Skip to main content

Salem Khalaf al-Jumayli, the former Iraqi Head of Intel for the US, told the story of the US invasion and occupation of Iraq from their point of view. He provided Iraqi's leaders with intelligence right before the invasion of 2003. He made two assertions -- there were no ties between Iraq and Al-Qaeda, the group responsible for the 911 attacks. Furthermore, he said that George Bush had fabricated claims that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction.

He stated that a statement made by President Bush in the leadup to war that Iraq had sent an envoy to Al-Qaeda was in fact true. However, Jumayli said that Bush disingenuously did not tell the whole story -- Bin Laden wanted nothing to do with the Baathists, who were secularists. Bin Laden believed that Saddam was the reason Americans were in Saudi Arabia to begin with and that the Baath movement was an "apostate" movement. Bin Laden was part of a nativist Islamic sect which believed in no "corrupting" foreign influences whatsoever.

Jumayli said that the US had transferred Bin Laden from Sudan to Afghanistan in 1996. He was referring to a deal struck between the US and the Sudanese government regarding Bin Laden. As late as 1991, the US regarded Bin Laden as a friendly mujaheddin. However, by 1996, he was starting to appear on peoples' radars and the US was demanding the extradition of suspected terrorists following the 1993 World Trade Center Bombing. The Sudanese government was reluctant to extradite Bin Laden fearing a backlash; however, they agreed to a deal where they would expel Bin Laden to Afghanistan and seize all his Sudanese assets, worth tens of millions of dollars. Bin Laden had invested millions of dollars and built roads in Sudan as a front for his activities; he began to target the US following the 1991 Gulf War due to what he saw as the US' "desecration" of Mecca and Medina, Islam's two holiest sites.

The US had armed Bin Laden and other Islamists in the 1980's while they were fighting the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Jumayli said that the allegations of weapons of mass destruction were completely "fabricated" and that data that the US received was lies. The photos of labs touted by the media and Colin Powell were actually labs that the Iraqi government used to check on food supplies. The US did not have a source in Iraq to tell them the truth about the lack of Iraq's WMD's; by contrast, Jumayli said that the Iraqis had a high-level source within the US Department of Defense who fed them information about Bush's intentions. After both of the main claims by the US, that Iraq had WMD's and that Saddam had ties to Al-Qaeda and the 9/11 attacks, were both debunked, that was when the US changed their story to say that they were there to help facilitate democracy in the Middle East. The Bush administration even went so far as to say that the chaos in Iraq following the collapse of that government was "constructive."

Jumayli said that the US Government went to extreme lengths to "prove" that Iraq was not cooperating on terrorism. One of the main perpetrators of the 1993 World Trade Center bombings was an Iraqi-American, who fled to Iraq following those bombings. Iraq detained the man in question and was willing to extradite him to America to be prosecuted. However, the US refused to sign the necessary papers to extradite them; then, they turned around and said that this "proved" that Iraq was uncooperative on terrorism.

Thanks to Iraq's source within the Department of Defense, the Iraqis were not fooled by leaks to the media suggesting that the invasion of Iraq would not happen until April or May 2003. The source also told Jumayli that there would be no invasion coming from Turkey, allowing Iraq to move some divisions from the northern border to protect Baghdad.

While everyone knows the main faces of the Iraqi invasion such as Rumsfeld, Powell, Bush, and Cheney, et al, Jumayli said that in fact, all US policy in Iraq was channeled through a policy advisor group within the Department of Defense which refused to consider advice outside their own circle. This was the committee that neocon Richard Perle headed up during the Bush years. The CIA had warned the DOD about the possibility of chaos following the toppling of Iraq; however, Perle and his group refused to believe that there would be any sort of chaos after the end of the invasion of Iraq. Perle and his group wrongly assumed that Iraq would stabilize. Jumayli said that the reason the US occupied Iraq was to prevent Al-Qaeda from gaining a foothold in the area and to prevent Iran from expanding its sphere of influence. Perle and his group wrongly believed that the Iraq war would not last long. However, it did and Jumayli believes that it helped lead to the Great Recession of 2008.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Fabrications (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FG

    Your title says that Bush fabricated the WMD claims, but then in the diary you say that the US just received incorrect information.  Which story are you going with?

    Jumayli said that the allegations of weapons of mass destruction were completely "fabricated" and that data that the US received was lies. The photos of labs touted by the media and Colin Powell were actually labs that the Iraqi government used to check on food supplies. The US did not have a source in Iraq to tell them the truth about the lack of Iraq's WMD's;

    Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

    by Sky Net on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 04:17:15 PM PDT

    •  I can put it in quotes. (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      truong son traveler, chuckvw, Sandino

      Since that word was Jumayli's characterization.

      •  I'm sure he used the word (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Dogs are fuzzy

        But who did the fabricating?  Bush or others inside Iraq?  You said the US received data that was lies, which implies it was someone else.

        Cynicism is what passes for insight among the mediocre.

        by Sky Net on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 04:40:42 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Both. (3+ / 0-)

          Starting at 3:40, where he goes into the intelligence that the Bush administration used.

        •  Yes, I agree. Bush was not capable of doing an (0+ / 0-)

          action as sophisticated as "fabricating". I would believe him if he said Bush made some mud and pushed it around with sticks while Cheney (Perle and co) did the fabricating.

