13 februari 2006
mail dit artikel
Dit artikel is deel van de serie: Waarheid bij Irakoorlog
- 2 ]
Truth about Iraq war slowly becomes clear - 2
By Daan de Wit
The Dutch in the original article has been translated into English by Ben Kearney.
While The Netherlands sets out for Afghanistan and preparations
for a war against Iran are underway, the original rationale for the
Iraq war continues to disintegrate. This article is a follow up to part
1, which appeared almost one year ago. In this article we highlight 3
new examples of deception used in the build up to the Iraq war.
4. The Times of London reports
about a false flag operation which was on the mind of U.S. president
George Bush: 'PRESIDENT BUSH had plans to lure Saddam Hussein into war
by flying an aircraft over Iraq painted in UN colours in the hope he
would shoot it down, a book reveals. Mr Bush told Tony Blair of the
extraordinary plan during a meeting in the White House on January 31,
2003, six weeks before the war started [...]. “The US was thinking of
flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted
in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach,” the
book reports Mr Bush telling Mr Blair at the meeting.' The newspaper is
referring to the update of a book cited earlier by DaanSpeak entitled Lawless World by Phillipe Sands,
human rights lawyer and Professor of Law. 'The president [Bush] makes
it clear, that there will be war on Saddam regardless whether the U.N.
passes a further resolution. The prime minister replies, he is "solidly
with the president"', according to Channel Four News in a news item in which Sands is also interviewed.
Bush's plan to paint over an airplane bears a strong resemblance to
another planned false flag operation known as Operation Northwoods (see
a plan that may have formed the basis for what took place on September
11th, 2001. Read about the possibility of remote controlled airplanes
on september 11th in this article by DaanSpeak.
5. In an extensive article in Foreign Affairs, the magazine of the Council on Foreign Relations, the CIA's most important anti-terrorism expert, Paul R. Pillar,
writes that 'the administration "went to war without requesting -- and
evidently without being influenced by -- any strategic-level
intelligence assessments on any aspect of Iraq"', reports
The Washington Post. '"It has become clear that official intelligence
was not relied on in making even the most significant national security
decisions, that intelligence was misused publicly to justify decisions
already made, that damaging ill will developed between [Bush]
policymakers and intelligence officers, and that the intelligence
community's own work was politicized," Pillar wrote. [...] Pillar,
retired after 28 years at the CIA, was an influential behind-the-scenes
player and was considered the agency's leading counterterrorism
analyst. By the end of his career, he was responsible for coordinating
assessments on Iraq from all 15 agencies in the intelligence community.
He is now a professor in security studies at Georgetown University.'
The Washington Post: 'Pillar's critique is one of the most severe
indictments of White House actions by a former Bush official since
Richard C. Clarke, a former National Security Council staff member,
went public with his criticism of the administration's handling of the
Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and its failure to deal with the terrorist
threat beforehand.' In his article Pillar describes '[...] the real
problem: intelligence on Iraqi weapons programs did not drive its
decision to go to war'. Pillar went on to make adept use of this
argument. He justifiably makes the comparison to what turned out to be
the instigation for the Vietnam War - the Gulf of Tonkin incident - in
which faulty intelligence was also used to get the U.S. into a war.
Read the article on this subject DaanSpeak wrote for the Dutch magazine de Humanist. Pillar: 'The administration used intelligence not to inform decision-making, but to justify a decision already made.''
It's also clear from his article that in addition to the British Operation Rockingham (see this DaanSpeak-article)
and the American intelligence unit OSP -Donald Rumsfeld's and Paul
Wolfowitz's Office of Special Plans- yet another ad hoc
agency-within-an-agency was set up (Read all about the OSP under the
head line OSP, de geheime dienst van Rumsfeld en Wolfowitz in this article
by DaanSpeak). Pillar: 'The administration's rejection of the
intelligence community's judgments became especially clear with the
formation of a special Pentagon unit, the Policy Counterterrorism
Evaluation Group. The unit, which reported to Undersecretary of Defense
Douglas Feith, was dedicated to finding every possible link between
Saddam and al Qaeda, and its briefings accused the intelligence
community of faulty analysis for failing to see the supposed alliance.'
That link wasn't there, as witnessed by Pillar, but the impression had
to be given that it existed in order to mislead the public. Once the
damage was done, Bush simply denied the link.
The (as of now former) chief-of-staff to Dick Cheney and advisor for
National Security affairs to George Bush, I. 'Scooter' Libby, has
testified that his 'superiors' authorized him to leak a secret
intelligence report to the media, as reported by the LA Times. National Journal knows what is meant by 'superiors' and writes:
'According to sources with firsthand knowledge, Cheney authorized Libby
to release additional classified information, including details of the
NIE, to defend the administration's use of prewar intelligence in
making the case for war.' Journalist Robert Novak then published an article in which he divulged Valerie Plame's identity as a CIA agent.
One of the lies in the run-up to the Iraq war concerned the alleged
purchase by the Iraqis of nuclear material in Niger (for details see
this DaanSpeak-article). Following a trip to Niger, former American ambassador Joseph C. Wilson revealed in an article
that the Bush administration distorted the facts about the Saddam-Niger
connection. In that same month, his wife Valerie Plame was exposed as a
CIA agent. It is against U.S. law to disclose the identity of a CIA
Meld je aan voor de gratis mailing list
9 september 2013
Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 4
Wie onder de oppervlakte kijkt, ziet dat Syrië onder vuur ligt vanwege de belangen van de betrokken partijen. 'Syrië' gaat over macht, geld, invloed en energie.
8 september 2013
Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - 3
Wie vorm en inhoud scheidt, ziet dat de strijd om Syrië vooral niet gaat over waar het over lijkt te gaan. De vorm maskeert de inhoud. Syrië en Iran zijn stukken op een geopolitiek schaakbord.
7 september 2013
Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 2
Bij grote militaire conflicten die aanzienlijke humantaire en economische gevolgen kunnen hebben, is het goed te kijken naar de belangen van de betrokken partijen en naar de rol van de media bij de verslaggeving van de feiten.
6 september 2013
Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 1
Aan de oppervlakte is het duidelijk: de VS willen Syrië bevrijden van een wrede dictator die zijn bevolking met gifgas bestookt. Onder de oppervlakte is er iets heel anders aan de hand.
1 april 2013
Albert Spits: Creëer je eigen financiële veiligheid
Spits beschrijft hoe de euro richting de uitgang gaat en dat je intussen maar beter waarde voor je geld kunt kiezen. Hij raadt iedereen aan zich voor te bereiden op een systeemkrach.