Skip to content

Black Shards Press

Forgetting Past Mistakes is to Repeat Them

Menu
  • Home
  • Novels
    • Liberty First Novels – The Recognition Saga
      • Recognition Free Chapters
  • Short Stories
  • Op-Ed Blog
  • About
Menu

No WMDs – Did Bush Know?

Posted on September 6, 2007September 6, 2007 by marc

Sidney Blumenthal’s article at Salon states that the answer is a resounding “Yes!”.

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.

Blumenthal is a former Clinton adviser who has made a career recently out of lampooning the Bush administration, so in that sense the story must be understood to be stilted. In other words, the mirror image of Dick Morris in many respects.

But is there a core of truth to his story? Remember that a reporter doesn’t necessarily have to be unbiased to be right.

More:

According to the former officers, the intelligence was also never shared with the senior military planning the invasion, which required U.S. soldiers to receive medical shots against the ill effects of WMD and to wear protective uniforms in the desert.

Instead, said the former officials, the information was distorted in a report written to fit the preconception that Saddam did have WMD programs. That false and restructured report was passed to Richard Dearlove, chief of the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6), who briefed Prime Minister Tony Blair on it as validation of the cause for war.

Secretary of State Powell, in preparation for his presentation of evidence of Saddam’s WMD to the United Nations Security Council on Feb. 5, 2003, spent days at CIA headquarters in Langley, Va., and had Tenet sit directly behind him as a sign of credibility. But Tenet, according to the sources, never told Powell about existing intelligence that there were no WMD, and Powell’s speech was later revealed to be a series of falsehoods.

Blumenthal’s language gives his feelings away – Powell’s statements weren’t incorrect, they were falsehoods.

Still more:

The CIA officers on the case awaited the report they had submitted on Sabri to be circulated back to them, but they never received it. They learned later that a new report had been written. “It was written by someone in the agency, but unclear who or where, it was so tightly controlled. They knew what would please the White House. They knew what the king wanted,” one of the officers told me.

That report contained a false preamble stating that Saddam was “aggressively and covertly developing” nuclear weapons and that he already possessed chemical and biological weapons. “Totally out of whack,” said one of the CIA officers.

…

The report with the misleading introduction was given to Dearlove of MI6, who briefed the prime minister. “They were given a scaled-down version of the report,” said one of the CIA officers. “It was a summary given for liaison, with the sourcing taken out. They showed the British the statement Saddam was pursuing an aggressive program, and rewrote the report to attempt to support that statement. It was insidious. Blair bought it.” “Blair was duped,” said the other CIA officer. “He was shown the altered report.”

The information provided by Sabri was considered so sensitive that it was never shown to those who assembled the NIE on Iraqi WMD. Later revealed to be utterly wrong, the NIE read: “We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs in defiance of UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in excess of UN restrictions; if left unchecked, it probably will have a nuclear weapon during this decade.”

So is Blumenthal playing it straight with us? To me the story has a ring of truth.

h/t memeorandum.

Cross-posted at The Van Der Galin Gazette.

1 thought on “No WMDs – Did Bush Know?”

  1. Pingback: The Van Der Galiƫn Gazette

Comments are closed.

Categories

  • Abortion
  • Afghanistan
  • Africa
  • Age Issues
  • Agriculture
  • Book Reviews
  • Business
  • Celebrities
  • Child Care
  • Christianity
  • Cinema
  • Communism
  • Conservatism
  • Crime
  • Death Penalty
  • Democracy
  • Denmark
  • Discrimination
  • Drugs
  • Education
  • Energy
  • England
  • Environment
  • Evolution
  • Family Values
  • Finance
  • France
  • Free Speech
  • Gay Rights
  • General News
  • Gun Control
  • Health
  • Holocaust
  • Humor
  • Immigration
  • India
  • Iran
  • Iraq
  • Islam
  • Israel
  • Justice
  • Korea
  • Law
  • Liberalism
  • Libertarianism
  • Literature
  • Media
  • Medicine
  • Men's Rights
  • Mexico
  • Middle East
  • Military
  • Music
  • My Tweets
  • National Security
  • Pakistan
  • Parenting
  • Personal
  • Philosophy
  • Political Correctness
  • Politics
  • Privacy
  • Race
  • Religion
  • Right to Die
  • Russia
  • Saudi Arabia
  • Science
  • Site News
  • Society
  • Space
  • Sports
  • Stupidity
  • Taxation
  • Technology
  • Term Limits
  • Terrorism
  • Texas
  • Transportation
  • Turkey
  • Unions
  • Venezuela
  • Welfare
  • Women's Rights
  • World
  • Youth

Archives

  • February 2025
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • October 2021
  • January 2021
  • November 2020
  • March 2020
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • May 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • March 2015
  • December 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • June 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • June 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003
  • October 2003
  • September 2003
  • August 2003
  • July 2003
  • June 2003
  • May 2003
  • April 2003
  • March 2003
  • December 2002
  • November 2002
  • October 2002
  • September 2002
  • August 2002
  • July 2002
© 2026 Black Shards Press | Powered by Minimalist Blog WordPress Theme