A mess with the labs

[Skybird]

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...542840,00.html

According to Tenet, the CIA even specifically asked the BND contact what he thought of “Curveball” after the war began. In response, though, the BND agent didn't specifically call "Curveball" a "fabricator," Tenets says. Rather, he spoke of a "single source" whose information couldn't be independently confirmed -- the same watered-down formulation that found its way into the Hanning letter. Former highly-placed BND agents confirm this account.
In any case, the CIA and the White House interpreted Hanning's response as carte blanche. Five weeks after receiving Hanning's letter, the US president announced in his State of the Union address that Saddam possessed "several mobile biological weapons labs" and further that "he has given no evidence that he has destroyed them."
But as confident as President Bush seemed, the US intelligence community was divided into two camps. The majority followed the war drums of the hawks. But there were also critics who warned against going to war. The CIA's Drumheller was one of them, and he mentioned his reservations to John McLaughlin, second in command at the CIA. On the night before Powell's Security Council presentation, he even telephoned with George Tenet himself. "Hey, boss," he recalls saying. "Be careful with that German report. It's supposed to be taken out. There are a lot of problems with that."

It seems that this detail needs to be re-evaluated, since german media have picked up the story now, too.

I have said several times that "we" (the Geman and european side in the widest meaning) have warned the US that intel situation is not reliable and that it is not wise an idea to go to war with Iraq. However, it seems that the "intel" regarding mobile biological weapons labs mainly is a mess caused by the German BND.

the German BND is one of the most active Western intel service in the middle East region. It was also responsible for the information about the sleeping location of saddam that was used to aim a cruise missle prestrike ahead of the main attack, in an attempt to take out saddam before the war even had begun.

It seems that the intel about mobile is a failure the BND is responsible for. having siad the opposite in the past, I want to say one thing on that:

In the news coverage of that time, medias in Germany had raised doubts about these labs exiosting from the beginning on, and also were not blindly trusting in the reliability of the info on sadam'S sleeping place - they already started to doubt in the sdame night the first stirke was carried out. Not knowing what was happening behind the curtain, and since the diea of mobile labs was relatively new, I followed that perception the media spread, and came to a general position of assuming that germany (and of corse also it's intel agencies) were warning aganst the weak basis regarding info justifying a war. As the essay says, the BND chief indeed warned the CIA's number two on the source's information not having been verified by a second source, and it also says that the leaders were warned as well by American analysts pointing out that the report by the Germans maybe was foul. Why America was so eager nevertheless to use that report, deserves to be examined. It is worth to remember that the highly questionable london missile memo also was accepted, despite it's very weak fundament: the British had copied I think the diploma paper of a junior political analysts doing some mind expeirments from ten years earlier and then sold that as the latest status of intel information from 2003. Accroding to that, Iraq should havbe been able to reach London with nulcear strikes in 30 minutes right now, or in the very imminent future (talking of days, or weeks at best)

The BND in it's watered words of caution seem to have tried to avoid fixing itself on any solid position. If this was just something happening, or maybe even was wanted by Schroeder - who made heavy use of the war-triggered anti-americanism and the anti-war sentiments for innerpolitical purposes - necessarily remains speculation, but I cannot rule out that scenario. His interests maybe has met Bush's interest in this going of decisions.

I also want to note that nevertheless it has been true and still is true that Germany and many other nations warned explicitly of the possible negative consequences of an attack on iraq, loud and in public, and repeatedly - and as we know now, these fears were all too justified. the official reason for goung to war was a runnign nuclear wepaoin progra, and Saddam being close to developeing ready nuclear warheads and carrier systems as well. The real intention was to strengthen america'S strategic longterm position in the region, and it's influence on the traffic patterns of oil , and the oil business inside Iraq, as well as wanting to establish an america-friendly government that should serve as a beacon of democarcy in the region.

It is clear that in the past 6-8 months there had been a drop in violence , due to a chnage in command (Patreus), and his new strategy. Nevertheless, it is no reason to become enthusiastic. the internal hostily in Iraqi society is enormous, the american orestige has suffered miserably, the USs are no longe feared by Iran, but on street demonstrations are laughed about and made ridicule of, and the American positojned is massievly weaklened, not strengthened. their is no and porbbyl will not be a beacon of democracy, the country is unstable, the occupators are disliked and even hated by most, and nuclearweapj shad not been found - so when referring to the orginal reasons for war, the war is lost, and is a failure regarding it's objectives.

Some people accused me in the past to be ignorrant towards germany's role in Iraq. I am not: not regarding the bio-lab-thing - that'S why I am posting this - , and not regarding former sensitive technology deals German companies - and others as well - illegally participated in (in violation of government decisions, and valid laws). But I also do not blow it up beyond proportion, and would say that the German "info" was used because it helped to sell the agenda - and that was set for war anyway.

If maybe the clique around chancellor Schroeder was involved in motivating this report, it would put even more shame on this man, whom I already always found disgusting in his unscrupelous opportunism and big mouth. But before any of my critics now becomes enthusiastic about me admitting the germans had dirty hands in the preparation of the war, i would ask two questions: why is this affair being digged out now, and so late, and at this point of the presidential race in the US, and why have internal warnings of american analysts who warned of this German report being ignored? Tennet is no innocent for me, he was told to bring up the information needed to excuse a war, ni matter if true or not, and noit before he found his name being put on the blakc loist in an effort by Bush to present a scapegoat, or to deliver a fall guy, he somewhat turned against Bush and distanced himself from him and the war and the reasons for it. That's why I repeatedly said that the intel service was ordered to fabricate the information needed to convince the american public that the war was needed, and desirable.

Manipulating a nation's own public is a top priority job of intel sevices.