Justifications for War: WMDs and Other Issues
Highlighted Documents
Will Blair Walk the Walk? (January 27, 2004)
On January 28, 2004, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair faces the most dangerous day of his political life as Lord Hutton issues his long-awaited report on the David Kelly case. The report will further expose the falsification and spin-doctoring of Downing Street in the run-up to the Iraq War. Tony Blair, an advocate of morality and responsibility in government, should take his own words seriously and tender his resignation as Prime Minister.
Unproven: The Controversy over Justifying War in Iraq (June 2003)
The Fourth Freedom Forum presents publicly available data purposely ignored by US and UK leaders. It asserts that the main problem in the scandal surrounding Iraq is not the intelligence, but the way it was selectively interpreted and misrepresented. This raises doubts about the integrity of political decision-making.
The Secret Downing Street Memo (July 23, 2002)
This secret memo details the UK government's support of the US administration's "inevitable" invasion of Iraq, almost a year before the war started. The memo sheds light on the decision-making process in Washington, where "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy [of military action]," according to the head of MI6, Britain's foreign intelligence service. The MI6 chief also presciently noted that "there was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action."
2005
Qaeda-Iraq Link US Cited Is Tied to Coercion Claim (December 9, 2005)
Before shifting its focus to regime change and democratization, Washington based the invasion of Iraq on weapons of mass destruction and Iraq's al Qaeda ties. The Bush administration primarily used the testimony of captured al Qaeda member Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi to substantiate the link between Iraq and al Qaeda. However, al-Libi has admitted that he fabricated information to escape harsh punishment during interrogation. While the CIA retracted intelligence based on al-Libi's testimony following the invasion of Iraq, declassified documents show that the US Defense Intelligence Agency identified al-Libi as a fabricator months before the Bush administration began to link Iraq and al-Qaeda prior to invasion. (New York Times)
Asterisks Dot White House's Iraq Argument (November 12, 2005)
In response to growing criticism over the war in Iraq, US President George Bush claims that the US Congress, which voted in favor of the war, saw the same pre-war intelligence that his administration did and that independent commissions have exonerated the White House of manipulating intelligence. As the Washington Postpoints out, neither claim is entirely true. The Bush administration had access to much more information than Congress and the only commission specifically examining intelligence misrepresentation – the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence – has not yet conducted its investigations.
Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh: Iraq Confidential (October 26, 2005)
In this interview with journalist Seymour Hersh, former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter discusses Iraq's former weapons program, sanctions, and US involvement. The US, Ritter says, was only interested in disarming Iraq for the sake of containing Saddam Hussein and fostering regime change. Despite the successful dismantling of Iraq's weapons program in 1995, which Ritter oversaw, the CIA continued to back assassination attempts against Hussein, and eventually the US went to war in Iraq. (The Nation)
US Diplomat Points to Neocon Ideology Behind Actions in Iraq (October 22, 2005)
Ambassador Robin Raphel, a long-time US diplomat, has accused US policy makers of pursuing ideologically driven goals throughout the invasion and occupation of Iraq. She notes that US officials were largely misinformed by expatriate Iraqis and that administrators in Iraq lacked sufficient preparation for the task of governing the country. Furthermore, political pressure on foreign service professionals was "huge" and "pervasive." (Agence France Presse)
Bush Gives New Reason for Iraq War (August 31, 2005)
US President George W. Bush has given yet another justification for the US-led invasion of Iraq: the "protection of [Iraq's] vast oil fields." This announcement comes amid continued violence in Iraq and increasing disapproval of the war within the US. (Associated Press)
CNN Makes News with WMD Special, but Press Deserves Blame, Too (August 19, 2005)
This article discusses a CNN documentary about the US government's falsely claimed that Iraq was building weapons of mass destruction. The article accuses the US media of assisting in the government's deception: it "acted like a jury that is ready, willing and (in this case) able to deliver a verdict— after the prosecution has spoken and before anyone else is heard or the evidence studied." The article examines the uncritical press response to Colin Powell's 2003 speech to the United Nations, where he charged that Iraq was hiding a nuclear weapons program. (Editor & Publisher)
My Sadness at the Privatisation of Iraq (August 12, 2005)
This article makes the case that the US and UK did not invade Iraq in order to bring democracy to the country. Rather, their goal was the "imposition of a neoliberal capitalist economy controlled and run by US transnational corporations." Paul Bremer, when he was leader of the Coalition Provisional Authority, issued decrees authorizing the large-scale privatization of the Iraqi economy. These laws still stand, and the Iraqi government is unlikely to reverse them as long as the US keeps a military presence in the country. (Times, London)
Spy's Notes on Iraqi Aims Were Shelved, Suit Says (August 1, 2005)
A former Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officer alleges that the Agency fired him because he doubted that Iraq was developing a nuclear weapons program. According to the anonymous former officer, a reliable informant told him that Iraq had abandoned the program years ago. However, the CIA buried the information and persisted in the view that Iraq was actively trying to enrich uranium for weapons, a view that later turned out to be false. (New York Times)
Oil and Blood (July 28, 2005)
New York Timescolumnist Bob Herbert argues that the US has no immediate plans to withdraw troops from Iraq. He says that despite the Bush administration's numerous and ever-changing justifications for the war, the real reason behind the invasion "was to establish a long-term military presence in Iraq to ensure American domination of the Middle East and its precious oil reserves." No matter how badly the war goes, then, the US will continue the occupation, to ensure its hold of Iraq's vast oil riches.
Number 10 Blocks Envoy's Book on Iraq (July 17, 2005)
The British Prime Minister's office has blocked the publication of Sir Jeremy Greenstock's book, "The Costs of War." Greenstock was the British Ambassador to the UN and a special envoy to Iraq after the invasion. His insider's account of the run-up to war criticizes the US decision to invade Iraq and is "scathing" towards the leader of the Coalition Provisional Authority, Paul Bremer. (Observer)
How the Leaked Documents Questioning War Emerged from "Britain's Deep Throat" (June 26, 2005)
In this Sunday Timesarticle, reporter Michael Smith discusses how he obtained the Downing Street Memo from an anonymous source. Given the controversial nature of the information justifying the Iraq war, the initial lack of coverage in the US media astonished British sources. But Smith notes that "people power took over" and US bloggers have compiled evidence of a "covert air war" long before the ground war began.
