Archive | November 8, 2015

“Official” British Intel Report on Iraq Copy-Pasted from the Internet*

“Official” British Intel Report on Iraq Copy-Pasted from the Internet*

Introduction by Michel Chossudovsky

Fake intelligence, plagiarism contained in an official intelligence report which was used to justify war on Iraq in 2003.

Glen Rangwala’s Submission to the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs (June 2003). Introduction by Michel Chossudovsky (November 8, 2015)

Dr. Glen Rangwala

The damning evidence presented by Cambridge Lecturer Dr. Glen Rangwala was first revealed by Britain’s Channel 4 TV on February 6, 2003, on the day following Secretary of State Colin Powell’s historic Iraq WMD presentation to the UN Security Council

“I would call my colleagues’ attention to the fine paper that the United Kingdom distributed . . . which describes in exquisite detail Iraqi deception activities.”

Powell was referring to “Iraq Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation”, published on January 30, 2003.

According to Rangwala, the  British intelligence document was fake. It had not been prepared by British intelligence. It was copied and pasted from the internet by members of Tony Blair’s office:   

The Downing Street authors state they drew “upon a number of sources, including intelligence material” (p.1, first sentence). In fact, they copied material from at least three different authors and gave no credit to them. Indeed, they plagiarized, directly cutting and pasting or near quoting.

A close textual analysis suggests that the U.K. authors had little access to first-hand intelligence sources and instead based their work on academic papers, which they selectively distorted. Some of the papers used were considerably out of date. This leads the reader to wonder about the reliability and veracity of the Downing Street document.

It was a fake document prepared on the instructions of Prime Minister Blair with a view to building a “credible” justification to wage war on Iraq.  

Rangwala’s analysis was more than a smoking gun. It revealed the Big Lie. It invalidated Colin’s Powell’s presentation to the UN Security Council. In many regards, it was far more important than the leak of the Secret July 2002 Downing Street Memo:  

C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the U.N. route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.

The “WMD facts” had to be “documented”. Did British intelligence refuse to comply with Tony Blair’s demands to produce a fast track report which would “fix the facts”?  

The “facts” were put together in a hurry (not by MI6) by Tony Blair’s public relations’ officials.

The report was finalized one week before Colin Powell’s presentation to the UN Security Council; the “facts” and supporting quotations were copied and pasted from the internet and inserted in an official and authoritative document.  

Plagiarism had become a means to waging war on Iraq. 

The Rangwala revelation was the “unspoken truth”. It was not the object of subsequent media coverage.  It had to be suppressed because the war on Iraq had already been scheduled for March 2003

The Role of Colin Powell in Planning the War on Iraq

In retrospect, the Rangwala findings also bring to the forefront the insidious and complicit role of Colin Powell, who organized the Crawford Texas meetings in early April 2002 between Bush and Blair, as confirmed by the recently leaked emails (see below).

What these emails suggest is that Colin Powell had been entrusted in setting the stage for the war on Iraq, initially at the Bush-Blair Crawford meetings on April 5-7, 2002, leading up to his presentation of the British intelligence dossier on Iraq’s alleged WMD at the UN Security Council on February 5,  2003.

Lest we forget Colin Powell played a behind the scenes role in the Iran Contra Affair. 

The Crawford meetings were intended to plan the war on Iraq. 

Colin Powell was a central political instrument. The issue is who was Behind Colin Powell?

Who was present at the Crawford meetings?

Plagiarism and Iraq’s WMDs: British Intelligence Iraq Dossier Relied on Recycled Academic Articles

By Glen Rangwala

Below is the text presented by Dr. Rangwala to the House of Commons Select Committee on Foreign Affairs 

It was presented in June 2003, in the wake of the invasion and occupation of Iraq

http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200203/cmselect/cmfaff/813/813we18.htm

THE PRESENTATION OF THE 30 JANUARY 2003 DOSSIER

  1. The 19-page dossier, entitled “Iraq—Its Infrastructure of Concealment, Deception and Intimidation”, was released on 30 January 2003. The document begins with the statement that:

“This report draws upon a number of sources, including intelligence material (. . .”

