Skip to content
Categories:

Did Bush White House order a forgery to connect Iraq and al Qaeda?

Post date:
Author:

Ron Suskind, a Pulitzer Prize winning author/journalist, has been a thorn in the side of the Bush White House for a few years now, but this might be the most damning revelation yet: Suskind reports in his new book that White House officials ordered the CIA to forge a “back-dated, handwritten letter from the head of Iraqi intelligence to Saddam Hussein.” The goal of the letter, apparently, was to “portray a false link between Hussein’s regime and al Qaeda as a justification for the Iraq war.”

The letter’s existence has been reported before, and it had been written about as if it were genuine. It was passed in Baghdad to a reporter for The (London) Sunday Telegraph who wrote about it on the front page of Dec. 14, 2003, under the headline, “Terrorist behind September 11 strike ‘was trained by Saddam.'”

The Telegraph story by Con Coughlin (which, coincidentally, ran the day Hussein was captured in his “spider hole”) was touted in the U.S. media by supporters of the war, and he was interviewed on NBC’s “Meet the Press.”

“Over the next few days, the Habbush letter continued to be featured prominently in the United States and across the globe,” Suskind writes. “Fox’s Bill O’Reilly trumpeted the story Sunday night on ‘The O’Reilly Factor,’ talking breathlessly about details of the story and exhorting, ‘Now, if this is true, that blows the lid off al Qaeda—Saddam.'”

According to Suskind, the administration had been in contact with the director of the Iraqi intelligence service in the last years of Hussein’s regime, Tahir Jalil Habbush al-Tikriti.

“The White House had concocted a fake letter from Habbush to Saddam, backdated to July 1, 2001,” Suskind writes. “It said that 9/11 ringleader Mohammad Atta had actually trained for his mission in Iraq – thus showing, finally, that there was an operational link between Saddam and al Qaeda, something the Vice President’s Office had been pressing CIA to prove since 9/11 as a justification to invade Iraq. There is no link.”

Deputy White House press secretary Tony Fratto denied the report, calling the version of events Suskind described as “absurd.”

That said, Suskind is a considerably more reliable source than the Bush White House.

Suskind writes in his new book that the order to create the letter was written on “creamy White House stationery.” The book suggests that the letter was subsequently created by the CIA and delivered to Iraq, but does not say how.

The author claims that such an operation, part of “false pretenses” for war, would apparently constitute illegal White House use of the CIA to influence a domestic audience, an arguably impeachable offense. […]

“It is not the sort of offense, such as assault or burglary, that carries specific penalties, for example, a fine or jail time,” Suskind writes. “It is much broader than that. It pertains to the White House’s knowingly misusing an arm of government, the sort of thing generally taken up in impeachment proceedings.”

Nearly as scandalous, Suskind’s new book, to be published next week, also reports that the administration had information from a top Iraqi intelligence official, who told U.S. officials that Saddam did not have weapons of mass destruction.

Suskind writes that the White House had “ignored the Iraq intelligence chief’s accurate disclosure that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq – intelligence they received in plenty of time to stop an invasion.

“They secretly resettled him in Jordan, paid him $5 million – which one could argue was hush money – and then used his captive status to help deceive the world about one of the era’s most crushing truths: that America had gone to war under false pretenses,” the book says.

What’s more, Kevin had a good item, noting the recent related revelations, including a report that the FBI was pressured to lie about the origins of the 2001 anthrax attacks, a report that Bush once suggested flying fake UN planes over Iraq in the hopes of instigating a war, and a report that Dick Cheney considered an idea to dress up Navy Seals as Iranians, put them on fake Iranian speedboats, and shoot at them.

“Maybe it’s coincidence,” Kevin said. “Maybe all these sources are just making stuff up. Maybe. But that’s a helluva similar pattern of allegations, isn’t it?”

Comments

  • Ed

    says:

    Wow – light’s out. If America doesn’t start to get really angry about this then I’ve lost all hope for the reasonable functioning of the republic. Or at least Ron Suskind’s publicist isn’t doing their job well.

