Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

War on Iraq

Bush's Paper Trail Grows

By John Prados, TomPaine.com. Posted April 4, 2006.


The Manning memo uncovers even more evidence that the president knew his case for invading Iraq was based on bogus intelligence.
Advertisement

On March 27, The New York Times published an article based on access to the full British record of the Iraq policy conversation that President George W. Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair held on January 31, 2003, as recorded by Blair's then-national security adviser David Manning.

British legal scholar Philippe Sands had already revealed this discussion in his book Lawless World, and the British television network Channel 4 had -- two months ago -- printed many of the same excerpts of Manning's memo, but the Times coverage focused new attention on the memo, previously ignored by the U.S. media.

The memo reveals that the two leaders agreed that military action against Iraq would begin on a stipulated date in March 2003 -- despite the fact that no weapons of mass destruction had been found there. The memo reveals how the two leaders mulled over ways to supply legal justification for the invasion. Indeed this record supplies additional evidence for the view that Bush planned all along to unleash this war.

Suddenly, the media descended upon the Bush White House demanding explanations. Spokesman Scott McClellan answered that "we were preparing in case it was necessary, but we were continuing to pursue a diplomatic solution." McClellan tried to turn the question around by insisting that the press had been covering Bush at the time chronicled in the memo, implying that if the truth were different the press should have known better.

He referred repeatedly to a December report from U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix to back his assertion that Iraq had failed to cooperate with the inspections. Evidently that cowed the reporters, for there has been little follow-up. But White House damage control should not be allowed to cover up this evidence that the president knew his case for war was based on faulty evidence.

First, the evidence is overwhelming that Bush hosted the January 31 meeting to manage his move to war, not as an occasion to review progress toward disarming Iraq. The record of the session shows this -- with talk of the war plan, the starting date, the justification and the securing of a second U.N. resolution as a legal cover, but there is more than that. Consider the context: the day the memo was taken U.S. Secretary of State Colin L. Powell began the extensive review at the CIA of the allegations he would use to make his Security Council "briefing" -- already scheduled -- supposedly "bulletproof." It was also that same day that the codebreaking National Security Agency issued a directive to spy on the friendly nations who were members of the U.N. Security Council to divine their attitudes on the move to war.

The day before, according to Bob Woodward's account, Bush had told Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, "We will kick ass." By his account, Berlusconi tried to dissuade Bush from war. Woodward duly notes the president resorting to his standard line that no decision had yet been made on military action. The Manning memo suggests otherwise, with Bush revealing March 10 as the projected date for beginning bombing -- a campaign to hit 1,500 targets in four days, the "shock and awe" which U.S. officials bragged about at the time. Moreover, on January 24, the U.S. military commander, General Tommy Franks, had sent his final war plan up through Rumsfeld to the president. Bush's comment to Blair on January 31, that "he was not itching to go to war," is belied by the entire surrounding structure of events.

The other significant finding in the Manning memo concerns Tony Blair's intentions. The press reporting at the time -- regardless of what Scott McClellan says today -- was that the purpose of the Blair-Bush meeting was to decide whether there needed to be a second U.N. resolution. Postwar investigations in London show that in late January Blair received official advice from his attorney general Lord Goldsmith that such a resolution was necessary to fulfill the terms of the existing resolution 1441. At the meeting with Bush, however, the record shows Blair presented the project as a convenience. "If anything goes wrong... a second resolution would give us international cover, especially with the Arabs," Blair said, according to Manning's memo.


Digg!

John Prados is a senior fellow of the National Security Archive in Washington, D.C., and author of Hoodwinked: The Documents that Reveal How Bush Sold Us a War (The New Press).

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from War on Iraq! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
IMPEACH! WHAT THE HELL ARE WE WAITING FOR??
Posted by: Tom Degan on Apr 4, 2006 2:30 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine, if you will, that a president who led the children of America into a war based on indisdputable lies was named Bill Clinton. Bill Clinton! A duly elected representitive of all the people who was almost removed from office for lying about having a harmless fling with a half-witted intern! Can you just imagine the hell that would have broken loose on the far right? Impeach? They would now be seeking the death penalty!

