 

I don't think it was about rebuilding contracts or oil for private companies, the USA government and economy won't see barely a penny of all this money and the benefits it'll bring to the companies involved. If it was about oil it was nothing to do with the profit of oil, that is for sure.

 

I really think that:

 

A. They believed Saddam Hussein posed a threat to the Middle East region and if the middle east is put into major instability that will affect us all greatly.

B. They believed Saddam Hussein's Iraq had WMD's.

 

then you sir are a frickin idiot

[Saintandy666]

then you sir are a frickin idiot

 

Constructive post. Many people think what I think, people much cleverer than you or me.

[Jonnyboy]

Constructive post. Many people think what I think, people much cleverer than you or me.

 

Oh go hang out with Dune

[rocknrollman no2]

It doesn't I guess. But then the oil was only part of the prize. Look how many squillions of dollars Haliburton made out of the re-building contracts.

 

The thing is though Andy, we now know that the whole WMD thing was a smoksecreen. We know that the people responsible for planning and carrying out this 'intervention' (as they like to dress it up as) were fully aware that they didn't exist. So there was obviously another more important motivation. So if it wasn't WMD, and it wasn't about gaining control of the world's second largest oil reserve, then what was it really about?

 

Revenge for taunting Daddy and threatening to kill him during Desert Storm? Possible I suppose. Maybe Bush jnr saw his father's failure to remove him as a mistake and felt it his duty to rectify it.

 

Liberating the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator? Don't even try and convince me of that one. What did Bush and Blair care about the ordinary people of Iraq? F***-all that's what. The US and UK were allies of Saddam in the eighties when he famously gassed those Kurds, and both countries are currently supporting much more despotic regimes around the world because it suits their business interests. Blair himself took British forces into action in Kosovo on the basis of 'preventing a humanitarian disaster', while at the same time turning a blind eye to the atrocities being carried out in East Timor by the Indonesian government under Suharto; using weapons and equipment supplied to them by British companies.

 

Creating stability and democracy in the middle east? Well they couldn't have done a worse job if that was the objective. The USA doesn't even have a proper democracy itself, how the hell did they expect to implement it in a country that has for thousands of years been a tribal system like Afghanistan?

 

They tried to fool the public into thinking that Saddam was aiding Al-Qaeda and use that as justification, but everyone knew that was complete nonsense from the start. There was never a single shred of intelligence confirming that Al-Qaeda had been operating in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Ironically, it was our very presence in Iraq that prompted thousands of jihadi fighters to cross the border and wage the holy war against the infidels, so all we achieved there was to create their presence that didn't previously exist. Brilliant job!

 

Excellent post.

Lets not forget we supplied arms to Iraq when they fought an eight year war with Iran.Saddam was always seen as a friend to the west and America spent a lot of time and money supporting him throughout the 1980s.

I wonder if America and Britain would have invaded Iraq if the twin towers had not been destroyed ?

[aintforever]

 

I don't think it was about rebuilding contracts or oil for private companies, the USA government and economy won't see barely a penny of all this money and the benefits it'll bring to the companies involved. If it was about oil it was nothing to do with the profit of oil, that is for sure.

 

The USA economy is all about the private companies, most of the "trillions spent" as you put it would go to the American arms industry. Companies like Blackwater providing security are making billions - there are more private security personel in Iraq than American troops. The big corporations were the ones pulling the strings - the oil contracts were worth billions and Bush was up to his nuts in the oil industry.

 

Another important thing is not just who profits from the oil but who CONTROLS the supply of oil. Oil worldwide is only ever sold in dollars so the US economy is effected by rises and falls in the price which is determined by supply.

 

Saddam Hussein was a nasty dictator - but so is half the middle east so that can't be an excuse.

 

Saddam Hussein sponsored terrorism in Palestine - definitely a motivation for the US to kick his ass but no excuse to kill hundreds of thousands.

