Lynchpin of Deceit: The Misrepresentations of Hussein Kamel’s
Testimony
Jesse Lee
opednews.com
“This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been
accounted for, and is capable of killing millions.” George W. Bush, 10/02
In this quote, Mr. Bush is referring to the stockpiles discussed in
an interview of defector General Hussein Kamel, the former head of Iraq's
weapons program, given by Rolf Ekeus of UNSCOM, Professor Maurizio
Zifferero of IAEA, and Nikita Smidovich, a Russian diplomat and weapons
inspector. In fact, whenever an administration official referred to
“unaccounted-for stockpiles”, they were referring to Kamel’s
testimony.
If the name Hussein Kamel does not ring any
clear bells, there is good reason. The
full content of his interview was kept secret until February of 2003,
despite the fact that a definitive UNSCOM report made the following claim:
“the overall period of the Commission's disarmament work must be divided
into two parts, separated by the events following the departure from Iraq,
in August 1995, of Lt. General Hussein Kamal”.
On the other hand, the name might be somewhat
familiar because it was used in vague references as a source by both
President Bush and Prime Minister Blair throughout the run-up to war.
In addition to the quote above, President Bush made the following
claim:
"We
now know that Saddam has resumed his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons.
Among other sources, we've gotten this from firsthand testimony
from defectors, including Saddam's own son-in-law."
The son-in-law is Hussein Kamel, who has now
been dead for seven years- hardly a credible source on whether Saddam
Hussein had resumed his nuclear program.
Kamel was killed when, after defecting to the United States and
giving this interview, he was lured back into Iraq where he and his
brother were promptly assassinated by Saddam Hussein.
And indeed Kamel did explain in his interview how Iraq had
manufactured stockpiles of VX and anthrax, as well as an attempt at a
crash nuclear program in 1995. In
Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair’s references, however, a subsequent statement is
omitted:
"I
ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons - biological,
chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed"
Responding to questions about the Iraqi VX program, Kamel stated the
following:
"We
changed the factory into pesticide production. Part of the establishment
started to produce medicine [...] We gave instructions [sic] not to
produce chemical weapons."
Clearly, this an “accounting for” of the infamous anthrax and VX
stockpiles. If there is no
documentation, this would be no surprise as Saddam Hussein would be
unlikely to keep extensive records of the destruction of weapons he was
not supposed to have. Of
course, such a statement coming from a defector is suspicious, but
Kamel’s assassination is not the only evidence that his testimony was
credible, and not ordered by Saddam Hussein.
The greater part of the interview, for example, is spent
criticizing the regime for tactical and humanitarian failures.
Furthermore, the Newsweek story that first disclosed the interview
quoted inspectors as saying not that the source was illegitimate, but
rather that the information had been withheld so as to “bluff” Saddam
Hussein into possibly revealing more information.
Finally, for what it is worth, Mr. Bush and Mr. Blair both saw his
testimony as not only fit to quote, but fit to quote as if it were a
current revelation.
The two most menacing aspects of the push for war, namely the
nuclear threat and the Al Qaeda connection in Iraq have already been
almost completely discredited. A
recent Washington Post story
(8/10/03) detailed how every serious piece of evidence for the nuclear
threat had been soundly undermined or refuted months before war began.
Paul Wolfowitz recently admitted in a talk radio interview that
there was no significant connection between Iraq and the attacks of
September 11th, or with Al Qaeda in general.
It appears, however, that perhaps even the less ominous elements of
President Bush’s case hinged on a blatant distortion and misquoting of a
testimony which, ironically, should have been the most potent argument
against Bush’s claims. The
threat of a serious congressional inquiry looms extremely large if this is
so, particularly since intelligence reports have already been released
stating that there was absolutely no conclusive evidence on any of Saddam
Hussein’s weapons programs.
The
transcript of the interview can be found here
|
