CIA CHALLENGED RELIABILITY OF BLAIR SEPTEMBER DOSSIER BEFORE IT WAS PUBLISHED
"In September 2002, the CIA
tried unsuccessfully to persuade the British government
to drop from an official intelligence paper a reference to Iraqi
attempts to buy uranium in Africa that President Bush included in
his State of the Union address four months later, senior
administration officials said Thursday.... The latest disclosures
further illustrate the lack of confidence expressed by the U.S.
intelligence community in the months leading up to Bush's speech
about allegations of Iraqi efforts to buy uranium in Africa. Even
so, Bush used the charge - citing British intelligence as its
source - in the Jan. 28 address as part of his effort to convince
Congress and the American people that Iraq had an ongoing program
to build weapons of mass destruction and posed a serious threat
to the United States."
CIA wanted British to drop uranium reference
Minneapolis Star Tribune, 11 July 2003
Blair ignored CIA weapons warning - July 13 2003
"There is one simple question
it must answer. Why did [the British government's] evidence of
the uranium deal not convince the CIA? If it was not good enough
to be in the President's address, it was not good enough to go in
the Prime Minister's dossier."
Robin Cook, Former British Foreign Secretary
Observer, 13 July 2003
"Legitimate questions have
arisen about how remarks on alleged Iraqi attempts to obtain
uranium in Africa made it into the Presidents State of the
Union speech. Let me be clear about several things right up
front. First, CIA approved the Presidents State of the
Union address before it was delivered. Second, I am responsible
for the approval process in my Agency. And third, the President
had every reason to believe that the text presented to him was
sound. These 16 words should never have been included in the text
written for the President..... Also in the fall of 2002, our British
colleagues told us they were planning to publish an unclassified
dossier that mentioned reports of Iraqi attempts to obtain uranium in
Africa. Because we viewed the
reporting on such acquisition attempts to be inconclusive,
we expressed reservations
about its inclusion but our colleagues said they were confident
in their reports and left
it in their document [the Blair
September dossier]. In September and October 2002 before Senate
Committees, senior intelligence officials in response to
questions told members of Congress that we differed with the British dossier
on the reliability
of the uranium reporting.... In October, the Intelligence
Community (IC) produced a classified, 90 page National
Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraqs WMD programs. ...The
NIE states... states: 'A foreign government service
reported that as of early 2001, Niger planned to send several
tons of pure 'uranium' (probably yellowcake) to Iraq. ....[but] the claims of Iraqi pursuit of natural
uranium in Africa are, in INRs assessment, highly dubious.'
... Although the documents related to the
alleged Niger-Iraqi uranium deal had not yet been
determined to be forgeries,
officials who were reviewing the draft remarks on uranium raised
several concerns about the fragmentary nature of the intelligence
with National Security Council colleagues. Agency
officials in the end concurred that the text in the speech was
factually correct - i.e. that the British
government report said that Iraq sought uranium from Africa. This
should not have been the test for clearing a Presidential
address. This did not rise to the level of certainty which should
be required for Presidential speeches, and CIA should have
ensured that it was removed."
George J. Tenet Director of Central
Intelligence
CIA Statement, 11 July 2003
"One by one, all the
Presidents men rounded on George Tenet yesterday, forcing
the CIA Director to issue a resounding mea culpa that is likely
to bring his career to an abrupt end. The extraordinary public
blame Mr Bush heaped upon the agency was underscored by
Condoleezza Rice, his National Security Adviser, who summoned
reporters covering Mr Bushs Africa tour to tell them that
the CIA had 'cleared the speech in its entirety'....The internal
warfare was triggered by last weeks White House admission
that Mr Bush was wrong to have claimed in his State of the Union
speech that Iraq had tried to buy uranium from Africa. That claim
was based on intelligence reports that Saddam sought nuclear
material from Niger. After it emerged that the CIA and State
Department were told 11 months before the speech that the claim
was bogus, congressmen demanded to know why Mr Bush repeated the
allegation. In anonymous briefings to the US media on Thursday
CIA officials insisted that the agency explicitly told the White
House that the claim was false before the speech. They also said
they had tried unsuccessfully to persuade the British Government
on this.... Their finger-pointing exposed the bitter blame game
now raging within the Administration as the issue of Saddam
Husseins alleged weapons of mass destruction finally caught
fire in Washington."
