US Invasion of Iraq Based on False Report of Al-Qaeda’s Ties With Saddam

According to Senator Carl Levin, the declassified US intelligence has revealed that the Bush administration relied on a false report of Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 attacks alleged meeting with an Iraqi intelligence agent to justify the US' invasion of Iraq in 2003.

WASHINGTON, December 12 (Sputnik) – Declassified US intelligence has revealed that the Bush administration relied on a false report of al-Qaeda's alleged meeting with an Iraqi intelligence agent, to build a case for invading Iraq after the 9/11 attacks, Senator Carl Levin has announced.

"Levin will introduce a letter he received from CIA Director John Brennan, declassifying for the first time some details of a March 2003 CIA cable, warning the Bush administration against references to the allegation that Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 hijackers, had met before the attacks in Prague, Czech Republic, with an Iraqi intelligence officer," a statement, released on the senator's website Thursday, said.

According to Levin, CIA field officers in the cable said there was not a single US counterterrorism or FBI expert who had said they had any evidence or even "knew" that Atta was in Prague in April, 2001.

In a Senate floor speech prepared for delivery and posted on Levin's website Thursday, the senator asks Brennan to declassify the entire cable to expose the Bush administration's campaign to "create an impression in the public mind that [iraqi President] Saddam [Hussein] was in league with the al-Qaeda terrorists who attacked us on 9/11" in order to justify the United States' invasion of Iraq in 2003.

Full story: http://sputniknews.com/military/20141212/1015759673.html

-- Sputnik News 2014-12-12

It's great all the Bush/ Cheney lies and failures are coming out before the new senate starts in new year. They should be prosecuted. We can be damn sure the new Republican gang wont want to reveal any "truths" about one of their own. It will be all "Benghazi"!!!!

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Nothing new. French told that since the first day. Then Colin Powell admitted it.

Bush is criminal, he just has to be judged.

I don't know how this could be news. I guess because it's no longer merely conjecture alone. I can't see how it will be a good thing... just make some more people angry because so many died as a result of what?

Edited December 12, 201411 yr by horsewell

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Hey Dinosaur ....wake up! Its was BOTH!

Oh and in the process, you killed 150.000 innocent people - thank you for bringing in democracy(that you don't even have yourself.).....everything is fine after you left....good job.

Bush had decided to take out Saddam long before 9/11. 9/11 was just the excuse. There's no surprise that a false report about Iraq's ties to the attack, and the entire WMD fiasco, was conjured up by the Bush-Cheney administration to justify the invasion.

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Hey Dinosaur ....wake up! Its was BOTH!

Oh and in the process, you killed 150.000 innocent people - thank you for bringing in democracy(that you don't even have yourself.).....everything is fine after you left....good job.

Uh, best have a talk with Tony Blair about the "you" stuff. Australia was there too. Twice.

So thank you UK and Australia for killing all of those people. Good job.

Bush had decided to take out Saddam long before 9/11. 9/11 was just the excuse. There's no surprise that a false report about Iraq's ties to the attack, and the entire WMD fiasco, was conjured up by the Bush-Cheney administration to justify the invasion.

My last post applies to you too, son.

How do people get off blaming the US or "Bush" for something they were up to their eyeballs in too?

Hypocrites.

-snip- because so many died as a result of what?

Because Tony Blair declared there were WMD's and the Australians went to war with him?

How do people get off blaming the US or "Bush" for something they were up to their eyeballs in too?

Hypocrites.

what b*******t

How do people get off blaming the US or "Bush" for something they were up to their eyeballs in too?

Hypocrites.

what b*******t

22 countries provided troops for the war in Iraq and I'll bet yours was one of them. Even Thailand provided troops.

Your comment stands (for you) if your country wasn't one of them, but for others blaming all on the US, they are full of bullshit.

-snip- because so many died as a result of what?

Because Tony Blair declared there were WMD's and the Australians went to war with him?