          You can't make this stuff up.

          by David54 on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 07:49:46 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          •  Actually: (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Paul1a, walkshills, Sandino

            I think Bush was capable of doing such a thing. In his book "Decision Points," Bush talked about how he believed that Saddam was responsible for a plot on the life of his father in 1994 during a visit to Saudi Arabia. You have to have hatred for the other person in order to start a war against them, and Bush certainly had the requisite hatred, seeing that he was willing to believe anything about them.

            •  I think he was morally capable, but I don't think (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              semiot, Linda Wood

              he was mentally capable of fabricating something as elaborate. He was capable of fabricating the central idea that Hussein was guilty.
              Ultimately all of this falls on the oil companies. They had the CIA act to depose the Iranian pres. and install the Shah. His brutality led to the Iranian revolution. This determined the dynamics of what happened in Iraq. The oil cos. (Cheney) took advantage of everyone's nervousness about energy security (incl. compliant Dems like Kerry) to make a grab for Iraqi oil. Bush was the place-holder for the oil cos., but I don't think he was the designer of any of what unfolded in Iraq. The idea that Saddam tried to kill his Dad was a convenient piece that rationalized the effort for him personally.
              Anyway, I was just taking a gratuitous shot at Bush's stupidity,...because.

              You can't make this stuff up.

              by David54 on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 06:25:46 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

        •  The 'Office of Special Plans' (6+ / 0-)

          in the pentagon was tasked with generating disinformation about WMDs.  Check out Doug Feith's connections through Italian intelligence to the ineptly forged 'yellowcake' letter.  Karen kwiatkowski an insider and whistleblower documented it extensively, as have others, including Curveball himself.

          •  Dated but related (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Sandino, Linda Wood

            is this article, Drinking the Kool-Aid, which might also be useful for future reference.

            Sometime in the spring of 2000, Stephen Hadley, now Condoleeza Rice's deputy at the National Security Council (NSC), briefed a group of prominent Republican party policymakers on the national-security and foreign-policy agenda of a future George W. Bush administration. Hadley was one of a group of senior campaign policy advisers to then-Texas Governor Bush known collectively as "the Vulcans." The group, in addition to Hadley, included Rice, Paul Wolfowitz and Richard Perle and had been assembled by George Shultz and Dick Cheney beginning in late 1998, when Bush first launched his presidential bid.

            Hadley's briefing shocked a number of the participants, according to Clifford Kiracofe, a professor at the Virginia Military Institute, who spoke to several of them shortly after the meeting. Hadley announced that the "number-one foreign-policy agenda" of a Bush administration would be Iraq and the unfinished business of removing Saddam Hussein from power. Hadley also made it clear that the Israel-Palestine conflict, which had dominated the Middle East agenda of the Clinton administration, would be placed in the deep freeze.

            Dr. Kiracofe's account of the pre-election obsession of the Vulcans with the ouster of Saddam Hussein is corroborated by former U.S. Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill's memory of the first meetings of the Bush National Security Council, which he attended in late January and early February of 2001. Ron Suskind's book The Price of Loyalty, based on O'Neill's memory and notes, tells us of an NSC meeting, ten days into the Bush administration, at which both the Israel-Palestine and Iraq situations were discussed.

            and taking the liberty here in this long piece to add a few words from another paragraph:
            One interesting thing about those at the meeting is that no one present or in the background had any substantive knowledge of the Middle East. It is one thing to have traveled to the area as a senior government official. It is another to have lived there and worked with the people of the region for long periods of time. People with that kind of experience in the Muslim world are strangely absent from Team Bush.
            Can we not also apply this to the foreign policy team of the current administration. Quoting the author of this piece quite recently, "BHO's foreign policy is run by political hacks and grad students who never grew up."

            Orwell - "Political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable"

            by truong son traveler on Mon Apr 01, 2013 at 03:26:02 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  •  You...you mean the WMD claims were all phony??? (4+ / 0-)

    OMYGOD THIS IS THE BIGGEST NEWS EVER Of THE YEAR 2008!!!

    Happy just to be alive

    by exlrrp on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 05:12:47 PM PDT

  •  This confirms a "Conspiracy Theory" that I was (9+ / 0-)

    scoured for: Perle and his cadre, basically the PNAC gang, trumped this whole mess up, "stovepiping" misinformation via Cheney.

    If I ran this circus, things would be DIFFERENT!

    by CwV on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 06:32:59 PM PDT

  •  Thanks, good diary (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sandino, walkshills, Linda Wood, semiot

    The final paragraph reveals information frequently omitted from the information about the sources of the pretexts for war in the lead up to the invasion of Iraq.

    This group, the gang of neocon chickenhawks, needs to be called out. They are still very influential in American foreign policy issues. I suspect that this is the "hijacking of US foreign policy" which both Wes Clark and Daniel Ellsberg have referred to as having taken place during that time period.

    Everything they touch turns to sh*t, "the reverse midas touch" as others have labeled it.

    But for them and their primary interests, the removal of Saddam and the destruction of Iraq so as to eliminate a potential threat to Israel, it worked out well enough.

    This is also one of the reasons behind the on-going "rolling back" of Syria.

    Israel can shape its strategic environment, in cooperation with Turkey and Jordan, by weakening, containing, and even rolling back Syria.

    This effort can focus on removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq — an important Israeli strategic objective in its own right — as a means of foiling Syria’s regional ambitions.

    The Policy Paper from 1996 - A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm

    Orwell - "Political language ... is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable"

    by truong son traveler on Sun Mar 31, 2013 at 08:16:30 PM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site