  1. The assertion that the intelligence agencies were involved in the production of the dossier was made more explicitly by Prime Minister Blair when he announced the release of the dossier to the House of Commons on 3 February 2003:

“We issued further intelligence over the weekend about the infrastructure of concealment. It is obviously difficult when we publish intelligence reports, but I hope that people have some sense of the integrity of our security services. They are not publishing this, or giving us this information, and making it up. It is the intelligence that they are receiving, and we are passing it on to people.”

www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk

A REVIEW OF THE CONTENTS OF THE 30 JANUARY 2003 DOSSIER

Sources

  1. The bulk of the 19-page document (pp 6-16) is directly copied without acknowledgement from three different sources that are on the internet. The most extensively used source is an article in the on-line Israeli journal, Middle East Review of International Affairs(September 2002), entitled “Iraq’s Security and Intelligence Network: A Guide and Analysis”.

http://meria.idc.ac.il/journal/2002/issue3/jv6n3a1.html

  1. The author of the piece is Mr Ibrahim al-Marashi, a postgraduate student then based at the Monterey Institute of International Studies, California, who is completing a doctorate at Oxford University. He has confirmed to me that his permission was not sought; in fact, he didn’t even know about the British document until I contacted him on 4 February to enquire whether his permission was given.
  2. In addition to Mr Marashi’s work, there is also the use of two articles from the specialist security magazine,Jane’s Intelligence Review. On-line summaries of articles by Mr Sean Boyne in 1997 and Mr Ken Gause in 2002 are on the GlobalSecurity.org website, at:

http://globalsecurity.org/intell/world/iraq/

These texts were also amalgamated in part into the UK dossier.

  1. The fact that these sources were copied is most clear from the typographical errors and anomalous uses of grammar in the original pieces that are incorporated into the Downing Street document. For example, Mr Marashi had written:

“Saddam appointed, Sabir `Abd al-’Aziz al-Duri as head (. . .)”

There is a misplaced comma after the second word. On p 13, the British dossier incorporates the same misplaced comma:

“Saddam appointed, Sabir `Abd al-’Aziz al-Duri as head (. . .)”

  1. Because the texts of these three authors are copied directly also results in a proliferation of different transliterations (for example, different spellings of the Ba’th party, depending on which author is being copied).

Modifications to the original articles

  1. The only exceptions to these acts of copying were the tweaking of specific phrases. For example, most of p 9 on the functions of the Mukhabarat (General Intelligence) is copied directly from Mr Marashi’s article. However, Marashi writes of the Mukhabarat’s role in:

“monitoring foreign embassies in Iraq”.

This becomes in the British dossier:

“spying on foreign embassies in Iraq”.

Similarly, on the same page, Marashi writes that the Mukhabarat had a role in:

“aiding opposition groups in hostile regimes”

The British dossier renders this as:

“supporting terrorist organisations in hostile regimes”.

  1. A further example is from the section on “Fedayeen Saddam” (Saddam’s Self-Sacrificers). Most of this text is copied from the 1997 article by Sean Boyne. However, Boyne writes that the personnel of this organisation are:

“recruited from regions loyal to Saddam”, and refers to their original grouping as “some 10,000-15,000 `bullies and country bumpkins.’”

  1. This becomes in the British government’s text, at pp 15-16, a reference to how its personnel are:

“press ganged from regions known to be loyal to Saddam” . . . “some 10,000-15,000 bullies.”

  1. The reference in Mr Boyne’s article to how the organisation was made up of “bullies and country bumpkins” was shorn of its last three words in the UK dossier, perhaps to render a more threatening picture of the organisation than that contained in the original article.
  2. Numbers are also increased or are rounded up. So, for example, the section on “Fedayeen Saddam” (pp 15-16) is directly copied from Boyne’s article, almost word for word. The only substantive difference is that Mr Boyne estimates the personnel of the organisation to be 18,000-40,000 (Ken Gause, in another article that was substantially copied, estimates personnel in the region of 10,000-40,000). The British dossier instead writes “30,000 to 40,000″. A similar bumping up of figures occurs with the description of the Directorate of Military Intelligence.

