It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
(visit the link for the full news article)
Fresh evidence is revealed today about how MI6 and the CIA were told through secret channels by Saddam Hussein's foreign minister and his head of intelligence that Iraq had no active weapons of mass destruction.
Tony Blair told parliament before the war that intelligence showed Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programme was "active", "growing" and "up and running".
A special BBC Panorama programme tonight will reveal how British and US intelligence agencies were informed by top sources months before the invasion that Iraq had no active WMD programme, and that the
Originally posted by Wrabbit2000
reply to post by Corruption Exposed
Interesting information to add to the stack..but I have a question. Why would they have believed these guys? They were in a position they were about to lose if we invaded (We sacked the WHOLE Government and authority structure and that was a predictable move for us). Aside from the fact, other "high level sources" who the public later learned were fabricating little trolls ...also said they did exist. Also Saddam's henchmen saying it. Who to believe?
I supported the invasion at the time because I believed Bush and TPTB must have more information. There must be plenty in the "Classified" stack the public simply wasn't seeing to make it all logical and right. In discovering over the years since how unfounded that hope and faith had been, I'll be the first to nominate Cheney in particular, but Bush as well, for a seat in a Witness chair and their very own Defendants table. Not international (This is America...not the UN.. Global Courts can stick it) but U.S. accounting for what happened.
^^^ having said that, so someone doesn't claim I'm some shill for Bush or whatever... This just seems opportunistic of the BBC. We invaded Iraq, ostensibly, on the intelligence and data derived by insiders of the Saddam regime...but then we were supposed to call it off because OTHER insiders of the same regime said it wasn't so? Err...
There is fire beneath the smoke for people like the BBC to find..Indeed. I think this is fluff and poor journalism though. Just my opinion.
Originally posted by Hopechest
And to be fair here, if anyone needed to be removed it was Saddam and his regime. He had started a war with Iran, he tried to invade Kuwait, he gassed over 5000 of his own people, he was continuing a policy of torture of political enemies...the list is very long of his crimes.
Whether the stated reason was truthful or not is sort of irrelevant. You have to look at what factors are required before the world community should take action to remove someone in power. I agree with taking him out but I think it should of been done in a completely different manner that didn't put the burden of cost on us.
Originally posted by Corruption Exposed
reply to post by Hopechest
If getting rid of dictators was reason enough to go to war than the USA would have to invade several of their allies such as Saudi Arabia or Bahrain...
You are right though, they need to sell the war the the public as the actual reasons for the wars are not something you want the general public to be aware of.
Luckily people aren't falling for it as easily anymore but regrettably regardless of our awakening that's not stopping the war criminals from continuing their global conquest.
And to be fair here, if anyone needed to be removed it was Saddam and his regime. He had started a war with Iran