Fixed Is Fixed (June 22, 2005)
Former CIA analyst Ray McGovern musters a "smokescreen patrol" to cut through the smoke being blown by the US administration and its surrogates around the issue of the Downing Street Memo. Many supporters of US President George W. Bush argue that the term "fixed", as in "the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," can mean something other than cooked/manipulated/selected in British English. But as British observers and journalists note, "Fixed refers to trickery." Or, as the former head of the US Defense Intelligence Agency's human intelligence section put it, "Fixed is fixed, man." (TomPaine)
Cabinet Office Paper: Conditions for Military Action (June 12, 2005)
This second UK memo leaked to the Timesin London demonstrates the British preoccupation with creating a situation in which invading Iraq could be legally justified. The British focus on legality contrasts with US government's concentration on military planning, and the memo notes that in Washington, "little thought has been given to creating the political conditions for military action, or the aftermath and how to shape it."
The Secret Way to War (June 9, 2005)
Writing in the New York Review of Books, the first major US newspaper to print the Downing Street Memo in full, Mark Danner analyzes the document and its implications. He paints a picture of how US administration sold the war, literally, without any factual basis: White House Chief of Staff Andrew Card referred to the process as "rolling out a product."
The Other Bomb Drops (June 1, 2005)
Six months before the war in Iraq officially started, US and UK aircraft carried out massive air strikes against Iraqi military units and facilities. Statistics from the British Defense ministry show that "the Allies dropped twice as many bombs on Iraq in the second half of 2002 as they did during the whole of 2001." Former UN Assistant Secretary General Hans Von Sponeck said the 2002 offensive air campaign reminded him "of a boxing match in which one of the boxers is told not to move while the other is allowed to punch and only stop when he is convinced that he has weakened his opponent to the point where he is defeated before the fight begins." (The Nation)
Analysts Behind Iraq Intelligence Were Rewarded (May 28, 2005)
Two US Army analysts whose work bolstered the US administration's claim that Iraq was developing nuclear weapons have received job performance awards. Current and former officials say the episode "shows how the administration has failed to hold people accountable for mistakes on prewar intelligence." Despite "sharp critiques" of bad intelligence by both the President's and Senate's committees, no individuals have been reprimanded or penalized. (Washington Post)
British Memo Reopens War Claim (May 17, 2005)
The Chicago Tribuneexamines the lack of attention the "Downing Street Memo" has gotten in the US. The memo, which reveals that the US "fixed" intelligence to fits its intention of invading Iraq, has gone widely unreported in the US mainstream media. The authors note that "there appears to be little appetite for reopening the question of why the US went to war." The White House, meanwhile, categorically denies the memo's claims.
British Memo Indicates Bush Made Intelligence Fit Iraq Policy (May 5, 2005)
A leaked Downing Street memo reveals that the head of Britain's MI6 intelligence service stated after meeting with top US officials in July 2002 that US President George W. Bush "wanted to remove Saddam through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD." But in July 2002 and well afterward, top Bush advisers insisted that "there are no plans to attack Iraq on the president's desk." (Knight Ridder)
Blair Planned Iraq War from Start (May 1, 2005)
Eight months prior to the invasion of Iraq, long before the US and UK talked publicly of the "inevitability" of war, British Prime Minister Tony Blair met with his government's top officials to discuss justifications for regime change. Documents uncovered by the Times reveal that the US administration had already made the decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, and the UK government concerned itself mainly with how to justify the coming war to the public. (Times, London)
Absolutely? (January 14, 2005)
Juan Cole ridicules US President George Bush's comments following the Pentagon's announcement that the search for weapons of mass destruction has now officially ended. Bush's continuing assertion that "Saddam was dangerous" falls under the President's "propaganda techniques of name-calling and stirring irrational fear." Cole warns that the war in Iraq has created a breeding ground for terrorism and sharply condemns Bush's cheap "hand waving" when justifying the invasion of Iraq. (Informed Comment)
2004
How Silent Are the Humanitarian Invaders of Kosovo? (December 8, 2004)
John Pilger compares the fables of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq to US and UK-fabricated figures of victims of genocide in former Yugoslavia. In both cases, Pilger argues, Washington and Downing Street justified the interventions with fraudulent evidence of respectively WMDs and exaggerated reports of mass killings, bombed civilians and aimed to set up a "free market economy" by imposing neoliberal reforms and privatizing the economy. (New Statesman)
'Impeach Blair' Bid Moves Closer (November 19, 2004)
30 British MPs have approved a motion to impeach Prime Minister Tony Blair. The motion charges that Blair was "guilty of a serious breach of constitutional principals" in defending his decision to wage war on Iraq. Labour MP's have dismissed the motion as a "no hoper" and a "political stunt." (BBC)
Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention and Iraq (October 2004)
This report provides evidence that the US supplied Iraq with material for its chemical weapons program in the 1980's when it supported Iraq in the war against Iran. The White House has confirmed that it licensed the export of anthrax to "established scientific research institutes" but this report questions such claims and argues that the US justified the war in Iraq on evidence of materials Washington itself provided. (University of Sussex, School of Social Sciences and Cultural Studies)
Poor Intelligence Misled Troops About Risk of Drawn-Out War (October 20, 2004)
CIA officials provided nothing but false intelligence in the run-up to the Iraq war, ignoring the threat of an insurgency and underestimating the threat of Saddam Hussein's paramilitary forces and the amount of weapons the resistance possessed. Former CIA Deputy Director Richard J. Kerr admits that "collection was poor. Too much emphasis was placed on current intelligence and there was too little research on important social, political and cultural issues." (New York Times)
So, Did Saddam Hussein Try to Kill Bush's Dad? (October 19, 2004)
''After all, this is the guy who tried to kill my dad,'' was one of the arguments US President George Bush put forward campaigning in September 2002, as he attempted to rally support for the US invasion of Iraq. Bush was referring to an alleged plot by Iraqi intelligence to assassinate his father, former President George Bush, but journalists have seriously questioned the circumstances of the assassination attempt. Close study of the Iraq Survey Group's Duelfer Report makes the allegations seem highly implausible. (Inter Press News)
Blair: No Apology for Iraq War (September 28, 2004)
At the annual Labour Party conference, UK Prime Minister Tony Blair admitted that there was no evidence of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq, but maintained that "the world is a better place with Saddam in prison not in power." Blair's statement was the furthest he has ever gone in admitting that Saddam did not posses weapons of mass destruction. (CNN)
In Address at UN, Bush Defends Decision to Invade Iraq (September 21, 2004)
At the annual meeting of the General Assembly, US President George Bush defended his decision to go to war in Iraq on the basis of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein's refusal to fully comply with Security Council resolutions and the need to defend freedom and democracy. Preceding Bush's address, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan had criticized the US for its hypocrisy in invoking international law to defend its actions in Iraq. (New York Times)
Secret Papers Show Blair Was Warned of Iraq Chaos (September 18, 2004)
Secret government papers warned the Tony Blair a year before the invasion of Iraq of the possible consequences of a second Gulf war. The Prime Minister's Foreign Office and Defense Secretariat officials predicted a difficult and lengthy process of nation-building in Iraq if the UK wanted to secure greater control over the region and a stable post-war government. (Daily Telegraph)
Iraq Had No WMD: The Final Verdict (September 18, 2004)
A draft of the Iraq Survey Group's final report concludes that there was no evidence of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq. The report dismisses the arguments brought forward by the US and British administrations to justify the war and to mask the real objective of regime change in Iraq. (Guardian)
Iraq War Allies Rebuff UN Chief (September 16, 2004)
British, Australian, Polish, Bulgarian and Japanese officials have rejected claims by United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan that the war in Iraq was illegal, claiming that international law legitimized the war. (BBC)
The Wrong War in the Wrong Place (September 3, 2004)
In support of a December 2001 Newsweek editorial titled "Let Iraq Wait, Finish Al Qaeda," this Le Mondearticle asserts that US President George W. Bush declared war based on personal gain and electoral interest rather than intelligence that established a clear link between Bin Laden and Iraq.