From the outset it looked like folly. At the time I was much less worldly but those in power that made those decisions for all the US allies should have known better. They should be personally held responsible. However, we let them do it and for all that has been done it hasn't made our world anymore safer.

"It hasn't made our world anymore safer."

There is really no way to know that.

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Hey Dinosaur ....wake up! Its was BOTH!

Oh and in the process, you killed 150.000 innocent people - thank you for bringing in democracy(that you don't even have yourself.).....everything is fine after you left....good job.

Uh, best have a talk with Tony Blair about the "you" stuff. Australia was there too. Twice.

So thank you UK and Australia for killing all of those people. Good job.

“Wrong does not cease to be wrong because the majority share in it.”

Leo Tolstoy

It's great all the Bush/ Cheney lies and failures are coming out before the new senate starts in new year. They should be prosecuted. We can be damn sure the new Republican gang wont want to reveal any "truths" about one of their own. It will be all "Benghazi"!!!!

In 2000 Saddam Hussein said from now on, Iraq wanted payments for its oil in euros,( despite the fact that the battered European currency unit, which used to be worth quite a bit more than $1, had dropped to about 82 cents ) . Iraq said in 2000 it would no longer accept dollars for oil because it didn't want to deal "in the currency of the enemy."

Look what happened next...................

There is no doubt in my mind that Saddam's intelligence services had contact with AQ, but AQ would have been the sworn enemy of a leader like Saddam, so any contact would have been about nothing substantial. Iraq was a Republic.

The decision was made and then the excuses were invented.

It's sad that so much good will was wasted. It might be a situation of crying wolf one too many times.

"...relied on a false report of Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 attacks alleged meeting with an Iraqi intelligence agent to justify the US' invasion of Iraq in 2003."

Another false report.

Should read: Mohammad Atta, the alleged leader of the 9/11 attacks.

Make up your minds, Dems. Was it a false claim of WMD's or was it a false claim about Al Qaeda?

Keep your stories straight.

Can you see how it is possible to be both?

Sorry guys.

I really do not know why Americans still argumenting, reporting, and reading about all this, and ANYONE questions what is the TRUTH about 9/11.

If the START do not make sense......EVERYTHING that follows also do not make any sense.

Edited December 12, 201411 yr by umbanda

What is conveniently overlooked in all this flowery rhetoric is that the Bush-Cheney administration could not have taken the action they did without the broad approval of the Democratic Senate and House of Representatives.

At the time the vote was taken in 2002, there were only 49 Republican members of the Senate. Without at least one vote from either a Democrat or an Independent, the Iraq war Resolution would not have passed and the Iraq war would never have occurred.

A total of 29 Democrats voted for the resolution, and they were: (from link provided below)

Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

Notice any prominent names on that list?

The Congressional members were fully briefed by the intelligence community prior to their votes. They didn't go into this blindly.

Sen. Levin voted against the resolution and now it is his "gotcha" moment and perhaps a little payback for his own Amendment to the Iraq War Resolution being defeated by a Senate vote of 75-24. He wanted the action to be approved by the UN.

This is all the dying swan song of the Reid controlled Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

The Cheney administration had plans to invade Iraq long before 9/11.

It is documented.

It's still hard to believe the American people let themselves be convinced that iraq had anything to do with 9/11!

Then again, they were fooled into electing Cheney's front man GW", for a second term.

He wasn't elected for the first term, but took office anyway.

My faith in the American public will never be restored unless Cheney and GW are actually punished for the crimes they have been convicted of.

"My faith in the American public will never be restored unless Cheney and GW are actually punished for the crimes they have been convicted of."

...and we shall weep for your loss of faith.

"...relied on a false report of Mohammad Atta, the leader of the 9/11 attacks alleged meeting with an Iraqi intelligence agent to justify the US' invasion of Iraq in 2003."

Another false report.

Should read: Mohammad Atta, the alleged leader of the 9/11 attacks.

Atta, is that the guy whose passport they found miraculously intact lying atop the rubble at the WTC site?