    Either way, I can’t see any way McCain’s campaign can unfuck this one.

  • Shalimar

    says:

    How can America get angry if we never hear about it? This is way too explosive to allow onto the news. Even Pelosi would have to admit it was an impeachable offense, though it’s only a matter of days before it comes out that she was briefed on the forged letter and approved.

  • amy

    says:

    “a report that Dick Cheney considered an idea to dress up Navy Seals as Iranians, put them on fake Iranian speedboats, and shoot at them.”

    Way to honor our troops. I’ve never heard of anyone more deserving of a flag pin.

  • boc

    says:

    All the little details…in a court of law they call it circumstantial evidence. Of course there is a pattern, one of deception and lies, omission of contrary facts, fearmongering, threats and bullying. And McSame was there all along, yes, at times hedging his bets but he was on that side.

  • TomB

    says:

    I believe it, and I think most Americans believe it. But I don’t think most Americans want to litigate it. Many people are confused about the ambiguity of the “means justifying the ends” argument and they know that Bush and Co. will be gone in a few months so why bother.

    I think it’s a big deal and should be litigated. I hope that post inaguration it will be. But I sense two problems. 1. Bush will grant blanket pardons, and 2. Obama and Democrats are going to have the stomach for it. I think it will be important to investigate and prosecute simply to make the point that this behavior is illegal and immoral and won’t be tolerated by any future administration.

  • NonyNony

    says:

    Either way, I can’t see any way McCain’s campaign can unfuck this one.

    If McCain isn’t to blame for the actions of his own campaign, how can he be held accountable for the actions of the President.

    If (and it’s a big IF) this hits the levels where it becomes an issue, McCain will fall back on the “they lied to me too” excuse and it will be a non-issue for him. Unless someone on his campaign staff can be directly tied to this, I guess.

    Why the hell do I feel like I’m living in some kind of novel lately?

  • jhm

    says:

    We don’t really need more proof that the White House engaged in this type of thing. It’s unbelievable to me that the whole “Niger yellowcake/16 words” deal wasn;t enough to hit this point home. Every single department of the US government, aside from the Office of the Vice President” knew these reports were forgeries, and tried on numerous occasions to excise the words from the SOTU speech. Result: they stayed in the speech.

  • DB

    says:

    Thats how a good conspiracy works. The truth is so shocking as to almost be unbelievable; that way when anyone discovers it they will be labeled as a nut or wackjob and those in authority can deny it by simply saying its ludicrous without anyone but the “nuts” disbelieving.

    Why, oh because the government is here to help you. They would never do anything to compromise our trust. That is exactly what they want you to believe and that is what you desperately want to believe yourself. Thus, here is where the conspiracies lie.

    Although I’ll say that I don’t believe at all there was a 9/11 conspiracy. It was terrorists, and they did more than any government conspiracy could have to open up the doors of power to this president.

  • Steve

    says:

    Now all we have to do is find a way to get Suskind in as Speaker of the House.

    What? You thought that Pelosi—high-crimes-enabling twit that she is, by the way—might finally decide to do the job that she’s ignored for the better part of two years—that she might actually decide to grow a spine and wield the gavel against the Bushylvanian regime?

    Please….

  • howard

    says:

    of course bush deserved impeachment, but the notion that really, if only pelosi would unleash the impeachers, it would be a slam dunk is about as credible as iraqi wmd allegations….

  • Stevio

    says:

    All of this hubris and morass being unearthed and coming directly to us and perpetrated by an oil man running our country into the ground, who, by the by, lives on a “Texas ranch” that has no horses and is heated and cooled, not by oil, like the rest of us poor sots, but by a geothermal system Yep. Google it. My guess is that Al Gore already knows this. Boy, are we a bunch of suckers. At least Jessie James used a gun to rob people…

  • Davis X. Machina

    says:

    How can America get angry if we never hear about it? This is way too explosive to allow onto the news…

    If a Republic falls in a forest, and no one is there to hear it, does it make a sound?

