NBC: Iraqi diplomat gave U.S. prewar WMD details(No WMD's)

[RamboLiberal]

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11927856/

In the period before the Iraq war, the CIA and the Bush administration erroneously believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding major programs for weapons of mass destruction. Now NBC News has learned that for a short time the CIA had contact with a secret source at the highest levels within Saddam Hussein’s government, who gave them information far more accurate than what they believed. It is a spy story that has never been told before, and raises new questions about prewar intelligence.

What makes the story significant is the high rank of the source. His name, officials tell NBC News, was Naji Sabri, Iraq’s foreign minister under Saddam. Although Sabri was in Saddam's inner circle, his cosmopolitan ways also helped him fit into diplomatic circles.

In September 2002, at a meeting of the U.N.’s General Assembly, Sabri came to New York to represent Saddam. In front of the assembled diplomats, he read a letter from the Iraqi leader. "The United States administration is acting on behalf of Zionism," he said. He announced that there were no weapons of mass destruction and that the U.S. planned war in Iraq because it wanted the country’s oil.

But on that very trip, there was also a secret contact made. The contact was brokered by the French intelligence service, sources say. Intelligence sources say that in a New York hotel room, CIA officers met with an intermediary who represented Sabri. All discussions between Sabri and the CIA were conducted through a "cutout," or third party. Through the intermediary, intelligence sources say, the CIA paid Sabri more than $100,000 in what was, essentially, "good-faith money." And for his part, Sabri, again through the intermediary, relayed information about Saddam’s actual capabilities.

<snip>

Tenet

"A source," he said in a speech on Feb. 5, 2004, "who had direct access to Saddam and his inner circle." Sources tell NBC News Tenet was alluding to Sabri. Tenet said that the source — meaning Sabri — had said Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons and that equipment to produce insecticides, under the oil-for-food program, had been diverted to covert chemical weapons production. However, in that speech, Tenet also laid out what Sabri had disclosed: that there was no biological program, that Saddam wanted nuclear weapons but had none.

Tenet's speech at Georgetown

http://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs/speeches/2004/tenet_georgetownspeech_02052004.html

[AndrewJacksonFaction]

1. Wow!

Wow!

[cantstandbush]

2. This story will only be told in the movies. n/t

[grytpype]

3. It just gets worse and worse for the War Party, doesn't it?

Just wait until the fact that Saddam offered to surrender before the invasion gets out there again... he did you know.

[RamboLiberal]

5. Except for a few select pundits - this will be ignored

After all there must be some white woman missing as we speak.

[rodeodance]

19. I read about that a while back.

[grytpype]

22. I wrote a dkos diary about it a long time ago...

... I'll post a journal about it.

OK done, check out my journal...

[Divine Discontent]

4. how the world sees *ush

"crazy drunken ingorant"

[acmavm]

6. NBC is reporting this? Do you think this will make them pry their

noses out of bush** ass?

[RamboLiberal]

8. I hope KO is all over this story tonight!

we'll soon know.

[cal04]

7. Crazy people led by a crazy, drunken, ignorant president," he said.

(snip)
On the issue of chemical weapons, the CIA said Saddam had stockpiled as much as "500 metric tons of chemical warfare agents" and had "renewed" production of deadly agents. Sabri said Iraq had stockpiled weapons and had "poison gas" left over from the first Gulf War. Both Sabri and the agency were wrong.
(snip)
When war broke out, Sabri was defiant and outspoken. "Those aggressors are war criminals, colonialist war criminals. Crazy people led by a crazy, drunken, ignorant president," he said.
After the war, former CIA director George Tenet once boasted of a secret Iraqi source.

"A source," he said in a speech on Feb. 5, 2004, "who had direct access to Saddam and his inner circle." Sources tell NBC News Tenet was alluding to Sabri. Tenet said that the source — meaning Sabri — had said Iraq was stockpiling chemical weapons and that equipment to produce insecticides, under the oil-for-food program, had been diverted to covert chemical weapons production. However, in that speech, Tenet also laid out what Sabri had disclosed: that there was no biological program, that Saddam wanted nuclear weapons but had none.

(Where is Tenet, he needs to be questioned)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11927856/page/2/

[davekriss]

23. Wrong, definately wrong!

It's not, "Crazy people led by a crazy, drunken, ignorant president," no. It's a crazy, drunken, ignorant president, led by crazy PNACers! This man, Sabri, has no credibility if he can get that obvious fact so wrong!!!









OK, OK, my very weak attempt at :sarcasm:

[tuvor]

9. MSNBC perpetuates lie about what the CIA "believed"...

"In the period before the Iraq war, the CIA and the Bush administration erroneously believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding major programs for weapons of mass destruction."

Uh...No. Intelligence didn't fail. bush did.

Check out these stories from well before bush decided to start a war back in '03.

WHY THE CIA THINKS BUSH IS WRONG
The president says the US has to act now against Iraq. The trouble is, his own security services don't agree.
13 October 2002
http://www.sundayherald.com/28384

CIA IN BLOW TO BUSH ATTACK PLANS
The letter also comes at a time when the CIA is competing with the more hawkish Pentagon, which is also supplying the White House with intelligence on the Iraqi threat.
October 10, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

WHITE HOUSE 'EXAGGERATING IRAQI THREAT'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence
October 9, 2002
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html



Also, check out LynnTheDem's comprehensive post from a year ago:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=104&topic_id=3394174

[LynnTheDem]

12. Great minds post alike, tuvor!

:D

They can fool rightwingnuts all the time...again & again & again & again & again...

[tuvor]

13. Gotta keep the important stuff out of the memory hole.

That post of yours from last year was well worth bookmarking.