MPs Plan to Impeach Blair over Iraq War Record (August 26, 2004)
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair may face impeachment proceedings. Eleven MPs plan to table a motion when the House of Commons returns after the summer recess. "[A]t the least, Mr. Blair will have to face a fresh debate on his personal handling of the war and there will have to be a vote in parliament on whether to institute impeachment proceedings." This is the first time in 150 years that an impeachment motion has been brought. (Guardian)
They Knew... (August 3, 2004)
This investigation reveals that Washington knew full-well that its pre-war assertions of a link between the Saddam Hussein regime and the al-Qaeda network, that Iraq attempted to procure uranium from Niger, and that Iraq possessed WMDs, were false. Given these facts, In These Timesconclude that Washington "engaged in a calculated and well-coordinated effort to turn a war of choice in Iraq into a perceived war of imminent necessity."
Number 10 Admits Hutton Cover-Up (July 17, 2004)
The Independentreports that British intelligence branch MI6 "embarked on an unprecedented cover-up," failing to disclose to the 2003 Hutton Inquiry that intelligence of Saddam Hussein's WMD program was "unsound." The Prime Minister's office defended the actions of MI6, claiming that the information "was not relevant to the investigation into Dr. [David] Kelly's death" and that the intelligence "was too sensitive to be made public."
Iraq Intelligence 'Seriously Flawed' (July 14, 2004)
The "Butler Inquiry" report reveals that British pre-war intelligence justifying the invasion of Iraq is "open to doubt." The report adds that UK intelligence claims that Iraq breached UN Security Council resolutions were "insufficiently robust." The findings also criticize government and intelligence officials for failing to reconsider Iraq's WMD capabilities after UN weapons inspectors came up empty-handed. (Press Association)
Bush and CIA Won't Release Paper on Prewar Intelligence (July 13, 2004)
The US Senate Intelligence Committee investigating pre-war intelligence on Iraq sought to obtain a "presidential summary" prepared for US President George Bush in October 2002. Officials contend that the document refutes critical White House assertions made in the "White Paper"of Saddam Hussein's illicit WMD program. However, the Bush administration refused the request, citing "executive privilege." (New York Times)
Did White House Pressure CIA on Iraq? (July 12, 2004)
The US Senate Intelligence Committee report on pre-war intelligence is re-igniting speculation that the Bush administration pressured the CIA to manipulate its findings to conform to White House policies. The Christian Science Monitorargues that the report does not address the "environment … in which the intelligence community officials were asked to render judgments," especially when senior officials "had already forcefully and repeatedly stated their conclusions" on the threat posed by the Saddam Hussein regime.
Report Says CIA Distorted Iraq Data (July 12, 2004)
Is the CIA alone to blame for pre-war intelligence asserting that the Saddam Hussein regime posed a threat to US security? The US Senate Intelligence Committee report concluded that the "White Paper" of October 4, 2002 "turned estimates into facts … and exaggerated Iraq's ability to strike the United States." (Washington Post)
Now Blair Must Face an Inquiry (July 11, 2004)
UK Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy contends that the "Butler Inquiry" failed to address the fundamental question posed by the Iraq war: the political judgment process that lead the country to war, specifically the decisions made by Prime Minister Tony Blair. Kennedy argues that "it is the politicians who are responsible for how the intelligence was used," regardless of the accuracy of the intelligence available. (Observer)
Spy Chiefs 'Withdrew' Saddam Arms Claim (July 11, 2004)
The Observerreports that the UK intelligence branch MI6 retracted its assessment that Saddam Hussein continued to produce chemical and biological weapons, claiming the intelligence was "fundamentally unreliable." The revelation comes shortly before the July 14, 2004 release of the Butler report on pre-war intelligence.
Blair Finally Admits It: 'We May Never Find WMD' (July 7, 2004)
In a remarkable twist, British Prime Minister Tony Blair conceded that WMD "may never be found" in Iraq, adding that "Saddam Hussein may have destroyed his arsenal." However, Blair fell short of an apology over the handling of the Iraq war, insisting that Saddam Hussein was in breach of UN Security Council resolutions. (Independent)
Did One Woman's Obsession Take America to War? (July 5, 2004)
This Guardianinvestigation reveals that Laurie Mylroie, an analyst at the American Enterprise Institute, with which Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz are affiliated, convinced senior US government officials that a "link" existed between the Saddam Hussein regime and the al-Qaeda network. Mylroie asserts that Saddam Hussein "was behind every anti-US terrorist incident of note in the past decade … and might hand weapons of mass destruction to his terrorist allies."