Errors

  1. There is at least one serious substantive mistake in the British text, on p 14, about the Iraqi organisation the Military Security Service (al-Amn al-Askari). After an initial two paragraphs copied from Marashi’s 2002 article, the remainder of the text is taken from the description by Sean Boyne in his 1997 article of a wholly different organisation called the General Security Service (al-Amn al-Amm). That is, it mixes up the descriptions of two different organisations.
  2. The result is a confusion that renders the description incoherent. The description of the Military Security Service (al-Amn al-Askari) begins by relating how this organisation was created in 1992 (in a section copied from Marashi). It then describes how the Military Security Service moved headquarters in 1990 (in a piece copied from Boyne on the activities of the General Security Service), two years before the organisation was even created.
  3. Later in the same section, the UK dossier claims that the head of the Military Security Service is Taha al-Ahbabi. This is from Boyne’s description of the General Security Service. In fact, the Military Security Service was headed by Thabet Khalil when the dossier was released.

FURTHER COMMENTS

  1. The information in the UK dossier is presented as being an accurate statement of the current state of Iraq’s security organisations. However, it may not be anything of the sort. Mr Marashi—the real and unwitting author of much of the document—refers in his article to his primary source as being the documents captured by Coalition forces in 1991, and which are now retained by the Massachusetts-based organisation, the Iraq Research and Documentation Project. His own focus is the activities of Iraq’s intelligence agencies in Kuwait in the period from August 1990 to January 1991, as this is the subject of his thesis. As a result, much of the information presented as relevant to how Iraqi agencies are currently engaged with UNMOVIC is 12 years old.
  2. When the document was first released as a Microsoft Word document, I checked the properties of the text in the File menu. It revealed the authors of the text as P. Hamill, J. Pratt, A. Blackshaw, and M. Khan. Those names were removed within hours from the downloadable file. However, in collaboration with journalists, I have since checked who these individuals are. The identity of the authors is as follows:

Paul Hamill, a Foreign Office official;

John Pratt, a junior official from the Prime Minister’s Strategic Communications Unit;

Alison Blackshaw, Alastair Campbell’s personal assistant;

Mustaza Khan, news editor of the 10 Downing Street website.

THE ORDERING OF THE DOSSIER

  1. The dossier is ordered as follows:

p 1 is the summary.

pp 2-5 consists of, firstly, a repetition of the comments of Hans Blix, Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC, to the Security Council in January on the difficulties they were encountering. Further claims about the activities of al-Mukhabarat follow. These claims are not backed up, and have in some cases been specifically denied by Hans Blix. For example, the UK dossier claims on p 3 that:

“Journeys are monitored by security officers stationed on the route if they have prior intelligence. Any changes of destination are notified ahead by telephone or radio so that arrival is anticipated. The welcoming party is a give away.”

This can be contrasted with the assessment of Hans Blix on 14 February 2003 that:

“Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming.”

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/blix14Febasdel.htm

Similarly, the UK dossier claims on p 3 that:

“Escorts are trained, for example, to start long arguments with other Iraqi officials `on behalf of UNMOVIC’ while any incriminating evidence is hastily being hidden behind the scenes.”

By contrast, Dr Blix relates in the same presentation of 14 February that:

“we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that had never been declared or inspected, as well as to Presidential sites and private residences.”

p 6 is a simplified version of Mr Marashi’s diagram at: http://cns.miis.edu/research/iraq/pdfs/iraqint.pdf

p 7 is copied (top) from Mr Gause (on the Presidential Secretariat), and (middle and bottom) from Mr Boyne (on the National Security Council).

p 8 is entirely copied from Mr Boyne (on the National Security Council).

p 9 is copied from Mr Marashi (on al-Mukhabarat), except for the final section, which is insubstantial.

p 10 is entirely copied from Mr Marashi (on the General Security Service), except for the final section, which is insubstantial.

p 11 is entirely copied from Mr Marashi (on Special Security), except for the top section (on General Security), which is insubstantial.

p 12 is entirely copied from Mr Marashi (on Special Security).

