Claire Short says there was no discussion about the invasion of Iraq.

You may recall me mentioning the other day the case of the Tories and various media organizations in the UK seeking the release of the minutes of cabinet meetings held in the days leading up to the invasion of Iraq. Specifically, inquiring minds want to see the legal advise the UK Attorney General, Lord Goldsmith, gave Phony B-Liar and what was discussed concerning that advise. The Labour government is stonewalling in the courts claiming executive privilege protects consultations the PM gets from his staff and advisers. (Where have we heard that one before?)

In any case, turns out Claire Short, a former cabinet minister (who quit in protest of the invasion), tells the Mail-Online that the reason the current PM Gordon Brown is refusing to release the minutes is because there was no discussion of Goldsmith's legal advise.

News Item:

"Details surrounding two crucial meetings on the eve of the conflict were laid bare for the first time yesterday when former Cabinet Minister Clare Short, who was present at both, gave a full account of what happened . . . 'The bitter irony is that what they are doing is concealing the fact there was no robust decision-making. The minutes will reveal there was no real Cabinet discussion about the Iraq War. That is the real scandal . . .’

Ms Short said: ‘When we arrived, there was a piece of paper in front of each of us, a few paragraphs written by the Attorney General saying the war was legal, there were no problems etc.

‘Lord Goldsmith started reading it out but we said, “You don’t have to, we can read it.” Then Tony said something like, “That’s it.” And that was it. ‘I wanted to know if the Attorney General had any doubts about the legality of the war. ‘They all said, “Clare, be quiet, stop.” No one else wanted to talk about it. I was shouted down.’"

Now that's how you get stuck in a never ending war that's cost a trillion dollars, 4,200 dead and tens of thousands injured. But, hey, we're moving on, things to do people to see. Let's not get bogged down in who did what and who drove us into this ditch in the first place.

That may be the mantra in the new administration, but it looks like Gordon Brown and the labour party have a rendezvous with destiny. Lucky for the criminal enterprise called the Bush administration, there are two NFL players lost off the Florida coast and a huge snow storm headed toward New York, the biggest media market in the US.

More than enough diversion to ensure the ignorance of the American people no matter what is revealed about the march to war in Iraq.

Ron Suskind just found the smoking gun on Iraq!

Now here's some news:

In his new book "The Way of the World: A Story of Truth and Hope in an Age of Extremism" Ron Suskind writes the administration knew from a secret meeting between an Iraqi intelligence official, Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, and British intelligence officals in Amman, Jordan, [Formerly called Philadelphia] that Saddam had no WMD, before the invasion.

Suskind writes: "That the White House had 'ignored the Iraq intelligence chief’s accurate disclosure that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion."

Of course, they also knew from the defection in 1995 of Saddam's son-in-law and chief of WMD that Iraq had no weapons.

As I pointed out in April of 2006, for about the 100th time, quoting from the transcript of the UNSCOM debrief: "Kamel states categorically: 'I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed.'" [In 1991]

But there's much more . . .

More explosively, if that's possible, Suskind writes that Bush ordered the CIA in July of '03 to fabricate a post-dated letter saying that Mohammed Atta went to Iraq to train for the 9/11 attacks and that Saddam really did get that "Yellow Cake," after all.

The very same Iraqi intelligence chief, Habbush, wrote the letter. He was relocated and given 5 million dollars, according to Suskind, which he told NPR couldn't have been anything other than "hush money."

Politico (who got an advance copy of the book, before the "street date," very naughty booksellers) reports:

"The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001,' Suskind writes. 'It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq – thus showing, finally, that there was an operational link between Saddam and al Qaeda, something the Vice President’s Office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade Iraq. There is no link.'" [Though Cheney keeps insisting it's true.]

The letter appeared in December of 2003 in the Telegraph.

The Telegraph:

"Iraq's coalition government claims that it has uncovered documentary proof that Mohammed Atta, the al-Qaeda mastermind of the September 11 attacks against the US, was trained in Baghdad by Abu Nidal, the notorious Palestinian terrorist.

Details of Atta's visit to the Iraqi capital in the summer of 2001, just weeks before he launched the most devastating terrorist attack in US history, are contained in a top secret memo written to Saddam Hussein, the then Iraqi president, by Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti, the former head of the Iraqi Intelligence Service.

The handwritten memo, a copy of which has been obtained exclusively by the Telegraph, is dated July 1, 2001 and provides a short resume of a three-day "work programme" Atta had undertaken at Abu Nidal's base in Baghdad.