With 9/11 Report, Bush's Political Thorn Grows More Stubborn (June 17, 2004)
The 9/11 commission investigating the 2001 attacks on the US "bluntly contradicted" Bush administration assertions linking the Saddam Hussein regime with Osama bin Laden and the Al-Qaeda network. Yet White House officials, including US President George Bush and Vice President Richard Cheney, remain adamant that Iraq and Al-Qaeda had "long-established ties with Al-Qaeda." Will Washington offer any credible evidence supporting its allegations? (New York Times)
Why Being Right on WMD is No Consolation to Iraqi Scientist Labelled Enemy of America (May 5, 2004)
Dr. Amer al-Saadi, a former scientific adviser to Saddam Hussein, remains jailed as a PoW in Iraq despite calls by US military and CIA interrogators for his release. Dr. Saadi acted as the main liaison between the Iraqi government and UN weapons inspectors from November 2002 until the US-led invasion. (Guardian)
Powell: Iraq Evidence May Have Been Wrong (April 4, 2004)
US Secretary of State Colin Powell concedes that intelligence on Iraq's WMD program, in particular the evidence presented to the UN identifying mobile chemical weapons labs, "may have been wrong." What does this tell us about the credibility of the Bush administration and of US intelligence services? (Associated Press)
Iraq War Launched to Protect Israel (March 29, 2004)
The Executive Director of the September 11, 2001 commission Philip Zelikow suggests that the US government's true motive for invading Iraq was to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein to Israel. Zelikow contends that the White House could not "sell the threat" as a justification for war to Europe because Europeans "don't care deeply about that threat." (Inter Press Service)
Former Terrorism Aide Charges Bush Manufactured Case for Iraq War (March 23, 2004)
Former US counter-terrorism coordinator Richard Clarke alleges that the Bush administration pressed officials to link Saddam Hussein to the events of September 11, 2001 despite evidence pointing directly to Al-Qaeda. What does Clarke's claims of a "hidden agenda" say about the White House justifications for invading Iraq? (World Socialist)
Carter Savages Blair and Bush: 'Their War Was Based on Lies' (March 22, 2004)
Former US President Jimmy Carter believes that the US and the UK justified an "unnecessary" war based on "lies and misinterpretations." Carter contends that President Bush and Prime Minister Blair knew that intelligence relating to an Iraqi WMD program was false, and that no evidence existed connecting Saddam Hussein to September 11, 2001. (Independent)
Lawyer Who Quit Over Iraq to Testify at Anti-War Trial (March 10, 2004)
Former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook challenged the government's assertions that "rogue states" funding terrorist activities, combined with the events of September 11, did not justify invading Iraq. Cook believes that the US and the UK "converted a country that had no link with international terrorism into a country which is rife with international terrorists." (Independent)
Experts Say US Never Spoke to Source of Tip On Bioweapons (March 5, 2004)
Investigations reveal that prewar White House intelligence on Iraq's "mobile bioweapons labs" was based on an Iraqi defector related to Ahmad Chalabi. To date, evidence of mobile labs in Iraq have yet to surface. (Washington Post)
Blix: Iraq War was Illegal (March 5, 2004)
Former chief weapons inspector Hans Blix argues that UN Security Council resolution 1441 did not give the US and the UK justification to launch war on Iraq. Blix contends that only a second resolution "explicitly authorizing" war would have legalized the invasion. (Independent)
Sending Blair to Prison (March 2, 2004)
A consortium of international lawyers has appealed to the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to investigate charges of war crimes against the UK government. The group alleges that "strong prima facie" evidence exists that the intent of war was not to eradicate WMD, but to elicit the fall of the Saddam Hussein regime. (Daily Mail)
You Call This Liberation? Why No Democracy in Iraq? (February 23, 2004)
White House assertions of "bringing democracy to Iraq" as justification for war is falling on deaf ears in Iraq. The Bush administration is paying a North Carolina firm $466 million to plan a candidate selection process creating "local governance" in postwar Iraq. Is this the new US definition of democracy? (Institute for Southern Studies)
Chalabi, Garner Provide New Clues to War (February 21, 2004)
US General Jay Garner contends that the alleged dangers of Iraq's WMDs or Saddam Hussein's links to Al-Qaeda to justify the war are unfounded. Rather, the White House push for war dealt with the need to establish military bases in Iraq, maintaining a presence in the region given the current troop withdrawals from Saudi Arabia. (Inter Press Service)
Ahmad Chalabi and His Iranian Connection (February 18, 2004)
The US investigation into prewar intelligence reveals that information regarding Iraq's WMD program came through Ahmad Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress (INC). Who is Ahmad Chalabi and why did the White House rely on intelligence supplied by the INC to justify the Iraqi invasion? (Stratfor Weekly)
Iraqis Blamed for WMD Claims (February 18, 2004)
In a new twist, US officials assert that members of the Iraqi National Congress, a party headed by Ahmed Chalabi, are responsible for the faulty WMD intelligence used to justify the Iraq invasion. What does this tell us about the credibility of the Bush administration and of US intelligence services? (Al-Jazeera)
We Had Good Intel - The UN's (February 9, 2004)
Pre-war UN inspectors' estimates of Iraq nuclear, biological and chemical capabilities closely mirror post-war findings. Why was this crucial human intelligence ignored and what does it tell us about the Bush administration's attitudes towards the UN? (Newsweek)
Making the Facts Fit the Case for War (February 8, 2004)
Former White House assistant Richard Goodwin argues that Iraq intelligence failures are not a result of the intelligence gathering process. Rather, he contends the information presented is influenced by government policies, saying, "Presidents and other decision makers usually get the intelligence they want." (New York Times)
US Officials Knew in May Iraq Possessed No WMD (February 1, 2004)
Three weeks after the fall of Baghdad, US intelligence and government officials reported back to Washington that no evidence of a WMD program existed in Iraq. As President Bush considers an inquiry into the intelligence fiasco leading to the Iraq War, why was this information withheld and what does it tell us about the Bush administration's approach to WMD information?(Observer)
The 50 Lies, Exaggerations, Distortions and Half Truths About the Iraq War (January 28, 2004)
The Independentchronicles the rhetoric put forward by the US and UK governments from the lead up to the Iraq conflict to present day. Of note are the transformations in statements regarding the justifications for war, from WMD to the liberation of the Iraqi people.