 

The Iraqi military barely had a working tank thanks to the years of sanctions, the idea that they had working WMDs is laughable, the US and UK knew 100% there were none IMO. A country HAVING WMDs has never been an excuse to invade, the opposite is true - do you really think they would have attacked if Iraq had the capability to gas half of Tel Aviv?

[scotty]

It doesn't I guess. But then the oil was only part of the prize. Look how many squillions of dollars Haliburton made out of the re-building contracts.

 

The thing is though Andy, we now know that the whole WMD thing was a smoksecreen. We know that the people responsible for planning and carrying out this 'intervention' (as they like to dress it up as) were fully aware that they didn't exist. So there was obviously another more important motivation. So if it wasn't WMD, and it wasn't about gaining control of the world's second largest oil reserve, then what was it really about?

 

Revenge for taunting Daddy and threatening to kill him during Desert Storm? Possible I suppose. Maybe Bush jnr saw his father's failure to remove him as a mistake and felt it his duty to rectify it.

 

Liberating the Iraqi people from a ruthless dictator? Don't even try and convince me of that one. What did Bush and Blair care about the ordinary people of Iraq? F***-all that's what. The US and UK were allies of Saddam in the eighties when he famously gassed those Kurds, and both countries are currently supporting much more despotic regimes around the world because it suits their business interests. Blair himself took British forces into action in Kosovo on the basis of 'preventing a humanitarian disaster', while at the same time turning a blind eye to the atrocities being carried out in East Timor by the Indonesian government under Suharto; using weapons and equipment supplied to them by British companies.

 

Creating stability and democracy in the middle east? Well they couldn't have done a worse job if that was the objective. The USA doesn't even have a proper democracy itself, how the hell did they expect to implement it in a country that has for thousands of years been a tribal system like Afghanistan?

 

They tried to fool the public into thinking that Saddam was aiding Al-Qaeda and use that as justification, but everyone knew that was complete nonsense from the start. There was never a single shred of intelligence confirming that Al-Qaeda had been operating in Iraq prior to the 2003 invasion. Ironically, it was our very presence in Iraq that prompted thousands of jihadi fighters to cross the border and wage the holy war against the infidels, so all we achieved there was to create their presence that didn't previously exist. Brilliant job!

 

very good post, couple of points tho. I dont think there was a payback motive for the way saddam taunted bush senior. At the end of the first gulf war, they could have easily killed him and nobody would have criticised them for it, after all saddam had at that stage actually invaded a neighbouring state. Bush sr left saddam in place deliberately as a matter of policy, for what reasons I dont know.

 

Secondly, agree wholeheartedly on the "ruthless dictator who has to be got rid of" point, just to add if we or the americans were genuinely interested in that, why did we do precisely f*ck all about mugabe?

 

and third, the point about talking up Iraqs supposed al quaeda involvement, its worth noting that in the run-up to the invasion, a poll for the bbc found that 55% of americans believed that saddam hussein and Iraq were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Thats more than half the american population believing an obvious and direct lie. Why did they believe that?

[Sheaf Saint]

and third, the point about talking up Iraqs supposed al quaeda involvement, its worth noting that in the run-up to the invasion, a poll for the bbc found that 55% of americans believed that saddam hussein and Iraq were responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Thats more than half the american population believing an obvious and direct lie. Why did they believe that?

 

Because most Americans are gullible enough to believe anything Fox News tells them, sadly.

[scotty]

Because most Americans are gullible enough to believe anything Fox News tells them, sadly.

 

thats the point. They were told it. And it was pure, unmitigated boll*cks, but they still believed it.

[Saintandy666]

Oh go hang out with Dune

 

I don't appreciate your replies. They are hardly part of a constructive debate.

[Jonnyboy]

I don't appreciate your replies. They are hardly part of a constructive debate.

 

diddums

[Saintandy666]

diddums

 

Constructive.

[Jonnyboy]

Constructive.

 

PM me with a constructive debate.