Why is it that Russ Feingold of Wisconsin and John Conyers of Michigan, two men of undeniable courage, are now treated by their colleagues as political pariah's? In short, what's wrong with this picture?

Why is it that the House and Senate are unable to muster up the courage to pass a mere censure of the president? What's wrong with our representitives?

A man walked up to me after having a look at the large, magnetic, custom-made "IMPEACH BUSH" sign on my van (that was stolen late that evening) and he said to me, "If Bush is impeached, someone oughtta put a bullet in Bill Cinton's brain". What's wrong with that man?

Twice the electorate sent to the White House an administration so mired in corruption, incompetence and stupidity that anyone paying even cursory attention couldn't have failed to pick up on it.
What's wrong with America?

And now, due to the wrecklessness and criminality of our "rulers" we're about to experience a total socio-economic catasrophe and I'm not even contemplating moving to Canada.

I ask you: What the hell's wrong with me?

Pray for peace.

Tom Degan
Goshen, NY
tomdegan@frontiernet.net

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» "What's wrong with America?" Posted by: Steve Adair
Not optimistic
Posted by: Germanicus on Apr 4, 2006 3:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have to say that, given the behaviour of the Congressional democrats these past few months, I am not optimistic they will take any action. They would argue that it does not make sense to stick their necks out during an election year to censure a president who is protected by the rubber-stamping Republicans (by the way, has there ever been a more inappropriate name for a political party? Let's just refer to them from now on as the Imperial Guard).

No, I am afraid future generations will look back at this moment in history and say "That is when the Republic died."

You might want to reconsider Canada.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: Tom Degan
» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: AlienSlave
» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: Germanicus
» RE: lesson in democracy!!!!!! Posted by: The Butcher
» RE: lesson in democracy!!!!!! Posted by: montana freeman
» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: Beverly
» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: montana freeman
» RE: Not optimistic Posted by: dangerouslysane
Sick of this discussion
Posted by: kgs1947 on Apr 4, 2006 3:56 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm sick to the stomach with this discussion. Impeach the idiot, liar, active addict (read alcoholic), and get rid of the Congress as well. They are unraveling out Constitution and the infrastructure of our country. When is the corporate-owned media going to wake up?!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sick of this discussion Posted by: Tom Degan
» Dream on, Horatio!!!!! Posted by: Prophit
» RE: I am too!! Posted by: Rowdy714
The bigger problem
Posted by: bg41 on Apr 4, 2006 4:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The thing about these recent memos that seems the MOST damning tome isn't the timetable set - I mean, if he did actually think Saddam was a threat, it makes sense to set a timetable, however flexible or "penciled-in," so he could, with his usual twisting of the facts, explain that away. But I wonder why we're not making a bigger deal out of his suggestion to goad Saddam into firing at a plane painted to look like a UN vehicle? Isn't that the most obvious sign that he had no intention of avoiding war? He wasn't trying to "give Saddam a choice" - something we all knew anyway - he was actively trying to TRICK Saddam into starting a war.

Jeez. The fact that this guy is still in office really says a lot about our country, and none of it good.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: The bigger problem Posted by: Tom Degan
It's the Republican Congress which must GO!
Posted by: metamind on Apr 4, 2006 4:23 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Will Congress investigate this? Unlikely. Do they investigate any of Bush's crimes? Not yet.

Get rid of the Republicans at every level. It IS the Republicans.

All the focus on Bush is missing the point. We need to throw the evil criminals who obstruct justice out of out government.

The path to justice is paved with the truth. If we refuse to investigate we will fail to achieve the truth.

Impeach ALL Republicans in the November election.
Throw them all out!