The Hutton Verdicts (January 28, 2004)
The Guardian reports the verdicts handed down by Lord Hutton regarding the David Kelly affair. The verdict appears to clear British Prime Minister Tony Blair of any wrongdoing in the lead up to the Iraq War.
HRW Report Says War Not Justified as Humanitarian Intervention (January 26, 2004)
Human Rights Watch rejects the claim by the US and UK that they launched the Iraq war on the basis of a humanitarian intervention. This comes as a blow to the Bush and Blair administrations, which are attempting to deflect attention away from the issue of WMD. (Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty)
Bush Was Demanding Excuse To Invade Iraq In January 2001,
Says Ex-Treasury Secretary (January 12, 2004)
The Independent reports that "hints of a link between Saddam and the 11 September attacks...were a political convenience, not the driving motivation behind the invasion." Paul O'Neill describes US President George Bush as "disengaged from the issues and apparently uninterested in dialogue with advisers."
2003
* From the Sunni Triangle to the Bermuda Triangle (November 15, 2003)
While the media likes to chatter about the "Sunni triangle" in Iraq, author Michael Renner calls attention to the Iraqi "Bermuda triangle" where unpleasant facts mysteriously vanish. Missing weapons of mass destruction, for example, and the gap between Washington's claims to democracy and its long-standing support for authoritarian and anti-democratic regimes throughout the oil-rich Middle East.
* Nuclear Weapons and Preventive War (November 2, 2003)
Looking closely at the arguments for war in Iraq and at the US doctrine of preventive war, Peter Weiss concludes that nuclear weapons provide an overwhelmingly fearful and imminent threat that rallies public support for aggressive military action. Unless we eliminate nuclear weapons, preventive war doctrine will proliferate, he argues, and with 35-40 nations capable of producing these weapons, further conflicts are likely.
How British Intelligence Sold the Iraq War (December 28, 2003)
Scott Ritter, former weapon inspector in Iraq, accuses the British Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) of launching a propaganda campaign to "convince the public that Iraq was a far greater threat than it actually was." Ritter claims that the campaign was launched to gain support for sanctions and the use of military force in Iraq. (Sunday Times)
Remember 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'? For Bush, They Are a Nonissue (December 18, 2003)
In the debate over the "necessity" for the war in Iraq, few issues have been more contentious than whether Saddam Hussein had access to banned weapons, as Washington repeatedly said. A few months after waging war US President George Bush says this issue is not important. (New York Times)
Ray McGovern, Former CIA Analyst: "We're Trying to Spread a Little Truth" (December 7, 2003)
The CIA never found any links between Iraq and Al Qaeda. It is every US citizen's duty to learn how Washington waged war based on false intelligence, says former CIA-analyst. (Atlanta Journal Constitution)
House Probers Conclude Iraq War Data Was Weak (September 28, 2003)
A bipartisan committee in the US House of Representatives accuses US intelligence agencies of "significant deficiencies" in gathering information to justify war against Iraq. The committee found outdated information and "piecemeal" new evidence used to conclude that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. (Washington Post)
Blix Claims US-UK Spin on Iraq WMD (September 18, 2003)
Former Chief UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix sharply criticized the US and UK for disguising unsubstantiated evidence as fact. Said Blix, "Advertisers will advertise a refrigerator in terms they do not quite believe in but you expect governments to be more serious and have more credibility." (Cybercast News Service)
No Proof Connects Iraq to 9/11, Bush Says (September 18, 2003)
The Bush administration frequently insinuated that Saddam Hussein was behind the 9/11 attacks by combining references to both subjects in interviews and speeches prior to the pre-emptive war against Iraq. Analysts ponder the consequences of the US public's continued willingness to believe this link. (Los Angeles Times)
Assessing Assessed Intelligence and Blair's Credibility (September 10, 2003)
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair put his faith in "assessed intelligence" on the likelihood of a Weapons of Mass Destruction program in Iraq. This article from ZNetpoints out the danger of equating "assessed intelligence" with "fact."
Britain and US Will Back Down Over WMDs (September 7, 2003)
The Independentreports that Britain and the US have started to downplay the Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) issue in speeches justifying the rationale for war with Iraq. According to the US Under-Secretary of State, whether or not the Hussein regime had WMD "isn't really the issue."
Iraq-Niger Uranium Chronology (August 11, 2003)
This chronology details US "intelligence" information on alleged Iraqi attempts to obtain uranium from Africa, along with relevant Bush administration statements. (Arms Control Association)
Iran-Contra, Amplified (August 11, 2003)
Jim Lobe argues that "hawks" in the Bush administration manipulated intelligence in the drive to war with Iraq, recalling similar skullduggery in the Iran- Contra scandal during the Reagan years. Lobe accuses the officials of deliberately aggravating tensions with Syria, Iran, and North Korea in defiance of official US policy. (Inter Press Service)
The Pentagon Has Some Explaining to Do (August 3, 2003)
Karen Kwiatkowski, retired US Air Force lieutenant colonel and former White House staffer, argues that the Bush administration misrepresented the case for war in Iraq. For "the answers to why peculiar bits of ‘intelligence' found sanctity in a presidential speech…one need look no further than the process inside the Office of the Secretary of Defense." (Houston Chronicle)
The Bush Administration on Iraq's WMD Capabilities (August, 2003)
In this report, the Carnegie Endowment for International Peacecompiles major statements by Bush administration officials on Iraq's capabilities to manufacture and hide chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons and delivery systems.