The days, months and (yes) years following 9/11 had to have been frighteningly chaotic for the Bush White House. They had just experienced one of the worst attacks on US soil, and they had no idea if another was coming. It seems clear now that they overreached, but hindsight is obviously a luxury they didn't have at the time.

What is conveniently overlooked in all this flowery rhetoric is that the Bush-Cheney administration could not have taken the action they did without the broad approval of the Democratic Senate and House of Representatives.

At the time the vote was taken in 2002, there were only 49 Republican members of the Senate. Without at least one vote from either a Democrat or an Independent, the Iraq war Resolution would not have passed and the Iraq war would never have occurred.

A total of 29 Democrats voted for the resolution, and they were: (from link provided below)

Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

Notice any prominent names on that list?

The Congressional members were fully briefed by the intelligence community prior to their votes. They didn't go into this blindly.

Sen. Levin voted against the resolution and now it is his "gotcha" moment and perhaps a little payback for his own Amendment to the Iraq War Resolution being defeated by a Senate vote of 75-24. He wanted the action to be approved by the UN.

This is all the dying swan song of the Reid controlled Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Typically you dont point out that these people were "lied to" by Bush administration and its cohorts. Difference today is most of those Dems know they were mislead and regret the vote.Of course most Republicans would have still voted for War even knowing the facts today. A certain Senator Obama voted against the resolution.

Edited December 12, 201411 yr by kingalfred

Nothing new. French told that since the first day. Then Colin Powell admitted it.

Bush is criminal, he just has to be judged.

Never happen.

I'm not going to country bash although my former president and vice president were the architects of this disaster. I can't believe that he got Tony Blair to go along with what was a complete made up farce. Yes, it was apparent almost just weeks after we had boots on the ground that we were fed a line of BS to promote a war in Iraq. What good has it done the world? One dictator dead, and the whole area now in complete chaos.

What is conveniently overlooked in all this flowery rhetoric is that the Bush-Cheney administration could not have taken the action they did without the broad approval of the Democratic Senate and House of Representatives.

At the time the vote was taken in 2002, there were only 49 Republican members of the Senate. Without at least one vote from either a Democrat or an Independent, the Iraq war Resolution would not have passed and the Iraq war would never have occurred.

A total of 29 Democrats voted for the resolution, and they were: (from link provided below)

Sens. Lincoln (D-AR), Feinstein (D-CA), Dodd (D-CT), Lieberman (D-CT), Biden (D-DE), Carper (D-DE), Nelson (D-FL), Cleland (D-GA), Miller (D-GA), Bayh (D-IN), Harkin (D-IA), Breaux (D-LA), Mary Landrieu (D-LA), Kerry (D-MA), Carnahan (D-MO), Baucus (D-MT), Nelson (D-NE), Reid (D-NV), Torricelli (D-NJ), Clinton (D-NY), Schumer (D-NY), Edwards (D-NC), Dorgan (D-ND), Hollings (D-SC), Daschle (D-SD), Johnson (D-SD), Cantwell (D-WA), Rockefeller (D-WV), and Kohl (D-WI).

Notice any prominent names on that list?

The Congressional members were fully briefed by the intelligence community prior to their votes. They didn't go into this blindly.

Sen. Levin voted against the resolution and now it is his "gotcha" moment and perhaps a little payback for his own Amendment to the Iraq War Resolution being defeated by a Senate vote of 75-24. He wanted the action to be approved by the UN.

This is all the dying swan song of the Reid controlled Senate.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution

Typically you dont point out that these people were "lied to" by Bush administration and its cohorts. Difference today is most of those Dems know they were mislead and regret the vote.Of course most Republicans would have still voted for War even knowing the facts today. A certain Senator Obama voted against the resolution.

A "certain Senator Obama" did NOT vote against the resolution.

He was not a member of Congress in 2001 or 2002.

He was either an Illinois State Senator or a community organizer at that time.

He had no vote at all.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Those Dems have been back pedaling ever since they made the vote. It has everything to do with getting reelected and nothing to do with the truth.