p 13 is copied from Mr Gause (on Special Protection) and Mr Marashi (Military Intelligence).

p 14 is copied from Mr Marashi (first two paragraphs) and then wrongly copied from Mr Boyne (on Military Security). The last section, on the Special Republican Guard, is copied from Mr Marashi.

p 15 is copied from Messrs Gause and Boyne (on al-Hadi project / project 858).

pp 15-16 is copied from Boyne (on Fedayeen Saddam).

p 16: The final section, on the Tribal Chiefs’ Bureau, seems to be copied from Anthony H. Cordesman, “Key Targets in Iraq”, February 1998, http://www.csis.org/stratassessment/reports/iraq_argets.pdf, pg. 8

pp 17-19 make general claims about human rights in Iraq.

Dr Glen Rangwala

Newnham College

Cambridge

16 June 2003

Source*

Related Topics:

Would you want this to be done to your Children? *

A Bogus Translation Deceived Powell to OK War on Iraq*

Tony Blair FINALLY apologises for Iraq War and admits in TV interview the conflict caused the rise of ISIS*

Eight Years on Former Blackwater Guard Gets Life for Iraq Genocide*

Cheney to Face Trial for Crimes in Iraq *

The Last Four U.S. Presidents on What to Do with Iraq*

US Blocks Investigation into Theft of $1billion from Iraq*

Radiation from Iraq War Detected In U.K. Atmosphere*

Veteran Who Raped and Murdered Iraqi Family Commits Suicide*

U.S. Rape and Sodomy of Iraqi Women and Children*

Sue-able… KBR and Halliburton for Iraq Crimes*

U.S. Rewarded Blackwater with $200+mn Contracts after Contract to Assassinate Iraqi Official*

Long time Coming: Blackwater Mercenaries Found Guilty for Crimes against Iraqis*

The Treasure at the Heart of Iraq

Former Iraqi PM Slams the 60 nations in the U.S. –Led ‘anti’ ISIS Coalition*

UFO, over California Turns Out to be a Trident Missile*

UFO, over California Turns Out to be a Trident Missile*

Social media went bananas when a large bright comet-shaped object with a blue-green-white tail streaked over Los Angeles and San Diego, sparking heated debate as to its origins. Sadly, again – no aliens, just a submarine missile.

The U.S. Navy has confirmed that the mysterious “meteor” was a scheduled Trident II ballistic missile test flight. Cmdr. Ryan Perry of the Navy’s Third Fleet said in a statement that the rocket was launched from the Kentucky Ohio-class submarine in the Pacific Test Range off the coast of Southern California.

The test range in question is a large area off Point Mugu, Ventura County, northwest of Los Angeles. The Navy does not usually issue warnings or disclose the nature of their activities ahead of such tests, the spokesman said.

This has been confirmed as a test of a Trident SLBM from a US NAVY submarine off Point Magu, near Vandenberg AFB. pic.twitter.com/wltema1tc3

— SpaceShuttleAlmanac (@ShuttleAlmanac) November 8, 2015

There was, however, a forced diversion of nighttime flights from Los Angeles Airport – the second-busiest in the U.S. – due to unspecified “activated airspace” in the area, Reuters reported.

Initial media reports did suggest that the object was in fact of earthly origin. The Orange County Sheriff’s Department tweeted thatLight seen in OC sky was confirmed through JWA [John Wayne Airport] tower to be a Naval test fire off the coast. No further details.”

Furthermore, Los Angeles County Lost Hills Station issued a traffic alert saying that “lights and lasers can be seen from beach and coastline” due to “military exercises off of Catalina Island.”

There is “no need to call 911,” the message said.

This didn’t stop ‘experts’ from suggesting that the object might have been a comet or a meteor. An astronomer at Griffith Observatory told local broadcaster ABC7 that the phenomenon could be considered “normal” – and could be a “comet” passing as a precursor to the Taurid meteor shower, which is peaking this week.

The alerts were also all too late for the majority of observers, whose reaction, captured on dozens and dozens of devices, ranged from surprise and amusement to sheer terror.