Distortions of History (July 31, 2003)
Since the invasion of Iraq, President George Bush has distorted the role of the United Nations and the international community in his justifications for war. (Project Against the Present Danger)
Speculation, Fact Hard to Separate in Story of Iraq's 'Nuclear' Tubes (July 31, 2003)
US President George Bush has been under criticism for 16 disputed words about Iraq's attempts to buy uranium in Africa in his State of the Union address. However, critics have paid far less attention to Bush's charge that Iraq "attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production." (USA Today)
Iraqi Scientists Still Deny Iraqi Arms Programs (July 31, 2003)
Despite vigorous efforts, the US remains unsuccessful in finding key senior Iraqi scientists to support its pre-war claims that the Hussein regime pursued a program to develop weapons of mass destruction. This lack of evidence further weakens President Bush's justification for the war against Iraq. (Washington Post)
9/11 Report: No Iraq Link to Al-Qaida (July 24, 2003)
The report of the joint US congressional inquiry into the 9/11 attacks, reveals that US intelligence never had evidence of the Hussein regime's involvement in the attacks, or its support of Al-Qaida. The report's statement further weakens President Bush's justifications for the war against Iraq. (United Press International)
Experts Believed No Iraqi WMDs in 2001 (July 18, 2003)
A conference of top-level military analysts were told that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction months before the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. A Canadian military analyst, who attended the meeting, says that this message fell on deaf ears in Washington. He asserts that President Bush had no grounds to base the invasion of Iraq on the disarmerment issue. (Canadian Press)
"Not Just Sixteen Words" (July 15, 2003)
Senator Carl Levin argues that US President George Bush's false statement in his State of the Union Address was one of several questionable statements and exaggerations by the US Intelligence Community and Administration officials. (Truthout)
20 Lies About the War (July 13, 2003)
The US and UK administrations propagated falsehoods ranging from exaggeration to plain untruth in making the case for the pre-emptive strike on Iraq. In the post-war era, the Occupying Forces use more lies to defend the attacks and to justify the continuing occupation. (Independent)
Blair Seeks New Powers to Attack Rogue States (July 13, 2003)
Downing Street is circulating a document to Western heads of government seeking authority to attack sovereign states if they "inflict suffering on their own people." The document is meant to justify the war on Iraq, but will also set a far-reaching precedent for future invasions in the name of "humanitarian intervention." (Independent)
White House 'Lied About Saddam Threat' (July 10, 2003)
A former intelligence official of the Bush administration accuses "the Bush administration [of not providing] an accurate picture to the US people of the military threat posed by Iraq." (Guardian)
White House 'Warned Over Iraq Claim' (July 9, 2003)
The CIA warned the US Government that claims about Iraq's nuclear ambitions were not true. The warnings came months before President Bush used them to make his case for war. (BBC)
A Diplomat's Undiplomatic Truth: They Lied (July 8, 2003)
Former Ambassador Joseph C. Wilson went to Niger to investigate documents supposedly proving that Iraq tried to acquire enriched uranium. Although he found no basis for the story, President Bush later used it as evidence against Iraq. (Los Angeles Times)
Why Did We Really Go to War with Iraq? (July 6, 2003)
Current Parliamentary investigations into the fabrications of security information by the UK government may not adequately uncover the truth. Only an independent judicial inquiry can answer the pressing questions of why the UK went to war.(Observer)
The Absence of Truth (July 3, 2003)
This report produced by Labour Against the Waragues that the Iraq war was launched on the basis of deceit, with claims about weapons provide the justification for an invasion that was already settled policy.
We Deserve the Truth (July, 2003)
This website, funded and developed by George Soros, provides resources and information on the emerging investigations into the controversies surrounding the justifications for the war in Iraq. The site allows visitors to directly get involved and to contact their local Congress members.
The Selling of the Iraq War: The First Casualty (June 30, 2003)
Despite a lack of consensus within the US intelligence community about Iraq's imminent threat and links to Al-Qaeda, the Bush administration selected evidence to justify its pre-emptive strike. (New Republic)
The Evidence (June 29, 2003)
Dr. Glen Rangwala raises the major questions that remain unaswered by the Foreign Affairs Committee's investigation of the manipulation of security information by the British government. (Independent)
The Hearings (June 29, 2003)
Iraq continues in chaos as the Occupying Forces fail to bring stability, democracy or basic reasources. Meanwhile, the UK government battles charges by the BBC and others of exaggerating and manipulating security information to justify the war. (Independent)
10 Appalling Lies We Were Told About Iraq (June 27, 2003)
The mainstream US press, after two years of cowardice, is finally drawing attention to the US government's deception about Iraq's military capabilities. Alternet reveals the 10 major lies propagated by the Bush administration and exposes the underlying truths.
Bush Escapes Fury That Batters Blair (June 26, 2003)
President George Bush continues to escape harsh criticism and inquiries over the alleged manipulation and misuse of security information. UK Prime Minister Tony Blair, under criticism from fellow Labour Party members, conceded that the UK government made errors in presenting its case for war. (New York Times)
An American Empire Built on Deception (June 26, 2003)
US public opinion about the war remains favorable even in the absence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and charges that President Bush manipulated security information. Two-thirds of those polled believe war was justifiable even if the US doesn't find WMDs. (Boston Globe)
No, Newt, the Ends Don't Justify the Means (June 25, 2003)
Apologists for the Bush administration argue that noble ends justify deceitful means, excusing Washington's lies about the threat Iraq posed to US national security. But, as this article argues, the "immoral and undemocratic means lead inevitably to immoral and undemocratic ends." We see this all too clearly in post-war Iraq. (Nation)
Distorted Intelligence? (June 25, 2003)
Secret German records cast doubt on the Bush administration's continual claims about an Iraq-Al Qaeda terrorist connection. The voluminous German record challenges reports by the White House that Abu Mussab Al Zarqawi, a terrorist linked with the Hussein Regime, was a key player in Al Qaeda. (Newsweek)
"The Road to Coverup is the Road to Ruin" (June 24, 2003) )
Senator Robert C. Byrd states that if the US continues to follow President Bush's doctrine of pre-emptive strikes against hostile countries it must have reliable security intelligence. Justification for the Iraq War was based on the Bush administration manipulating and selectively picking information. (Truthout)
Denial and Deception (June 24, 2003)
Bush administration officials deceived the people of the US into war. This constitutes a fact, not a possibility or an opinion. Yet the political and media establishment act in denial, finding excuses for the administration's efforts to mislead both Congress and the public. (New York Times)
Slaughtergate (June 23, 2003)