In the memo, Habbush reports that Atta 'displayed extraordinary effort' and demonstrated his ability to lead the team that would be "responsible for attacking the targets that we have agreed to destroy'.

The second part of the memo, which is headed 'Niger Shipment', contains a report about an unspecified shipment — believed to be uranium — that it says has been transported to Iraq via Libya and Syria.

Although Iraqi officials refused to disclose how and where they had obtained the document, Dr Ayad Allawi, a member of Iraq's ruling seven-man Presidential Committee, said the document was genuine.

'We are uncovering evidence all the time of Saddam's involvement with al-Qaeda,' he said. 'But this is the most compelling piece of evidence that we have found so far. It shows that not only did Saddam have contacts with al-Qaeda, he had contact with those responsible for the September 11 attacks.'"

Notice, btw, who takes credit for uncovering this important evidence that just happens to debunk Joe Wilson's claim that Bush lied in his Jan 2003 SOTU address about Yellow Cake. That Darth Cheney, always thinking about covering his tracks!

Suskind goes on . . .

[The forgery] "operation created by the White House and passed to the CIA seems inconsistent with the laws about the CIA not launching operations 'intended to influence United States political processes, public opinion, policies or media . . . . It is not the sort of offense, such as assault or burglary, that carries specific penalties, for example, a fine or jail time . . . It is much broader than that. It pertains to the White House’s knowingly misusing an arm of government, the sort of thing generally taken up in impeachment proceedings."

Boy, Dennis Kucinich and Robert Wexler are real nutjobs, huh? Where do they get their crazy ideas, wasting the public's time and money?

Suskind on NPR

Suskind was on ATC this morning and had to deal with a very skeptical Steve Inskeep.

Inskeep: "Are you alledging that the President didn't just screw up, [Because we all know he does that all the time] or that his people didn't screw up, but that the President himself knowingly lied about what Iraq's situation was?"

Suskind: "The evidence is clear, that the Presdident knew there were no weapons, or certainly had plenty of evidence there were no weapons in Iraq prior to the invasion."

Inskeep: "Let me ask, though, you're talking about one high level Iraqi official, very high level, credible sounding, but he's one offcial, and I wonder if you as a reporter would be willing to base you entire book, say, mush less a matter of life and death, on a single source like that?"

No Steve, actually, beside Saddam's defector son-in-law (only in charge of Saddam's entire WMD program), Iraq's foreign minister told the CIA Saddam didn't have weapons, as well.

Sidney Blumenthal confirmed on Salon.com the story that Tyler Drumheller, the former CIA chief of clandestine operations for Europe, told "60 Minutes" that the CIA "received documentary intelligence from Naji Sabri, Saddam's foreign minister, that Saddam did not have WMD. 'We continued to validate him the whole way through,' said Drumheller. 'The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming, and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy, to justify the policy' . . .

Now two former senior CIA officers have confirmed Drumheller's account to me and provided the background to the story of how the information that might have stopped the invasion of Iraq was twisted in order to justify it . . .

On the eve of Sabri's appearance at the United Nations in September 2002 to present Saddam's case, the officer in charge of this operation met in New York with a 'cutout' who had debriefed Sabri for the CIA. Then the officer flew to Washington, where he met with CIA deputy director John McLaughlin, who was 'excited' about the report. Nonetheless, McLaughlin expressed his reservations. He said that Sabri's information was at odds with 'our best source.' That source was code-named 'Curveball,' later exposed as a fabricator, con man and former Iraqi taxi driver posing as a chemical engineer."

According to the Observer, "Curveball's German Handlers handlers saw him as 'crazy ... out of control', his friends called him a 'congenital liar', and US officials investigating his claims were surprised that he had a hangover and that he 'might be an alcoholic.'"

Great source, but any friend of Ahamd Chalabi is a friend of BushCo.

Of course, knowing, in fact, that there were no weapons Bush had to create a casus belli. Since he figured the weapons inspectors weren't going to come up with any weapons soon enough to make the whole misadventure appear legal, he needed create a reason to attack Iraq.

The Boston Globe reported:

"According to a British author's account, Bush proposed an alternative: Paint a US spy plane in UN colors and see if they couldn't tempt Hussein's forces to shoot at it. In any case, he said, the war was 'penciled in' for March 10 and the United States would go ahead with or without a second UN resolution.