Bush team split as CIA becomes the fall guy
London Times, 12 July 2003
"If Tenet's account is true,
it is doubly embarrassing, for the CIA had made its reservations
clear elsewhere, if not to Bush. The previous year, ahead of
Blair's September 2002 dossier setting out the British case
against Saddam, the
CIA told London that the Niger claim was deeply questionable.
And it also warned US Secretary of State Colin Powell against
using the Niger evidence before he made his powerful presentation
about the Iraqi threat to the UN in February, just weeks after
Bush's State of the Union address. In other words, the CIA told
everyone about its doubts except the White House. What is most
revealing is Tenet's admission that the central claim was left in
Bush's speech because it had been attributed to British
intelligence."
The Niger connection
Observer, 13 July 2003
"We
must find out whether the CIA deceived the President as he was
developing his Iraq policy or whether it is deceiving the public
now to protect the President and the Vice President".
New Questions on
President's Use of Forged Nuclear Evidence
Statement of Rep. Henry A.
Waxman, Ranking Minority Member, House Committee on
Government Reform, 12 June 2003
"This
chapter sets out what we know of Saddam
Husseins chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic
missile programmes, drawing on all the available evidence. While
it takes account of the results from UN inspections and other
publicly available information, it also draws heavily on the
latest intelligence about Iraqi efforts to
develop their programmes and
capabilities since 1998. The main
conclusions [include] that.... Iraq has a useable chemical and
biological weapons capability, in breach of UNSCR
687, which has included recent
production of chemical and biological
agents... Iraq continues to work on developing nuclear weapons,
in breach of its obligations under the Non-Proliferation Treaty
and in breach of UNSCR 687. Uranium
has been sought from Africa that has no civil nuclear
application in Iraq... Iraqs military forces are
able
to use chemical and biological weapons, with command,
control and logistical arrangements in place. The Iraqi military are
able
to deploy these weapons within 45 minutes of
a decision to do so...."
IRAQS WEAPONS
OF MASS DESTRUCTION
THE ASSESSMENT OF THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
(Blair's 'September
Dossier' 2002)
'Fight Smart' Special
Report
David Kelly and Scott Ritter Contents |
|
Not enough
time to read the full 100 plus page report? |
"President
Bush, asked about the Niger issue at a news conference during his
visit to South Africa, did not answer directly but said that he
was 'certain that Saddam Hussein had a weapons of mass
destruction programme'. Like Mr Blair, he has dropped the
assertion that Iraq actually had weapons. Both now say that it had a 'programme.'
"
Did Iraq try to get African uranium?
BBC Online 9 July
| Background Media Links For This 'Fight Smart' Report |
| CIA challenged reliability of Blair September dossier before it was published |
| What the Blair September dossier actually said |
| The lies are leaking |
| The Italian connection |
| Right wing think tanks that pushed unknowing US public into war for oil |
| Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz and Perle at the heart of this agenda |
| British complicity - 'Operation Rockingham' |
| 'Dark Actors' - The death of Dr Kelly and what he knew |
| Why Britain has gone along with all of this |
| How the media let humanity down - The General Kamel episode and other deceptions the press ignored before the war |
"There is no longer any serious doubt
that Bush administration officials deceived us into war. The key
question now is why so many influential people are in denial,
unwilling to admit the obvious.... even people who aren't
partisan Republicans shy away from confronting the
administration's dishonest case for war, because they don't want
to face the implications."
Denial and
Deception
New York Times, 24 June 2003
NATURAL LAW PARTY
WESSEX
nlpwessex@btinternet.com
www.btinternet.com/~nlpwessex