Defector 'Curveball' admits he lied about Iraqi WMD

A large part of the problem was:

Defector 'Curveball' admits he lied about Iraqi WMD

By Douglas Stanglin,
USA TODAY Feb 15, 2011

An Iraqi defector code-named "Curveball," whose tales convinced the Bush administration that Iraq had secret biological weapons has admitted for the first time that he lied about his story, The Guardian reports.

Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi tells The Guardian in an exclusive interview that he made up the stories of mobile bio-weapons trucks and clandestine factories in an effort to bring down the Saddam Hussein regime.

The defector, who had fled Iraq in 1995, tells the British newspaper that he watched in shock as his claims were used to justify the war.

"Maybe I was right, maybe I was not right," he tells the newspaper. "They gave me this chance. I had the chance to fabricate something to topple the regime. I and my sons are proud of that, and we are proud that we were the reason to give Iraq the margin of democracy."

He claims officials implied that his cooperation would make it easier for his Moroccan-born wife and child to join him in Germany.

"Curveball" initially told his tales to the German secret service, and the information wound up in Secretary of State Colin Powell's speech in 2003 to the United Nations stating the case against Saddam Hussein.

"Curveball" tells The Guardian that when he complained to his German handlers that they had violated an agreement not to pass his information to a third country, he was told not to speak and was placed in lockdown for about 90 days.

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/ondeadline/post/2011/02/defector-curveball-admits-he-lied-about-iraqi-wmd/1

Well, that ship sailed (sunk?) long ago. Despite the inisistence of the likes of Sean Hannity, there were no WMDs and the grounds for thinknig there were were weak. Granted that things are always less clear at the time than they often appear in retrospect, and that erring on the side of security is arguably the right appraoch, stil we ought to be a lot surer than they were before we send our military into harm's way.

@IBH

So, when was he lying? Then, or now?

@IBH

So, when was he lying? Then, or now? Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Subsequent events, and his own admission, indicate that he was lying then.

It is amazing to me that our intelligence system didn't look at this more skeptically and find the lies. Maybe there was a part of the then-administration that wanted to believe a little too much.

I feel sad for all the families that lost their members of the military based on that rush to judgment. And their friends, too.

I feel sad for all the families that lost their members of the military based on that rush to judgment. And their friends, too. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

No need to feel bad about a couple hundred thousand Iraqis, of course.

Mazo.

No need to feel bad about a couple hundred thousand Iraqis, of course.

Mazo. Originally Posted by Mazomaniac

Touche. I do feel bad for all the victims of this policy.

Touche. I do feel bad for all the victims of this policy. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

OK, previous cheap shot withdrawn.

Cheers,
Mazo.

It is amazing to me that our intelligence system didn't look at this more skeptically and find the lies. Maybe there was a part of the then-administration that wanted to believe a little too much. Originally Posted by charlestudor2005

Somebody didn't WANT to know. Other intelligence agencies were telling our intelligence agency & the administration at the time that Curveball was not credible.

We choose not to listen.

Somebody didn't WANT to know. Other intelligence agencies were telling our intelligence agency & the administration at the time that Curveball was not credible.

We choose not to listen. Originally Posted by Sisyphus

Maybe there was incentive for "not wanting to know", and going forward with the war over there?

Maybe there was incentive for "not wanting to know", and going forward with the war over there? Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

Perhaps, as that seems to be exactly what we did. If one believes that a righteous end justifies any means, it could be argued we simply took advantage of an opportunity that was presented to us.

I've never been comfortable with it, though.

Recently, Ron Paul entered into the record what could amount to war crimes against George HW Bush. If the interpretation of a message sent through ambassador April Glaspie gave a green light to Saddam... I've known for a long time that Kuwait was cross-drilling into iraq, but even this wasn't being reported by the conservative media. If green lighting the invasion to Kuwait, led to US involvement, which led to UN sanctions, which led to lies about WMDs, well I'm sure you get the picture.

Recently, Ron Paul entered into the record what could amount to war crimes against George HW Bush. If the interpretation of a message sent through ambassador April Glaspie gave a green light to Saddam... I've known for a long time that Kuwait was cross-drilling into iraq, but even this wasn't being reported by the conservative media. If green lighting the invasion to Kuwait, led to US involvement, which led to UN sanctions, which led to lies about WMDs, well I'm sure you get the picture. Originally Posted by DFW5Traveler

Just like that ole song, "The Windmills of Your Mind"...

Actually, there were contemporaneous sources that warned the administration that Curveball's intelligence was extremely unreliable. This is not an exhaustive list of the warnings, but it does list some of them:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...401081_pf.html

Actually, there were contemporaneous sources that warned the administration that Curveball's intelligence was extremely unreliable. This is not an exhaustive list of the warnings, but it does list some of them:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...401081_pf.html Originally Posted by TexTushHog

It's been a while since I read a lot of the material on this, but the article, basically, jives with the rest of what I read. I would take exception with the Post articles's characterization that the Germans "faithfully" passed on what Curveball told them.

The Germans didn't believe Curveball practically from the beginning. They passed it on more in the form of,

"Look, we have this guy. We don't think he's credible. We can't verify anything he's told us. But, if what he says is true, it's something you may wish to hear."

In terms of Curveball assertions making it into Powell's speech, there are a number of accounts on the whole, "It's in. It's out. It's back in", aspect to that. James Bamford's, Pretext for War, being the first that leaps to mind. The CIA kept telling Powell to take the assertion out...that they had no proof to support the assertion. Douglas Feith's office in the Pentagon (which allegedly was looking at all the intel with a "fresh eye") kept putting it back in. They had their hands on the presentation last...so it ultimately stayed in.