Steve Moyer

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Respectful disagreemnet Posted by: Lincoln fan
THROW ALL THE BUMS OUT
Posted by: rsaxto on Apr 4, 2006 5:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
ALL OF THE BUMS IN CONGRESS WHO DO NOT FAVOR IMPEACHMENT OF THE BUMS IN THE WHITE HOUSE NEED TO BE THROWN OUT OF OFFICE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Kick out all incumbants! Posted by: Prophit
BUMS
Posted by: CTvoter on Apr 4, 2006 5:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
They are all eating from the same trough. I am voting against anyone who: (1) voted for the Patriot Act; (2) voted to go to war; OR (3) voted to spend more money on the war. That doesn't leave many, but these are the qualifications for representing ME.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: BUMS Posted by: Rowdy714
Did Bush tried the UN plane strategy? Some indications
Posted by: Catherine a on Apr 4, 2006 6:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A recent post at Daily Kos pieces together evidence that may indicate that a second plane, unidentified and unauthorized by the UN, was flown over Iraq on the 11th of March 2003. This was the day after the memo indicates the war was originally due to start.

See matadorph's Kos post about the U2 planes here.

This fits with Bush's proposed strategy to try to bait Saddam Hussein into attacking a UN plane, as this could then be used to justify a US attack on Iraq.

The circumstantial evidence presented by matadorph is as compelling as it is disturbing, and sources of information are clearly referenced.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It goes deeper than Bush
Posted by: FakeCommunityChest on Apr 4, 2006 7:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Its great to read all the overemotional comments about impeach Bush and everything, but its not going to work. Getting rid of Bush is just the tip of the iceberg, the whole political system is corrupt and has been like this for a while. The nation has been conditioned to be full of apathy and thats going to be almost impossible to change, many generations it will take in fact. You think 9/11 would wake people up, but obviously people chose to avoid it and continue their slumber. The problems with the current system go much deeper than Bush, they are problems that deal with the fundamental bedrock of this country, Capitalism. Too many people have been conditioned to believe that idividualism is the truth. They think all that needs to happen is one or two people need to take the blame and go down, and all will be right again. The thirst for a scapegoat ignores the wider problem, that the whole system is in decay. Imagine a full 90-100% of eligible voters turned out for a presidental election, the country would be completely different, almost like its own revolution. Too bad that is only a dream in this land of apathy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: It goes deeper than Bush Posted by: thinkverybig
Bush's Paper Trail
Posted by: britknee on Apr 4, 2006 8:11 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
You know what ?
There isn't a man on this planet going to stop Bush doing whatever he wants.
What we have here at Alternet is a group of united people speaking out against government injustice, waiting for someone to jump up and arrest the villians .... but it aint gonna happen folks !
Not when the civilian majority isn't even bothered.
When one looks at everything from 911 through to Iraq and Iran Bush and Blair should long have been imprisoned. They eluded justice then , and no amount of newly released evidence is gonna change things for us now.
I'm sure every politicians' attitude towards us voters is a universally resounding, " Put Up, and Shut Up" attitude.
Waiting for those in power to "help us" will be a long wait indeed.
The media may release "evidence" of corruption, but as long as no-one holds the perpetrators to account it isn't worth the paper it's printed on.
I agree with the previous poster who says, every politician voting for undemocratic principles should be held accountable... but we arrive at the same crossroads.
There is no individual prepared to represent us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Three Options
Posted by: CMaciolek on Apr 4, 2006 9:51 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The socio-political environment is turning inhospitable. You, the people of this country, and the people of this world have three options available to them...

ADAPT, MIGRATE, or DIE.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

There are no white knights on shining steeds - do it yourself
Posted by: thoughtcriminal on Apr 4, 2006 1:43 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm getting tired of people saying 'where are our leaders? who will save us?'. Nobody is going to come riding to the rescue. As long as individuals are willing to sit, slack-jawed and drooling, in front of their TV sets absorbing FOX Propoganda, nothing will change.

Therefore you have to take on the powers that control your own life - corrupt university administrators, criminal CEOs, dishonest small businesspeople, slimy two-faced politicians and their related ilk. You have to hold their feet to the fire - like all those protestors in Blackburn, England, whose voices reached right into the lecture hall where ChevronTexaco's Dr. Condi Rice was trying to spew forth on "US efforts to promote democracy". If nothing else, they made her and Jack Straw uncomfortable.