William Rivers Pitt claims that the Bush administration undisputedly and deliberately trumped up dire stories of Iraq's weapons capabilities to galvanize the US people behind war. Pitt accuses Washington of using the tragedy of September 11, 2001 to justify an invasion against a nation that posed no threat to US security. (Truthout)
Report Cast Doubt on Iraq-Al Qaeda Connection (June 22, 2003)
President George Bush made claims of an Iraq-Al Qaeda terrorist link in seeking congressional support for a resolution to authorize war against Iraq in October 2002. A still-classified national intelligence report circulated within the Bush administration at that time and drew a far less clear picture about these alleged links. (Washington Post)
Truth Is the Weapon of Bush's Self-Destruction (June 19, 2003)
Harvey Wasserman believes that George W. Bush has the most internationally hated presidency in the history of the US. After receiving near-total support in the wake of 9/11, Bush's popularity has sunk. Unfavorable international sentiments result from the world-media reporting the "truth," unlike their corporate-owned US counterparts. (Columbus Free Press)
Impeachable Offense (June 18, 2003)
The new revelations over security information have created an enormous political scandal in the UK and have the potential to do so in the US. Geov Parrish states that these scandals should lead to the impeachment of President George Bush for his "gregarious abuse of the oath of office." (Seattle Weekly)
Shocking, Shoddy and Shameful (June 18, 2003)
Clare Short, former Secretary of State for International Development, launched an attack on the "collapse in decision-making" at the heart of Prime Minister Tony Blair's government. She accuses the PM of disregarding the Foreign Secretary and Cabinet and relying on a close entourage of unelected advisers to take important decisions on the war. (Independent)
What's the Official Story? Weapons of Mass Distortion (June 17, 2003)
Sheer military power ensures that US casualties in Iraq will be relatively low. This fact mutes the debate over the lack of reliable security information. The recent illegal operation in Iraq has similarities with past clandestine military operations, such as in Zaire (1964-65). (Miami Herald)
Behind the Changing Rationales for War (June 13, 2003)
The Bush administration cited Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction as the main reason for war. In the post-war period Washington has changed its justifications, citing humanitarian liberation as the motive. For many US citizens8this raises doubts about the validity of preemptive strike against a distant country that may not have been a direct threat to the US. (Christian Science Monitor)
The Dog Ate My WMDs (June 13, 2003)
Williams Rivers Pitt points out that after 280 days of fear-inspiring tales of the Iraqi arsenal, seven years of UNSCOM weapons inspections, four years of surveillance, and months of UNMOVIC weapons inspections, the occupying forces have yet to find weapons of mass destruction. (Truthout)
White House in Denial (June 13, 2003)
A multitude of evidence suggests that the Bush administration's security information to justify the war on Iraq was incorrect and manipulated. Nicholas D. Kristof believes the administration deceived themselves about Iraq's nuclear programs and then misled the American public as well. (New York Times)
Prevaricating President (June 11, 2003)
American Prospectstates that Congressional Democrats must further pressure the Bush administration to admit that they manipulated security information to justify a preemptive strike on Iraq.
WeaponsGate: The Coming Downfall of Lying Regimes? (June 10, 2003)
Author Wayne Madsen asserts that scandals over the alleged misuse of security information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction may ultimately result in the downfall of the Bush presidency. (Counterpunch)
Doctors of Intelligence (June 10, 2003)
Intelligence manipulations are not new to US policymakers. As intelligence writer Thomas K. Powers noted in 1982, "dishonesty in the intelligence business is not personal but institutional," with the political realities of Washington inevitably leading the CIA to compromise its findings. The controversies over Iraq are no different. (Alternet)
Accountability Missing in Bushland (June 10, 2003)
The Bush administration brought the US into an unprovoked war against a sovereign state, backed by reasons that were at best exaggerated and at worst outright lies. Still, Washington has not been held accountable and the self-censoring US media is unlikely to do so. (Seattle Post-Intelligencer)
Truth and Consequences (June 9, 2000)
This US News and World Reportarticle tells the story of the interpretation of intelligence information on Iraq's WMDs and the battle between officials in Washington to make a case for war. To the public, the important question remains, what did the administration know or think it knew.
Why America Is Waking Up to the Truth About WMD (June 8, 2003)
A secret report by the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) confirms that President Bush misled the public about the existence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The report concluded it could find no evidence of Iraqi chemical weapons activity in Iraq. (Sunday Herald)
Spies Threaten Blair with 'Smoking Gun' Over Iraq (June 8, 2003)
UK intelligence officers accuse Prime Minister Tony Blair of pressuring them to produce evidence against Iraq to make the case for war. They assert they have transcripts documenting their claim. (Independent)
Revealed: The Secret Cabal Which Spun for Blair (June 8, 2003)
Some accuse the UK government of running a covert operation to produce misleading intelligence that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. The program, known as Operation Rockingham, was set up to "cherry pick" information justify the UK going to war. (Sunday Herald)
Some Iraq Analysts Felt Pressure from Cheney Visits (June 5, 2003)
According to senior intelligence officers, US Vice President Dick Cheney's frequent visits to the CIA created an atmosphere which pressured analysts to make their assessments fit with the Bush administration's policy objectives. (Washington Post)
Blair Must Quit if He Is Wrong About These Weapons (June 5, 2003)
Former UK Defense Secretary Dennis Healy is unconvinced that there was serious evidence of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, despite what Prime Minister Tony Blair insists. Mr. Healey believes that if the Prime Minister is proven wrong about his assertions of Iraq's weapons he should be replaced as leader. (Independent)
The 'Weapons of Mass Disappearance' (June 5, 2003)
US and UK declarations of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were used to scare the US public into supporting the war and gave the UK the necessary legal cover to take part. (Jordan Times)
American Credibility on the Line (June 5, 2003)
In the US and abroad people have begun to question the credibility of the use of US government intelligence. This is a result of the exaggerated intelligence provided by the government administration to make the case for the Washington-led invasion of Iraq. (Jordan Times)
How Truth is Mangled by the Bush Administration (June 5, 2003)
Molly Ivins criticizes the Bush administration and the US press for attempting to cover up the lies of the use of fraudulent government intelligence. In addition, Ms. Ivins states that they are now condemning those reporters who ask, "So where are these weapons of mass destruction we went to war to over?" (Chicago Tribune)
Bomb and Switch (June 4, 2003)
Maureen Dowd states that, in the post-war period, the people of the US are searching for the reason they went to war. Reporters and others assert that US intelligence claims about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq were "beefed up" disputing the stated reasons for going to war. (New York Times)
The Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But ... (June 4, 2003)
