A House of Cards

A House of Cards

There is a smoking gun.

Facebook
Twitter
Email
Flipboard
Pocket

There is a smoking gun.

Unfortunately–and to the disgrace of a basically decent man–it is in the hands of Colin Powell, who finds himself touting the flimsy, exaggerated and often phony evidence of alleged links between Saddam Hussein and Al Qaeda.

From the beginning, the 9/11 attacks that horrified the world have been cynically exploited by this Administration as a golden opportunity to settle an old Bush family score with Hussein. Even as we went justifiably to war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda in Afghanistan, the White House kept inexplicably hinting that Iraq would be next. But why? After all, Iraq’s arsenal, eviscerated by war, inspections and bombing raids, was not a pressing threat.

One answer is that Hussein, hunkered down in Baghdad, was a handy stand-in for Al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden and Taliban leader Mullah Mohammed Omar, both of whom have not been brought to account as promised by George W. Bush. This was especially convenient for a powerful clique of White House “chicken hawks”–so called because they are quick to support war but managed to avoid service themselves–who were eager to dust off a decade-old plan to seize Iraq as the first step in redrawing the map of the Middle East and, incidentally, gaining control of its oil.

In normal times, the selling of this imperial fantasy to a properly skeptical public, both at home and abroad, would have been impossible. But if Hussein could be linked to the mass murderers of 9/11? Piece of cake. That is why the good soldier Powell in his United Nations speech labored gamely to establish such a connection.

The main evidence presented by the secretary of State was a satellite photo of a forlorn outpost, allegedly linked to Hussein and Al Qaeda and which Powell claims is in the business of producing chemical weapons. However, the camp is outside the area controlled by Hussein and is in the northern Kurdish region protected by US and British warplanes. It is run by the Islamic fundamentalist group Ansar al-Islam, which has a history of opposing both the secular Hussein and his equally secular rivals in the dominant Kurdish group, one of whose leaders was assassinated Monday.

Later it was revealed that the United States had had this camp under surveillance for months and could have taken it out on one of many recent bombing runs.

Over the weekend, twenty foreign reporters finally got to visit the camp and found a dilapidated collection of shacks without indoor plumbing or the electrical capacity to produce the weapons in question.

A further embarrassment was another bit of intelligence touted by Powell, a British report that Powell referred to as a “fine paper…which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.” The report, grammar and spelling errors intact, turned out to be largely plagiarized from a graduate student paper, grabbed off the Internet from an Israeli publication, that relied on 12-year-old data. Unfortunately, unlike Scotch, intelligence does not age well. Nevertheless, there were the dregs of old dissertations and magazine articles, recycled and served up in a report cobbled together by British Prime Minister Tony Blair’s press officer, just before Blair’s meeting with Bush last month.

There was nothing better to report in regard to an Al Qaeda-Iraq connection because England’s vaunted spy agencies would not confirm the falsehoods that Blair and Bush wanted to hear.

Like their professional counterparts in the United States, British intelligence agencies don’t believe there is an Iraq-Al Qaeda connection–a rather inconvenient fact revealed by the British Broadcasting Corp. on the eve of Blair’s visit. The BBC had obtained a top-level report from British intelligence that stated flatly that there were no current ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda.

“The classified document…said there had been contact between the two in the past, but it assessed that any fledgling relationship foundered due to mistrust and incompatible ideologies,” reported London’s Independent newspaper.

This last is the rub. Hussein, himself evil in so many ways, is the secular apostate to the Islamic fundamentalist nuts that are behind our terror fears; that is precisely why the United States backed Iraq, nasty weapons and all, in its devastating war with fundamentalist Iran. This is all further evidence that the increasingly frenetic and discredited argument for preemptive war against Iraq is not based on a coherent policy.

Depressing as it is to acknowledge, it now seems clear we are witnessing the tantrum of a woefully untutored and inexperienced President whose willfulness rises in direct proportion to his inability to comprehend a world too complex for his grasp.

Thank you for reading The Nation!

We hope you enjoyed the story you just read, just one of the many incisive, deeply-reported articles we publish daily. Now more than ever, we need fearless journalism that shifts the needle on important issues, uncovers malfeasance and corruption, and uplifts voices and perspectives that often go unheard in mainstream media.

Throughout this critical election year and a time of media austerity and renewed campus activism and rising labor organizing, independent journalism that gets to the heart of the matter is more critical than ever before. Donate right now and help us hold the powerful accountable, shine a light on issues that would otherwise be swept under the rug, and build a more just and equitable future.

For nearly 160 years, The Nation has stood for truth, justice, and moral clarity. As a reader-supported publication, we are not beholden to the whims of advertisers or a corporate owner. But it does take financial resources to report on stories that may take weeks or months to properly investigate, thoroughly edit and fact-check articles, and get our stories into the hands of readers.

Donate today and stand with us for a better future. Thank you for being a supporter of independent journalism.

Thank you for your generosity.

Ad Policy
x