Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

A R C H I V E S

War, Lies and WMDs

Madina Archives


Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board

War, Lies and WMDs
amatullah
05/26/03 at 11:56:31
Here is an interesting article on the Bush Administration's lies about
Iraq to mobilize U.S. public opinion to support a war.
http://www.lewrockwell.com/cummings/cummings22.html




                   War, Lies and WMDs

                            by Richard Cummings

           Is there an ethical distinction between lying to get your
country out of
           a war and lying to get your country into one? DeGaulle did
the former
           when, in a room filled with French officers, he proclaimed
"Algerie
           Francaise!" only to win power and pull out of a long, drawn
out
           colonial war that had left hundreds of thousands dead and
which had
           left France drained. The preponderance of the evidence
strongly
           suggests that Bush did the latter when he said the existence
of
           Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction was sufficient
reason
           to go to war with Iraq.

           Saddam Hussein was under an obligation to destroy his WMDs
           under the terms that ended the first Iraq war. To justify a
second Iraq
           war to implement a regime change, Bush needed to show that
           Saddam Hussein was in violation of those terms. His basic
instrument
           was United Nations Resolution 1441. In order to get a second

           resolution to satisfy his only real ally, Britain, he needed
evidence that
           the U.N. inspectors were failing and that WMDs did, indeed,
exist.

           To this end, Colin Powell trotted out photos of vehicles
that may or
           may not have been mobile weapons labs and produced
statements by
           defectors that the WMDs did exist. To this spectacle,
America and
           Britain added an obsolete dissertation by a graduate student

           published in an Israeli journal from an institution for
research in
           international affairs funded by Ronald Lauder, and forged
documents
           from Niger about Saddam’s attempts to purchase uranium for
making
           nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, Bush and his minions, including
Donald
           Rumsfeld and Condoleeza Rice kept repeating that the WMDs
were
           there, and that there were proven Iraqi ties to Al Queda,
the other
           justification for the war being that it was somehow related
to the war
           on terrorism. There is still no concrete proof of any
Iraq–Al Queda
           connection.

           An army officer, a key source in Kirkuk, reports that not
only is the
           MEK (Mujahaiden Badr Corps) not a pro-Al Queda operation
with
           ties to Iran, as the Bush administration asserted, it is
opposed to the
           regime in Iran and has been fighting Iranian para-military
units in
           Northern Iraq. Well equipped and superbly trained, the MEK
did
           fight with Saddam Hussein against Iran, but only for the
purpose of
           toppling the Mullahs. Most of the upper level MEK commanders
and
           a very significant minority of their troops are women, so
they hardly
           qualify as Fundamentalist terrorists. When Condoleeza Rice
said their
           base in Northern Iraq where they trained was tied to Al
Queda, she
           was lying through her teeth. She knew exactly who and what
they
           were. The Army source in Kirkuk reports that Rumsfeld is
           considering using them in an invasion of Iran, the way he
used the
           Northern Alliance in Afghanistan. The only difference is
that the MEK
           is a far superior fighting force. It is currently under U.S.
Army
           protection against the Iranian para-military units.

           Moreover, David Albright, president of the Institute for
Science and
           International Security and a former U.N. nuclear weapons
inspector
           in Iraq, has said, "We conclude that the large number of
deployed
           weapons the administration said that Iraq had was not nearly
as
           sophisticated as the administration claimed." And the
discovery of
           two possible mobile biological weapons labs falls far short
of the
           claims that Bush and members of his administration made
before the
           war.

           It was Bush, himself, who said in an October 2002 speech,
"We
           know that the regime has produced thousands of tons of
chemical
           agents, including mustard gas, sarin nerve gas, VX nerve
gas. And
           surveillance photos reveal that the regime is rebuilding
facilities that it
           had used to produce chemical and biological weapons?"

           The Bush administration also accused France and Germany with

           providing Iraq with technology in the form of precision
switches that
           could be used to detonate nuclear bombs. In actuality, as
The New
           York Times reported, the switches were presented as spare
parts for
           medical equipment and French authorities had immediately
barred the
           sale.

           Was this a Hitlerian use of the "big lie" technique ("Repeat
a lie often
           enough and the people will believe it. The bigger the lie,
the more it
           will be believed.") or did the Bush administration actually
believe that
           these things existed? And if it were a matter of lying, is
lying about
           war any better or worse than lying about sex? When Clinton
denied
           that he had a sexual relationship with Monica Lewinski, his
position
           was that there had been no penetration. Of course, he lied
under
           oath, which is not the same thing as lying in a speech or a
press
           conference. But if the lies add up to what can be called an
"abuse of
           power," it starts to become something much more troubling
than the
           inability to acknowledge that fellatio is indeed sexual, the
major
           difference being that in the case of abuse of power, it is
the country
           and its people who are violated. And abuse of power is abuse
of
           power, whatever the nutty professor, Leo Strauss, might have
said.