Time Magazine, Newsweek and US News & World Report have featured reports on the possibilities that the US government lied about the existence of weapons of mass destruction to gather support for war on Iraq. (Inter Press Service)
The Iraq War Was Always Based On Lies (June 4, 2000)
Politicians and journalists pressure US military officials on why weapons of mass destruction have not been found in Iraq. In making the case for war, Washington tried to quiet dissent among its own analysts over how to interpret evidence. According to Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, the administration began planning for the war two days after 9/11, long before the issue of WMD was discussed. (ZNet)
WMD Will Be on Blair's Political Headstone (June 3, 2003)
John Pilger asserts that on the eve of war, the British majority demanded Prime Minster Tony Blair not to invade Iraq. Instead, the PM decided not to listen to the people, disregarding such an "epic show of democracy." (Daily Mirror)
Standard Operating Procedure (June 3, 2003)
Paul Krugman blames President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair for "grossly manipulating intelligence" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. He criticizes other reporters and government officials for placing the guilt on intelligence agencies instead of the Bush and Blair administrations.(New York Times)
Bush and Blair Under Fire (June 3, 2003)
Both President Bush and Prime Minister Blair are under growing pressure from their countries' Members of Parliaments and Congressmen over allegations that they exaggerated the threat posed by Iraq. (Daily Telegraph)
WMD or Not, Blair Had Already Made Up His Mind (June 3, 2003)
Hugo Jones argues that the real reasons behind Prime Minister Blair's decision of going to war were based on a "twin commitment." The first reason was reliant on the US decision to go to war no matter what and the second was Mr. Blair's unwillingness to abstain from whatever the US decided. (Guardian)
Evidence and Deceit: How the Case For War Became Unstuck (June 2, 2003)
A British official has recently claimed that the government has exaggerated the September UK "intelligence" dossier. Glen Rangwala says that this news came as hardly a surprise. The unexpected part is Prime Minister Tony Blair's insistence upon perpetuating well-known misconceptions of the "intelligence" reports about Iraq. (ZNet)
Short: Blair Lied to Cabinet and Made Secret War Pact With US (June 2, 2003)
UK Prime Minister Tony Blair is facing pressure from the House of Commons to hold an independent inquiry into the war. This came after the former International Development Secretary, Clare Short, accused the PM of lying to Parliament and agreeing on a "secret" pact with George Bush to go to war.(Independent)
Wolfowitz Admits Iraq War Was Planned Two Days After 9/11 (June 2, 2003)
The hawks in the Bush administration have attempted to defend the reasons behind a preemptive strike against Iraq. Though it is now clear that the US and UK have failed to find weapons of mass destruction and begun admitting the real reasons for war. (ZNet)
Bush Remarks Confirm Shift in Justifying War (June 1, 2003)
Washington is shifting focus on the search for weapons of mass destruction. President George W. Bush indicates that the discovery of equipment that could be used to produce weapons would be sufficient to justify the war. (Washington Post)
Straw, Powell Had Serious Doubts Over Their Iraqi Weapons Claims (May 31, 2003)
Highly controversial secret transcripts of a meeting between UK Foreign Secretary, Jack Straw, and his US counterpart, Colin Powell have revealed that both shared serious doubts about the quality of intelligence on Iraq's banned weapons program. (Guardian)
Britain and US Urged to Show Arms Evidence (May 30, 2003)
This Times Londonarticle reports that some officials in the US and the UK have raised doubts about the exaggeration and fabrication of information provided by Washington and London to support an attack on Iraq.
WMD Just A Convenient Excuse for War, Admits Wolfowitz (May 30, 2003)
The primary justification for war against Iraq was simply ‘politically convenient', as stated by Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz in an interview with Vanity Fair . Wolfowitz's comments suggest that the US administration cared little for the truth as it raced toward war. (Independent)
Rockefeller Says Iraq's Weapons Should Have Been Found By Now (May 30, 2003)
US Senator Jay Rockefeller, the top Democrat on the US Senate Intelligence Committee, challenged comments by Bush administration officials that Iraq's WMDs were well hidden and may not be located soon. He stated that if Iraq's weapons of mass destruction posed enough of a threat to justify war, they should have been found by now. (Associated Press)
Blair: WMD Dossier Claims ‘Absurd' (May 30, 2003)
Prime Minister Tony Blair was visibly irritated when he rejected the accusations that Downing Street had asked MI6 to invent evidence for a report on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. (Guardian)
Bush Lied and Soldiers Died (May 29, 2003)
Wayne Francis argues that it appears that the massive chore undertaken by the US to invade and occupy Iraq has not yielded one single victory in the "war on terrorism." In addition, US claims that Iraq constituted a major threat to national security have, thus far, not been proven. (TruthOut)
Truth, Lies and Weapons of Mass Destruction (May 29, 2003)
US officials state that Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were destroyed before the war. This means that the US and UK invasion was based on claims to get rid of WMD that in fact were already destroyed. (Independent)
The American Confession (May 29, 2003)
In this article, Le Mondedescribes the US attempt to make world public opinion believe that Iraq held and constructed weapons of mass destruction without adequate proof, as the "biggest State Lie in recent years."
CIA Fails to Find Iraq's WMD (May 29, 2003)
A US intelligence analyst has acknowledged that the CIA does not have any concrete evidence that the seized trailers and a mobile laboratory in Iraq were used to make biological agents. (Middle East Online)
Where Are Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction? (May 4, 2003)
US teams searching for weapons of mass destruction are under intense pressure from Washington to come up with something. If they do not find any WMDs, charges of the war's illegitimacy will be strengthened. (Associated Press)
Intelligence Officers Challenge Bush (May 1, 2003)
In a memorandum to President Bush, the Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity accuse the Bush government of fabricating intelligence about Iraq. They urge him to launch an inquiry into the performance of the CIA and to allow UN inspectors to return to Iraq. (Common Dreams)
Weapons of Mass Deception (April 29, 2003)
The concept of WMD's and its possible threat was used as one of the main tools of deception by the US to justify a preemptive strike on Iraq. (Yellow Times)
Straw Hints That Weapons Will Never Be Found (April 29, 2003)
UK Foreign Secretary Jack Straw indicated that weapons of mass destruction might never be found and insisted it was not necessary to provide a legal justification for the war on Iraq. (Independent)
Reports of Weapons Greatly Exaggerated (April 25, 2003)
London and Washington's justification for war on Iraq was on the basis of the threat of weapons of mass destruction. US and UK forces have not yet found any WMD's and the governements have offered no credible accounts of where the weapons might be. (Times, London)
2002
Seven Fallacies of US Plans to Invade Iraq (August 2002)
A US invasion of Iraq could have serious moral, legal, political, and strategic repercussions. "In the international community," reports Foreign Policy in Focus, "serious questions are being raised regarding its legality, its justification, its political implications, and the costs of the war itself."