  • Tom Cleaver

    says:

    None of this surprises me – unfortunately.

    Anybody who thinks that “anthrax scientist” Ivins was anything but a government patsy is living in la-la land. The only “accuser” he has is a psychiatrist who’s likely a government agent, and who better to doctor his files than the people who employed him? He probably did make the anthrax – as part of his official government work. And now he’s dead, so there’s nobody to tell the truth.

    I hate the fact that these goddamned Nazis have made me a believer in conspiracy theories. Like SWMBO says, “you go to sleep at night thinking they can’t do worse than they have, then you wake up and realize how pathetic your imagination is.” Name the topic, that’s the truth.

    The “Truth and Reconciliation Commission”/Congressional investigation of these criminal scum is going to have their hands full for 10 years, and that will just scratch the surface. This is why Dick Cheney doesn’t leave a paper trail.

  • Ed

    says:

    NonyNony,

    You’re right; McCain had nothing to do directly with creating the lie that propelled us into war. He’s just supported it all along, and remains the war’s top proponent. So while he had nothing to do with the lies, he’s still hitched his wagon to Bush’s horse and as such has just seen his most important strategic advantage on national security issues cut out from underneath him. He can’t talk about the war now without someone asking the question about the entire affair’s legitimacy. Obama, on the other hand, has been consistently against the war and has no such vulnerability. McCain’s campaign now has to explain why it’s important to stick with a war that never should have been fought in the first place.

    Especially if he and his colleagues on BOTH sides of the isle had been doing their check and balance job.

    That’s why they can’t undo the damage from this book. Sure, the right wingers will explain this all away as part of the vast liberal media conspiracy — I mean the timing of the book is suspect, doncha think? — but McCain is still left defending a position that has been left completely vulnerable to attack. And that was his strongest suit.

  • Focality

    says:

    As much as I’d like to see something done about this, the past few years indicate that not a damn thing will be done. The truth comes out and falls on deaf ears—or ears listening to the latest music on an iPod, watching the latest “reality” TV show, another stupid “feel good” movie, another vacuous screed in book form, eating crappy food (with plenty of subsidized corn product) from a crappy chain restaurant, and apathy.

    The MSM will never report any of this. The Dems in Congress don’t care because they’re complicit in the crimes (and they have other things to do).

    Seriously, nothing significant will come out of this—just like nothing happened after all the other facts about the BushCo. came out. Christ, Dick Cheney tried to off a guy while out “hunting.”

    Forget it, these guys are untouchable and come January 2009, they’re gone, as if they never existed, like ghosts.

  • timeoutofmind

    says:

    big deal — go back to your Mai Tai’s ya pansies. Nothing will happen — nothing. You could have videotape of George W personally ordering kilos of smack to be shipped aboard Air Force one for distribution to Harlem schoolchildren, and it wouldn’t matter a damn.

    No one has the balls to do anything about it. And anyone who does — Kucinich ? Waxman ?
    Anyone ? will be portrayed as a lunatic, vindictive flake.

    Ed, in Comment 1, said it all. It’s a full-blown, impeachable, international war crime. Committed by an unhinged usurper who is still sitting in the Oval Office, BABBLING EVERY DAY about the next war he wants to launch …. and obviously unconcerned about military capability, public opinion, or igniting World War Three.

    You call yourself a mature republic ? ANY third world kleptocracy would recognize the danger, and drive the maniac out of office with spears and their bare hands if that was the best weapon at hand.

    What will you do ? Nothing … sit back while he lies to your face, and shuts off your impertinent questions. And then go back to the beach. This story will die in two days. Hopefully the Susskind brings some sunscreen for his long ride on the Swiftboat for the rest of the summer.

    I repeat, as i have in every other post i’ve left here: you have what you deserve.