If this seems impossible, take this lesson from the Soviet gulags and the Nazi concentration camps:

your silence will not protect you

Democracy means nothing if you don't participate.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Million Patriot March?
Posted by: gonzoskismet on Apr 4, 2006 2:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Imagine, if you will, this scenario: Like from an old Frankenstein movie, a million people surrounding the White House and the Congress with pitchforks and torches. This is the only kind of 'shock and awe' that will convince an ineffectual, out-of-touch with the electorate of the United States government that you want change, you want it now and you'll not go away until you have it. And, sadly enough, this is the ONLY thing that will convince them. Look at the massive demonstration it took to end the Vietnam War. These thugs only respond to pressure. They could care less about petitions. You can write these guys forever and recieve a personally signed form letter from any of them saying they will keep you in mind. Then they immediately put you out of their minds and go on about their business of raping you and your country. If, however, there are a million of you camped on their doorsteps in their pretty little cherry blossumed fortress of power, it's kinda hard to ignore that. And, I'm afraid this is the only thing you can do that will get a response. So, as soon as some action group sponsors a REAL gathering of angry, irrate patriots, nothing is going to change. Sorry.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The 9/11 Paper Trail is being totally ignored....
Posted by: shadow7 on Apr 4, 2006 2:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Scholars, professional researchers, and hundreds of other credible experts have amassed a paper trail that totally destroys the 'official' version of 9/11.

Still... NOT A SINGLE corporate news network will even discuss the fact that there has been NO investigation of any of the anomalies and discrepancies that are so blatant in the story we were give.

If you have ANY doubts... just view LOOSE CHANGE 2. It's free on the web. Do a google.

Just ONE email from you can change all that! Please consider becoming part of history:

linked text

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

i always make a point of voting
Posted by: rollo on Apr 4, 2006 4:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
and I always lose. currently, there is no one to vote for.

i was thinking, if i just wrote FUCK YOU on my next ballot and sealed it in the envelope, would i get arrested?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: i always make a point of voting Posted by: bansidh@citlink.net
Why bother?
Posted by: fogpatch on Apr 4, 2006 8:32 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I took the time last week to write an email to the Democratic party. It was a politely worded message, expresing my concern at the silence of the Democratic leadership in the face of so much blatant and partisan abuse of authority from the Bush administration. "Why" I asked, "why are you all so silent?" Today I got my response: an email from the Democratic party asking for money.
There was no comment at all about my email to them, or the points that I raised. Nothing.
I wrote back saying that money had to be earned. Of course they won't respond. The silence of the Democratic leadership is an abuse of government, right up there with the failings of the present administration.
There is no longer any enlightened leadership - they're all pigs at the trough. "Send us a donation", yeah right.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It is the grassroots that will count in 2006
Posted by: HawkSpirit on Apr 4, 2006 8:54 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If we do not vote to change congress then all is for not. We have no other job than to elect good people to congress, which requires grassroots working hard to educate people and get out the vote. Take your knowledge of what anyone can read in MSM about how bad Bush appointee have been, like Katrina. The National debt to China ought to shake people up. All those fact are available to anyone, even without the internet.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Time Is NOW
Posted by: thinkverybig on Apr 4, 2006 11:38 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
IT’S TIME TO TAKE A STAND