           But before one can answer any of these questions, one must
first
           understand that in Washington, knowledge is power. And since
the
           basic game in Washington is getting power, it follows that
having
           exclusive access to knowledge is the essential ingredient
for the
           accumulation of power. Which is why the director of the CIA
is
           always one of the most powerful figures in Washington. As8br>head of
           the CIA, he is also the DCI, the Director of Central
Intelligence,
           meaning that all intelligence flows through him. Such
agencies as the
           NSA, the DIA, Army Intelligence, Navy Intelligence, and any
other
           agency involved in intelligence, report to the DCI. As since
it is the
           head of the CIA who briefs the president every morning on
matters of
           intelligence, it is he who defines the arcane realm of
intelligence and its
           consequences to the chief executive, who is also commander
in chief
           of the armed forces.

           This is not a situation that sits well with Donald Rumsfeld,
the
           SECDEF, as he is known in the corridors of power. Rumsfeld
sees
           himself more as the Secretary of War (as that cabinet
position was
           once known) than as the Secretary of Defense. He is not into

           defending. He is into attacking. He sees his task as
defining who the
           enemy is and then obliterating him. It is inconceivable to
him that he
           must wait for the intelligence gathered by his own military
intelligence
           agencies to flow through George Tenet, who then interprets
it to the
           President, before he can act on it. It quickly became
obvious to him
           that he needed to bypass this bureaucratic hierarchy.

           To this end, he allowed Paul Wolfowitz, his Deputy
Secretary, to
           create the Pentagon’s Office of Special Plans, the "Cabal,"
as
           Seymour Hersh, writing in The New Yorker, has said they call

           themselves. Its director is Abram Shulsky, a disciple of Leo
Strauss
           (who said lying by the leader was OK), who reports to
           Under-Secretary of Defense, William Luti, a retired Navy
captain
           who was a strong supporter of war with Iraq. But with a
small staff
           and limited resources, it was not likely that this office
could, by itself,
           effectively find the WMDs. And while it did work to secure
the
           cooperation of the leaders of the Iraqi National Congress,
including
           its leader, Ahmed Chalabi, who had secured secret CIA
funding, it
           was not so much a collector of intelligence as a receiver of
it. The
           beauty of the Office of Special Plans, is that it does not
fit into the
           hierarchy that must report to the DCI. It reports directly
to Rumsfeld,
           himself. Rumsfeld needed a way to get intelligence in such
manner as
           to circumvent the DCI, so he, with his own direct access to
the
           President, could contradict what George Tenet was telling
him.

           Enter Science Application International Corporation (SAIC),
the
           world’s largest private "Information-Technology" ("I-T")
company,
           which, since January 23, 2003, is a major Department of
Defense
           contractor. A Fortune 500 company with annual revenue of
$5.9
           billion, it is the world’s largest consulting firm and one
of the top 100
           defense contractors. Its Board of Directors includes Bobby
Inman,
           Admiral USN, (Ret.), once regarded as anti-Israel and forced
to
           withdraw as a candidate to head the CIA, but now, more than
willing
           to make amends for the right price. SAIC is a leader in
biomedical
           research and has provided biomedical information to the
Federal
           government. It is involved in nuclear energy and in chemical
research,
           providing "terrorism response training" and "inspection
technology" for
           the defense industry. It currently aids the United States
Government in
           establishing "a formidable presence to arrest or even
prevent Global
           terrorist activities." It boasts: "SAIC’s national security
efforts reach
           across all branches of the military and support the full
spectrum of
           military operations – from peace keeping and humanitarian
missions
           to major conflicts. SAIC also helps the Department of
Defense, the
           FBI and other agencies combat terrorism, cybercrime and the
           proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."

           In actuality, as sources in the Pentagon report, SAIC is the
vehicle for
           the information Special Plans has been receiving. And it, in
turn,
           according to sources in Jerusalem, has been receiving
information
           from Israeli sources involved in chemical and biological
warfare and
           from the Mossad, which, increasingly, has grown so
suspicious of the
           CIA, it has become sufficiently alienated from it to prefer
to
           cooperate with Rumsfeld rather than with Tenet. Israel
rejected the
           Tenet plan and resents the fact that the CIA has been put in
charge of
           overseeing the implementation of the Road Map. According to
inside
           sources in Tel Aviv, Sharon suspects Tenet of being
pro-Palestinian
           and regards giving him information as counter-productive.
Which is
           why, as Seymour Hersch reported in The New Yorker, Tenet is
           getting beaten up and morale at the Agency is at an all-time
low.