Blair replied that he was 'solidly with' the president.

That is the gist of an account of the Jan. 31, 2003, meeting contained in the new edition of a book, 'Lawless World,' by British author Philippe Sands. The author has not identified the writer of a memorandum on which the account is based, but British news reports say it was one of the aides in attendance: Sir David Manning, then security adviser to Blair and now the British ambassador in Washington."

Not that, Bush & Co. would ever consider anything like that again, naturally.

Oh, but there is this: Sy Hersh recently said that, at a brainstorming session in Cheney's office:

"There was a dozen ideas proffered about how to trigger a war [With Iran]. The one that interested me the most was why don’t we build — we in our shipyard — build four or five boats that look like Iranian PT boats. Put Navy seals on them with a lot of arms. And next time one of our boats goes to the Straits of Hormuz, start a shoot-up. Might cost some lives. And it was rejected because you can’t have Americans killing Americans. That’s the kind of — that’s the level of stuff we’re talking about. Provocation. But that was rejected." [Democraticwarrior.com]

I'm sure that's as far as it went.

Anyway, back to impeachable offenses . . .

Inskeep: "Are you saying the White House ordered the CIA to fabricate evidence, even after the invasion of Iraq, fabricate evidence linking 9/11 to Iraq, in effect?"

[Gasp! Ambassador Wilson's Op-Ed provoked Cheney to "out" a CIA agent, for Christ sake! Common', get real jackass!]

Suskind: "Absolutly. George Tenet comes back from a White House briefing and he's got it . . . folks at CIA remember seeing the creamy White House stationary and it says 'we want a letter fabricated and we want this letter to essentially emerge. This hand written letter from Habbush to Saddam, which essentially is a checking of the box on all the controversies about the WMD that are unfolding that America might have taken the nation to war on false pretences."

How crazy is that?

NPR called around and the got the stright poop from all involved. Tenet said it was "rediculous" to sugget he would plant false evidence; that farcical Colin Powell presentation at the UN, by the way, was "triple sourced"

The White House said this is all another one of those "bizzare conspiracy theories that Ron Suskind likes to dwell in. "

And about the charge that Habbush telling the Brits before the war Saddam had bubkus for WMD? George Tenet said the "Iraqi failed to persuade."

Curveball, obviously, was so much more convincing. And this guy was our chief spook? Wow. That explains 9/11.

The White House adds that any info Habbush might have provided was "inmaterial to the decision to use force."

Finally, the truth! Of course, the information that Saddam had no WMD was inmaterial to the decision to go to war, what difference did that make?

Good God! What else are these people into? When do the impeachment hearings start?

The myth of the Iraqi military's abilities.

I just heard Guy Raz, NPR's defense correspondent, say on TOTN that al-Maliki's defeat isn't all bad. He says Pentagon officials tell him the offensive showed large numbers of Iraqi security forces can operate independently, without US help.

Judging by the outcome of the fighting, I'd say they really can't.

Only three days into the fighting the WaPo reported:

"U.S. forces in armored vehicles battled Mahdi Army fighters Thursday in Sadr City . . . Iraqi army and police units appeared to be largely holding to the outskirts of the area as American troops took the lead in the fighting. Four U.S. Stryker armored vehicles were seen in Sadr City by a Washington Post correspondent, one of them engaging Mahdi Army militiamen with heavy fire. The din of American weapons, along with the Mahdi Army's AK-47s and rocket-propelled grenades, was heard through much of the day. U.S. helicopters and drones buzzed overhead."

Last Friday AP reported:

"U.S. forces stepped deeper Friday into the Iraqi government's fight to cripple Shiite militias, launching air strikes in the southern city of Basra and firing a Hellfire missile in the main Shiite stronghold in Baghdad."

The NYT reports:

"At about 5 p.m. on Sunday, an American soldier was killed just north of the capital when the vehicle he was riding in was hit by a roadside bomb. In Sadr City, witnesses said an American armored vehicle was blown up by a homemade bomb on Falah Street, in the center of the neighborhood. Ali Khayon, who lives on the street, said the blast occurred about 1:30. 'The American soldiers opened fire randomly in a crazy way and shot many people,' he said. 'I started taking the wounded people in my truck in order to move them to the hospital, and on the way I saw the American tank still burning.'