“Oh my God! It looks like a UFO! What is going on?!” cried a frightened female observer in a clip posted by @sav_hilde on Twitter.

“It look like a planet opening up the sky or some… this is like zombie apocalypse,” commented a man in a video published on YouTube channel Jet 2.

While another witness was quick to nail the nature of the event saying “This is Donald Trump!”

Source*

Related Topics:

US Deploys ‘Sky Dreadnought’ Over Ukraine; Media Calls it ‘UFO’‏

UFO’s … Fake It!

Aliens my A**!*

British General Threatens ‘Mutiny’ Against Corbyn Leadership*

Former Iraqi PM Slams the 60 nations in the U.S. –Led ‘anti’ ISIS Coalition*

Former Iraqi PM Slams the 60 nations in the U.S. –Led ‘anti’ ISIS Coalition*

The US-led coalition has been “unbelievably” inefficient in fighting the terror group Islamic State, possibly because some members have their plans for the terrorists, Iraq’s former PM told RT.

Nouri al-Maliki, who stepped down as the head of the Iraqi government last year and remains a vice-president, believes that Iraq was targeted by a “regional conspiracy” and is at risk of breaking up. He also said inviting Russia to target Islamic State targets in Iraq could play a positive part in the debacle.

Describing the effort of the international coalition led by the U.S. to cripple ISIS fighters in Iraq, Maliki said it was “inefficient”.

It’s unbelievable and unacceptable that more than 60 nations comprising this coalition that have the most modern aircraft and weapons at their disposal have been conducting their campaign in Iraq for 14 months and IS still remains in the country,” he told RT’s Arabic-language sister-channel Rusiya Al-Yaum.

Maliki cited the loss of the city of Ramadi and the major oil refining center Baiji to ISIS, both of which happened after the coalition started bombing the terrorists, as proof that not enough is being done by the coalition.

Some members of the coalition have their own strategies that account for ISIS either continuing to exist or being destroyed. They also consider what would happen after ISIS’s destruction. I believe they are indecisive, trying to calculate what happens. What will be the situation in Iraq, in the region, will the map look the same? Or maybe ISIS is a key instrument for changing the situation in Iraq and the region?” he asked.

Nouri al-Maliki

Maliki says Russia helped Iraq in the aftermath of the fall of Mosul to the Islamic State by providing weapons and may help more by expanding to Iraq its bombing campaign in Syria. He said the Russian effort had proven to be efficient.

The Russian involvement in Syria and the intensive bombings have stopped the offensive of many terrorist groups. This involvement hurt the terrorists a lot and inspired the Syrian troops. Russia’s actions also stunned the international coalition. In just days and weeks Russia delivered strikes against major terrorist positions in Syria. And where is the intentional coalition of more than 60 nations that had achieved nothing in 14 months in Iraq?” he said.

Maliki said the Iraq government is dragging its feet on inviting Russia, partially due to pressure from the U.S.

“If somebody has a strong position in the region and then another nation starts using its capabilities the former party is naturally concerned. It was believed that Russia’s presence in the region was over. But now Russia has a comeback to fight terrorism alongside Iraq and Syria. And a situation where decision, which could be previously taken unilaterally, should now be taken in partnership, causes concern,” Maliki said.

Source*

Related Topics:

Iraqi Forces have been Busy doing what U.S. Fails to Do*

Anti-ISIS Coalition Forces are U.S. Targets*

British SAS Special Forces “Dressed Up as ISIS Rebels” Fighting Assad in Syria*

U.S. Tried to Force anti-ISIS Element to Back-off from Anbar Province*

Captured Israeli Officer Details Israeli-ISIS Plan to Wipe-out all Islamic and Muslim Culture and Prevent Religions Coming Together*

Washington Preventing Iraq from Turning to Moscow*

Why Obama Wanted Maliki Removed*

Russia has Deployed Missile Defense Systems to Syria*

Russia has Deployed Missile Defense Systems to Syria*

An Su-24m takes off from Hmeymim Airbase outside the Syrian port city of Latakia

Russia has deployed missile defense systems to Syria to protect its military forces and equipment stationed in the Arab country, the head of the Russian air force says.