Hello World! Hello America! I can feel the emotions of most Americans starting to brew and you know what? It’s about time. It’s time for us all to wake up and take a stand. Not as a democrat, republican or independent but as Americans, as human beings. Let us all put aside our petty differences and start working together for the common good of mankind. Let’s create a paradigm shift in the way we think and act and no longer succumb to the mass media. Let’s no longer allow ourselves to be trained or programmed information not of our choosing. Let’s start patronizing businesses that have our best interest at heart and boycotting those that are unfair in their practices, unfair to their employees yet reward executives up to 2500 times more financially. It’s time to take a stand. Let’s no longer be distracted by race but come together as one and question the wealthiest one percent. Why must you have so much and we have so little? Why must you have so much and poverty is still rampant throughout our country and this world? That of course is their greatest fear – the coming together of all races to address this great disparity, this great travesty. It’s time to take a stand. Let’s take a look at how small businesses affect our communities and start giving them our support. Let’s take a look at corporations having too much power and influence in politics therefore dictating to our elected officials their views and the things that benefit them and not us. It’s time for our elected officials to start working for us and not the lobbyists and corporations. It’s time to say no to corruption in our government and yes to decent paying jobs, a fair judicial system, fair immigration laws to all countries especially those of color, yes to fair trade to all countries especially those poor nations, yes to campaign finance reform, yes to increasing the minimum wage and no to pay increases for politicians alone, yes to protecting our borders and the list goes on.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Twilight Zone or Insane Asylum?
Posted by: merwyck on Apr 5, 2006 11:33 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I really have nothing new to add to the discussion or the comments. My participation here is simply to add another number to the voices that are tired of the nonsense of this US administration's deceit, behavior and policies.

Living in this nation, lately, is like living in the Twilight Zone or in an Insane Asylum (albeit a very, very spacious asylum!).

Extreme disappointment doesn't even scratch the surface of describing how disheartened I am at the bullying of our government and at the nearly-criminal apathy of a majory of American "citizens" (honestly, they don't deserve to share whatever dignity the term "citizen" may suggest because, historically, "citizens" participate in their government rather than just bending over and squealing).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

answer to a sociopath
Posted by: robchapman on Apr 5, 2006 7:56 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The socio-political environment is turning inhospitable. You, the people of this country, and the people of this world have three options available to them...

ADAPT, MIGRATE, or DIE.

I am sure the writer of this intended some sort of wise and profound statement.
What he shows is the conscioussness of a socio-path.
Such sentiments are far too prevalent in our society.
If there is such a thing as right and wrong, we must stand up for what is right.
We must stop ourselves from acting out fear or outrage or passion.
A far better course is to think strategically and to organize around principles of shared humanity, integrity and compassion.
For many, this means avoiding the political arena.
For many others this means avoiding the temptations inherent in the ownership society.
For all of us it means rejection of the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war.
Focus on the party in government, the party that controls the entire federal government and most of the States.
Demonstrate to them that they can get tossed out based on bad behavior.
Demonstrate to the GOP and the world that in a democracy the people can fire a bad government, even if the opposition only consists of flawed humans like ourselves.
If we cannot rid ourselves of the moral cancer that the GOP has brought to Washington, democracy is meaningless.

Robert Chapman
Lansing, New York

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So What Else Is New
Posted by: marrieah on Apr 8, 2006 7:17 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While we all waited to see how the Supreme Court would rule in the 2000 elections, Bush had begain to assembly his cabinet. All were War Hawks.

A co-workers and I started listing all of US Allies and Foes. We passed Iraq because it was obvious that Iraq posed no threat to the US because of the Gulf War. Actually we thought maybe North Korea. The only thing was, North Korea was basically minding it's own business. Sure it had a show down with Clinton, but still it posed no threat to the US.

Although I too thought Iraq was possibly involved with 9-11 initially, I quickly changed my mind when the nationalities of the hi-jackers became known. Saudi Arabia was not a friend of Saddam.

Then about two weeks after 9-11, Mr. Cheney said to the effect, that 9-11 could have only been done under the directive of a government. My thoughts were what government in the world had the balls and the know how and the money to carry out such an attack on the USA.

Although Mr. Cheney was in the process of building a case against Iraq, the reality was there was only one country in the world capable of carrying out such an attack and getting away with it.

Of course Bush was planning on attacking Iraq. He came into office with that in mind as his main goal. Fired members of his administration have already said as much. The only problem was how does one sell a war to the American public. Then incrediously 9-11 happened.

Some have suggested that Bush be impeached. Tried for treason would be more apt.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]