Whitewash operation Iraq war in full swing

'Half Britons say Hutton was "whitewash"', headlines Reuters. Half of the Britons apparently cannot be fooled. The Guardian calls it a 'cover-up'. In the meantime, Blair's colleague Bush is also busy trying to appear innocent: 'A Senate report says the CIA is to blame for bad intelligence on Iraq. Critics say there's a whitewash underway', headlines MSNBC.

The Dutch in the original article has been translated into English by Marienella Meulensteen.

The still confidential report that reached MSNBC in draft, contains strong criticism for the CIA 'for major “errors in judgment” regarding Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction programs—mistakes that were greatly compounded by the agency’s failure to develop reliable on-the-ground sources with direct knowledge of Saddam’s military capabilities, according to people familiar with the document'. This, while it is known that the CIA was put under pressure by the White House to produce nonsensical claims, and that when they were not successful, the White House even established an alternative information cell, alongside the similar Office of Special Plans. Both organizations contributed to nonsensical information needed to be able to go to war.

Blair pulled out all the stops to be able to wage a war
'Hutton's report could scarcely have been more favorable if it had been drafted, or even sexed up, by Tony Blair's former spinmeister Alastair Campbell himself', writes The Guardian. Blair creates a brilliant diversion with the Hutton report, but we only need to consult DeepJournal to read that he loved being led by the OSP, and even had his own service, namely Operation Rockingham. It was that one who provided the Joint Intelligence Committee with the nonsense claims that ultimately led England into war. Besides, Downing Street asked its own secret service to brush up the now infamous 45-minute claim: 'Intelligence told Downing Street that the 45-minute claim hadn't been added in as it only came from one source who was thought to be wrong. The intelligence services were asked to go back and do a rewrite even though Downing Street was told the 45-minute claim was unconvincing', writes the Sunday Herald. What is more, as we wrote earlier: 'Through disinformation the British secret service M16 has tried to exaggerate the extent of the Iraqi arms program by means of Operation Mass Appeal '.

Weapon inspector David Kay joins the whitewash operation
Weapon inspector David Kay, who could not find anything in Iraq and recently resigned, adds his two cents worth and says 'he doesn’t believe political pressure was behind conclusions about Iraq’s weapons [...] “We were almost all wrong", said the inspector, David Kay, noting that intelligence services in France and Germany, both of which opposed the war, also were convinced that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction before the U.S. invasion', writes MSNBC. While earlier DeepJournal cited the Sunday Herald: 'The British intelligence source said the best Humint [human intelligence] on Saddam was held by the French who had agents in Iraq. 'French intelligence was telling us that there was effectively no real evidence of a WMD programme. That's why France wanted a longer extension on the weapons inspections. The French, the Germans and the Russians all knew there were no weapons there -- and so did Blair and Bush as that's what the French told them directly. Blair ignored what the French told us and instead listened to the Americans'.

Condoleezza Rice expects a white wash
And we don't need to expect too much of Condoleezza Rice in the struggle for the truth. Reuters writes: 'President George W. Bush's national security adviser has acknowledged some prewar intelligence about Iraq was flawed but brushed aside calls for launching an independent investigation'. Thereupon she looks into the future and says that the 'United States may never learn the whole truth about Iraq's weapons capabilities because of looting'.

The weapons that Saddam did have, came from the U.S.
The war-crazy sympathizers of Bush and Blair who in retrospect still are happy with the war against Iraq, can argue that Saddam was not totally without weapons. In 1983 he already had the benevolent weapon and poison-gas supplier Donald Rumsfeld visit him, and it did not stay there. The Dutch newspaper NRC writes on October 16, 2003: 'The U.S. have discovered that almost thirty Americans sold weapons to the regime of Saddam Hussein. This is according to the The New York Times. Some of those weapons would have been deployed against the American military during the attack on Iraq. "It is a shock to discover that Americans at a time of war have traded with a hostile regime", says Michael Dougherty of the Bureau of Immigration and Customs, which is leading the investigation'.

War against Saddam unjustifiable, says Human Rights Watch
And again it does not go well for the sympathizers of Bush and Blair; even their last hope was taken away from them. Because also the argument that the war was justified because the criminal Saddam has been removed, has been declared invalid: 'Saddam not so cruel that war was justified' headlines NRC on January 27 in a quotation of the director of Human Rights Watch, Kenneth Roth. Very regrettable for the followers of Bush and Blair is that the two situations in which a war against Saddam would be justified according to Roth, happened with Saddam being responsible, but were only possible thanks to the U.S.: namely Saddam's alleged poison-gas attack in Halabja against the Kurds in 1988 and the crushing of the Kurdish revolt by Saddam, after Bush Sr. summoned the Kurds thereto in 1991 and subsequently abandoned them.
Good that it was the Kurds who were able to arrest Saddam, sour that the Americans walked away with the honor.
[News added March 17, 2004: Dutch journalist H. J. A. Hofland writes in the NRC: 'In about fifty years, maybe, the historians will have a difference of opinion about the question if president Bush and his government made a wise decision to start the war, or chose the wrong path. I, who will not be a historian in 2054, vouch for the latter'].

Suicides by American soldiers in Iraq
Since Bush declared the end of the war in Iraq, 381 American soldiers have been killed, notes the Associated Press. In total, 519 American soldiers died in Iraq. It is unknown if this includes the 21 soldiers who committed suicide. Dying full of pride for a war that has such a shameful lack of motive that Washington as well as Londen are busy carrying on a whitewash operation.

Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 4

Wie onder de oppervlakte kijkt, ziet dat Syrië onder vuur ligt vanwege de belangen van de betrokken partijen. 'Syrië' gaat over macht, geld, invloed en energie.

lees meer

Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - 3

Wie vorm en inhoud scheidt, ziet dat de strijd om Syrië vooral niet gaat over waar het over lijkt te gaan. De vorm maskeert de inhoud. Syrië en Iran zijn stukken op een geopolitiek schaakbord.

lees meer

Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 2

Bij grote militaire conflicten die aanzienlijke humantaire en economische gevolgen kunnen hebben, is het goed te kijken naar de belangen van de betrokken partijen en naar de rol van de media bij de verslaggeving van de feiten.

lees meer

Waarom ligt Syrië onder vuur? - Deel 1

Aan de oppervlakte is het duidelijk: de VS willen Syrië bevrijden van een wrede dictator die zijn bevolking met gifgas bestookt. Onder de oppervlakte is er iets heel anders aan de hand.

lees meer

Albert Spits: Creëer je eigen financiële veiligheid

Spits beschrijft hoe de euro richting de uitgang gaat en dat je intussen maar beter waarde voor je geld kunt kiezen. Hij raadt iedereen aan zich voor te bereiden op een systeemkrach.

lees meer