A police officer in Sadr City said a second armored vehicle that came to tow away the one that was bombed was hit by another explosion. . . An aircraft called in to support the soldiers killed 25 people, according to the statement. American forces also conducted air strikes in the New Baghdad neighborhood, just south of Sadr City, in Kadhimiya, in Ghazaliya in eastern Baghdad and in the northern part of the city, according to the American military. At least 21 people were killed."

And Reuters reported yesterday:

"The United States confirmed on Sunday that U.S. special forces units were operating alongside Iraqi government troops in Basra. . . A U.S. military statement described a joint raid by Iraqi and U.S. special forces units which killed 22 suspected militants, including '16 criminal fighters' strafed in an air strike on three houses." [Or just civilians who just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. It's so hard to tell.]

And Newsweek reporter Michael Hirsh says this extensive US help for Iraqi forces, especially air support, is a long term deal.

Michael Hirsh reported in Newsweek last year:

"Despite all the political debate in Washington about a quick U.S. pullout from Iraq, the vast Balad Air Base, a 15-square-mile mini-city of thousands of trailers and vehicle depots located 43 miles north of Baghdad, is hard evidence that the Pentagon is planning to stay in Iraq for a long time-at least a decade or so, according to military strategists. . . . With 27,500 landings and takeoffs a month, Balad is second only to London's Heathrow Airport in traffic worldwide, Brig. Gen. Frank Gorenc, the base commander."

So, don't believe the hype about the abilities of the Iraqi army to wipe their own asses without massive US aid.

Extra note:

I count at Icasualties.org 7 US casualties listed in Baghdad since al-Maliki launched his offensive. More than likely these deaths can be attributed to al-Maliki "taking the lead."

Operation "Saulat al-Fursan:" Retreat of the Knights instead?

The BBC reports:

"A curfew has been imposed on Baghdad to contain the violence between Mehdi Army militants, and Iraqi security forces. The curfew will last from 2300 (2000 GMT) on Thursday, until 0500 (0200 GMT) on Sunday. A spokesman for the security forces, Major-General Qassim Moussawi, said: 'This is because of the clashes in Baghdad. We want to protect civilians.'"

W., who was speaking at the Air Force museum in Dayton, Ohio, said "normalcy" was returning to Iraq. For once I agree with him, it sure is starting to look like the Iraq we're all used to.

Time Online reports:

"Iraq’s Prime Minister was staring into the abyss today after his operation to crush militia strongholds in Basra stalled, members of his own security forces defected and district after district of his own capital fell to Shia militia gunmen. With the threat of a civil war looming in the south, Nouri al-Maliki’s police chief in Basra narrowly escaped assassination in the crucial port city, while in Baghdad, the spokesman for the Iraqi side of the US military surge was kidnapped by gunmen and his house burnt to the ground.

Saboteurs also blew up one of Iraq's two main oil pipelines from Basra, cutting at least a third of the exports from the city which provides 80 per cent of government revenue, a clear sign that the militias — who siphon significant sums off the oil smuggling trade — would not stop at mere insurrection. . . . Rockets from Sadr City slammed into the governmental Green Zone compound in the city centre, killing one person and wounding several more."

Wasn't al-Maliki from his battlefield HQ just threatening if Madhi army fighters didn't give up their weapons in 72 hours "the law will follow its course'? The clock has almost run out, so what now Nouri?

Since when, btw, has Nouri al-Maliki become a battlefield general? Who does he think he is, a war president?

What I'm real curious about is how much the US military had to do with the planning of this offensive against Mutada al-Sadr? I mean, they're still blaming the fighting in Basra, and Baghdad, and Kut, and Diwanya, ect. on "rogue elements" of the jaish i-Mahdi, as if they're trying to give Sadr an out. Of course, it's gone way beyond that by now, Maliki just blew up the ceasefire that was making the surgeon look like it was really working and now all bets are off.

At some point, or another, the US is going to have to move in to clean up Maliki's mess and possibly to save his neck. Oh yes, and at the some time try to maintain our presence in the green Zone, which is looking more and more precarious everyday.

AP reports:

"A U.S. government employee was killed and four others were wounded in Baghdad this week by rocket attacks on the Green Zone diplomatic and government compound, the U.S. State Department said on Thursday. . . Mortar bombs and rockets have exploded across the capital for days. A strike near the U.S. Embassy in the fortified Green Zone on Thursday sent a column of black smoke into the sky. [State Department spokesman Sean] McCormack said Green Zone rocket attacks occurred on Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday. He blamed the attacks on 'extremist criminal elements.'"