:hi:

[LynnTheDem]

14. Problem is, there's so much important stuff trying to fall down that hole.

A never-ending job of pulling it all back up again & again. *sigh*

Thanks! :hug:

[salin]

17. That struck me as well...

it was that the intel was "faulty" - not that policy makers were selecting intel that fit their argument, and ingorning anything that disproved their argument - all so they could "sell" their pre-determined war.

[LynnTheDem]

10. The CIA??? That's strange...

CIA to Bush: 'No clear Evidence of WMD'
http://www.truthout.org/docs_03/120103A.shtml

Why the CIA thinks Bush is wrong
The president says the US has to act now against Iraq. The trouble is, his own security services don't agree.
http://www.sundayherald.com/28384

CIA in blow to Bush attack plans
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,808970,00.html

White House 'exaggerating Iraqi threat'
Bush's televised address attacked by US intelligence
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html

[magellan]

11. "...the CIA and the Bush administration erroneously believed..."

:rofl:

They're getting closer to the truth, but MSNBC's reporting still smells of excrement.

[Clarkie1]

15. This is very, very disturbing.

The only explanation I can see for why the CIA would ignore this is they were looking for data that fit what * wanted to be told.

[alfredo]

16. K&R

[Terran1212]

18. Ever seen HBO film Live From Baghdad

That details Shabri; it is very kind to him -- portrays him as a good person

[rhombus]

20. Why is this all now coming out?

The media has been sitting on this story for how long? sheesh

[xyboymil]

24. Well, God forbid it came out BEFORE the election...

Assholes!

Worst.

President.

Ever.

[Raksha]

25. That was my question too when I first looked at this thread.

Why is NBC reporting on this NOW? Have they finally decided it's "safe" to stop protecting the BFEE?

Welcome to DU, rhombus! :toast:

[RazzleDazzle]

21. Okay, now we know about 2 highly placed Iraqis

The other was Saddam's son-in-law, who defected to the West, spilled the beans, got lured back to Iraq and was killed.

[young_at_heart]

26. But....Tenet said it was a "slam dunk"....what did he mean?

I don't understand.

[Uncle Bob]

27. Time for sheeps to sollow: "erroneously believed".

Seriously...

Read the whole thing again and again... "In the period before the Iraq war, the CIA and the Bush administration erroneously believed that Saddam Hussein was hiding major programs for weapons of mass destruction."

They are just trying to paint the whole picture a with a litle shade of pink.

You are not "led by a drunktard" who "erroneously believed". Bush Jr. is a just the front face. All he does is read the crap Rove/Cheney give him and try to look sober.

Who can seriously belive that the US military "erroneously believed" shit about Iraq?

If they really belived Saddam had WMD they wouldn't have invaded it. It couldn't have been a "cakewalk".

It's just smokescreen propaganda from the Ministry of Truth. And, sadly, you of all people are buying it. I can understand hill-Billy boy sitting in his fantasy-world cattle ranch listenting to FUKS-News beliving this shit, but DU people...?

The US "intellignece" knew exactly what Iraq had and had not.

They are trying to cover up war crimes. "Gee, we didn't invade them **on purpose**, we **really** belived they had WMDs".

Sheep-people of Northen 'Murika, wake the fuck up. The brain is not just balast for balancing the body...

[stickdog]

28. DIOP (Dismissed It On Purpose)

[gasperc]

29. Yawn, I have asserted BUSH INC KNEW THERE WAS NO WMD

or at least knew it was a substantially reduced capability. I have repeatedly brought up the point that if they really thought there was WMD to worry they would have never gone gangbusters towards Bagdad, WITHOUT ALOT OF CHEMICAL SUITS FOR THE TROOPS!!!!

And the yawn in my subject, a coy reference to Tommy Franks who was recently quoted as yawning when warned of possibly taking casualties on rushing to Bagdad.

WMDs, Yawn?? Hmmm, were they hoping Saddam would use WMD so they could scream I told you so??? or they knew there was nothing to worry about making the march on Bagdad all that much easier???

I've proposed this for close to 2 1/2 years now.

[xyboymil]

30. kick

[Roland99]

31. Can You Imagine?: Hussein Was Right & Bush Was Wrong

http://www.lewrockwell.com/browne/browne24.html

You may remember that in 2002, the year before the Iraq War began, the United Nations Security Council ordered Iraq to produce a report detailing all of its biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons – past and present. Iraqi officials complied and produced an 11,800-page report on Iraq's weapons programs. The report described all the chemical and biological weapons the country once had – where they came from and what was done with them – as well as what had happened to Iraq's nuclear weapons program.

Although the report was prepared for the United Nations, U.S. officials intercepted the report, edited out 8,000 pages (over two thirds) of it, and delivered its Reader's Digest version of the report to the UN.

A German reporter managed to obtain a copy of the original report from Iraq, and then compared it with the truncated copy the U.S. gave to the UN. He found that the missing parts covered the Iraqis' acquisition of chemical and biological weapons from the U.S., the delivery of non-fissionable materials for a nuclear bomb by the U.S. to the Iraqis, and the training of Iraqi nuclear scientists at U.S. nuclear facilities in Los Alamos, Sandia, and Berkeley.

Esp. this part:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1323471,00.html

One of the tragic ironies of the decision to invade Iraq is that the Iraqi WMD declaration required by security council resolution 1441, submitted by Iraq in December 2002, and summarily rejected by Bush and Blair as repackaged falsehoods, now stands as the most accurate compilation of data yet assembled regarding Iraq’s WMD programs (more so than even Duelfer’s ISG report, which contains much unsubstantiated speculation). Saddam Hussein has yet to be contradicted on a single point of substantive fact. Iraq had disarmed; no one wanted to accept that conclusion.