           Meanwhile, according to the Israeli sources, the Mossad gets
a
           considerable amount of its information from its Iraqi
operatives, most
           of which are from the Iraqi National Congress (INC),
including
           Ahmad Chalabi, who is a virtual Mossad operative. Mossad’s
           objective is to make Chalabi, who is currently looked upon
with
           suspicion by the CIA, so indispensable to the Americans,
that he will
           end up organizing, if not heading, the eventual Iraqi
government.
           Indeed, he is rapidly becoming L. Paul Bremmer III’s pet
rock. To
           the Israelis, he is the only alternative to an Islamic
republic, something
           that is anathema to them and totally unacceptable because of
its
           inevitable threat to Israeli security. And while it is true
that, on the
           surface, the Pentagon is running Chalabi, he is ultimately a
creature of
           Israeli intelligence, which now says, as it has been widely
reported,
           that the WMDs it identified to Bush have been smuggled out
of Iraq
           and are now in Syria, where Israel wants the next regime
change.

           There is a rationale to what the Israelis have been doing in
providing
           their information with regards to the WMDs. Bush wanted his
war
           because, a White House source related, Karl Rove told him
that it
           would keeps his polls up. As long as the war against
terrorism goes
           on forever, which the invasion of Iraq now appears to
guarantee,
           given the suicide bombings in Saudi Arabia and Morocco, Bush

           won’t fall victim to his father’s fate, when his victory in
Iraq was
           forgotten by the time the election came around. He wanted it
also
           because it would rid Saudi Arabia of its only military
threat, so
           American troops could leave the Islamic Holy Land. The
Israelis
           wanted him to buy into the WMD basis for the war, so he
would
           eventually have to turn against Syria to prove he was right.
Israel has
           openly called for a "regime change" in Syria. With the
suicide
           bombings in Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and again in Israel, the
heat is
           on again. Another major terrorist attack in America and Bush
will
           blame Syria and/or Iran. And the worse it gets, the bigger
the SAIC
           contract will be. Does SAIC want to see Bush re-elected?
Does
           Roger Clemens throw right-handed?

           So did Bush lie? It all depends on how one defines "lie."
Coriolanus
           "dissembled," which is defined as "to hide under a false
appearance,
           to put on the appearance of: SIMULATE: to put on a false
           appearance: conceal facts, intentions, or feelings under
some
           pretense."

           Shakespeare wrote:

                "What have you done? Behold! The heavens do ope,
                the gods look down, and this unnatural scene
                They laugh at. Oh my mother! Mother! O!
                You have won a happy victory to Rome;
                But for your son, believe it, O believe it,
                Most dangerously you have with him prevail’d,
                If not most mortal to him. But let it come."

           De Gaulle won a kind of victory for France by dissembling.
Because
           humans are misled by rhetoric, as Heidegger said, what he
did was
           probably right, but it was the opposite of Leo Strauss’
political
           philosophy because it was the reverse of the interventionism
Strauss
           advocated. But maybe most Americans simply don’t care about
any
           of this and are prepared to take Bush’s word for it, or
simply let him
           get away with it, because they have no interest in politics
and would
           like to have someone else take care of everything for them.
What do
           they care if Leo Strauss is, in actuality, the theorist of
choice of the
           new Military-Industrial Complex.? But as Pericles observed,
"Just
           because you don’t take an interest in politics, doesn’t mean
that
           politics won’t take an interest in you."

                                                    May 22, 2003

           Richard Cummings [send him mail] taught international law at
the
           Haile Selassie I University and before that, was
Attorney-Advisor
           with the Office of General Counsel of the Near East South
Asia
           region of U.S.A.I.D, where he was responsible for the legal
work
           pertaining to the aid program in Israel, Jordan, Pakistan
and
           Afghanistan. He is the author of a new novel, The
Immortalists, as
           well as The Pied Piper – Allard K. Lowenstein and the
Liberal
           Dream, and the comedy, Soccer Moms From Hell. He holds a
           Ph.D. in Social and Political Sciences from Cambridge
University
           and is a member of the Association of Former Intelligence
           Officers.


Madinat al-Muslimeen Islamic Message Board
A R C H I V E S

Individual posts do not necessarily reflect the views of Jannah.org, Islam, or all Muslims. All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the poster and may not be used without consent of the author.
The rest © Jannah.Org