Referring to the potential threats against Russian military forces and equipment in Syria, Colonel General Viktor Bondarev said fighter jets could be hijacked in countries neighbouring Syria and used to attack the Russian forces.

“We have taken into account all possible threats. We have sent not only fighters, attack aircraft, bombers, and helicopters, but also missile defense systems because any sort of force majeure situation may occur,” Bondarev said in an interview with Russian newspaper Komsomolskaya.

“For example, the stealing of a warplane in a neighbouring country with Syria or having to return fire. We need to be prepared for that,” he said

Missile lock behind Turkish airspace violation’

Elsewhere in his remarks, the Russian air force commander commented on a Russian fighter jet’s violation of Turkey’s airspace in October. He said the Russian warplane had been forced to enter Turkish airspace while performing an evasive maneuver against “some kind of” a missile.

“Our fighter jet was on a combat mission in northern Syria in very dense cloud conditions. When the aircraft was passing along the Turkish border, the onboard equipment set off an alarm indicating the plane was being targeted by some kind of air defense system,” Bondarev told the Russian daily.

“The pilot had to take a split-second decision to perform an anti-missile maneuver. Well, [the plane] went a little bit into Turkish airspace. We acknowledged it frankly,” he added.

Bondarev did not explain to what country the surface-to-air missile locked on the Russian jet belonged.

The Russian Defense Ministry said on October 3 that a Sukhoi Su-30 fighter jet had violated Turkish airspace for several seconds because of unfavorable weather conditions.

Turkey said later that a Russian jet had again violated the country’s airspace. Moscow rejected the claim, saying no second airspace violation had occurred.

Russia began its own military campaign against terrorists in Syria on September 30 upon a request from the Damascus government, shortly after the upper house of the Russian parliament gave President Vladimir Putin the mandate to use military force in the Arab country.

The foreign-backed militancy in Syria, which flared in March 2011, has so far claimed the lives of over 250,000 people and displaced nearly half of the country’s population internally and externally.

Russia missiles ‘message to U.S.

Meanwhile, an American journalist and radio host tells Press TV’s Website that Russia’s missile defense systems in crisis-hit Syria are a message mainly directed at the United States.

In an interview with the website on Thursday, Don DeBar said that the Russian systems are neither directed at the Takfiri Daesh terrorist group nor the U.S.-backed terrorist groups operating in the Middle Eastern country as neither are in possession of an air force.

However, he said, the purpose of the Russian systems inside Syria is to send a message “directed at the U.S.,” DeBar said.

“Clearly, the only other players in the sky… who… admit to have force there are the U.S., Turkey, Israel and perhaps some other NATO players like the U.K. and France,” he said.

The presence of the Russian systems in Syria indicates “exactly how volatile the situation is in Syria in terms of the so-called big power relations and how close the U.S. is to war with Russia.”

Source*

Related Topics:

The Earthquake that Stopped Before Hitting Ukraine and Russian Borders*

U.S. on Russia’s Borders Trying to Provoke War*

Doing the Netanyahu: A Russian fighter jet Intercepts U.S. Reconnaissance, but U.S. Accuses Russia*

Russia Says No to One-World Government*

American Civil War: When Russia Blocked British-led Intervention against the Union

Twenty-Seven Million Russians Died Defending Europe against the Cabal’s WWII*

China Warns Russia That “State Of War” Now Exists With the U.S.*

Russian Source: Saudi Intelligence Responsible for A321 Bombing Killing *

Captured Israeli Officer Details Israeli-ISIS Plan to Wipe-out all Islamic and Muslim Culture and Prevent Religions Coming Together*

Corbyn Triumphs as Cameron Fears Failure to Achieve Mandate on Invading Syria*

Professors and Politicians Gather to Warn Us about the NWO*

U.S. Sending Special Forces to Aid ISIS in Syria*

As far as Honour Goes U.S. has None: Tries to Bait Russia with Lifting of Sanctions for Russian Withdrawal from Syria*

The U.S. is Back in Recession with Interest Rates Already at Zero*