  • Capt Kirk

    says:

    “But if someone had evidence of the president committing a crime…” -Pelosi

    This is life in a novel, an out of control spy novel. Suspects commit suicide weeks before they’re charged, case closed. Gen. Petraeus close associate commits suicide, not in the news. Documents forged, assassinations attempted, billions of dollars vanishing, lives ruined, all in the name of Bush Imperialism and Corruption.

    They impeached Clinton for lying about an incident that happened years after the investigation began, yet no investigation of Bush has been begun in eight years.

    I think maybe I. Lewis Libby is writing this damn novel.

  • SickofBushMcCainLiebermann

    says:

    If this is true, then Bush should be in jail for Forgery…. end of story, screw the impeachment send him to Gitmo. Calling it absurd is just knee-jerk. They need to disprove it, and if the document exists it needs to be investigated.

  • Stevio

    says:

    There are components of Kucinih’s Impeachment Articles that, if investigated fully by Congress, would illuminate her implicit collusion and the collusion of other prominent Dems like Jay Rockefeller who both served on national security committees that were given information that they agreed to that would cause them to also be indicted. Pure and simple. Bush and C. would be pointing a stiff finger at a number of these ass holes even as he would be ejected from a job he never really wanted. She hits the gavel to impeach, she too goes up the river. So, forget it.

  • SickofBushMcCainLiebermann

    says:

    #17, but that would preclude people getting out of their H3’s, disconnecting from their Crackberries and pulling out their earbuds…

    …AND ACTUALLY GIVING A DAMN!
    besides us, of course.

  • Capt Kirk

    says:

    If we had the news media in 1973 that we have today, I’m betting Deepthroat would have mysteriously committed suicide. The story would have been a thirty second airing of his “crazy” story and Brit Hume, Charlie Gibson, Chris Matthews, Chris Wallace, et al, would have lightly chuckled, “what a flake…and moving on…”.

  • Mark E

    says:

    Funny you mention Habbush when he was the one actually involved in the Islamic conferences that Saddam hosted during the 90’s (and reported by Chris Dickey of NEWSWEEK) that was overflowing with Islamic radicals and included al Qaeda members. This guy has also been involved with al Qaeda post invasion but it’s supposed to be unbelievable that he would work with al Qaeda PRIOR to the invasion. You people on the left really need to take off the hateBush instead of hatealQaeda Goggles. It’s pretty dangerous in terms of destroying your concept of reality.

  • Lawrence E. Rafferty

    says:

    Capt Kirk,
    You are right about the media today as compared to the Watergate era. The media today see their job as one of entertainment. The media of the Watergate era knew that their job was to investigate what the government is saying and doing and highlighting the lies and crimes.

  • lou

    says:

    During the summer of 2002 Cheney began bad mouthing the prospects to be gained by getting arms inspectors back into Iraq. Then later that fall, after the inspectors were in Iraq Cheney worked diligently and aggressively to discredit them.

    So, if Suskind’s reporting is true, it adds a little more meat to the story that was pretty well fleshed out prior to the war. Most of us who visit here could pretty well read the writing on the wall — that Bush and Cheney were drumming up the war under false pretenses with the collusion of the national media and the stooges in Congress.

  • jen

    says:

    25 has it right.

    News is entertainment. That’s why Tim Russert’s son can get an important job with little background. The children of entertainment industry folks expect to get jobs in the industry with their connections.

  • John Rohan

    says:

    Interesting. So folks here think we should get riled up and impeach the president for an incident on which we have no evidence whatsoever, beyond Suskind’s word.

    Oh wait… but Suskind is reliable right? Yes, he’s so reliable that last year, when he hilariously flatly contradicted his own source on Abu Zubaydah, even Steve Benen said: “At this point, I have no idea who’s right about this”. (More here).

    Similarly, the story about dressing seals as Iranians and shooting at them comes from Seymore Hersh, who exclusively uses anonymous-only sources, that, of course, only he can verify. Here’s his track record: since 2004, he’s predicted five times that the Bush will attack Iran, and he’s been wrong every single time. Now that the clock is running out and his reputation is in serious jeapardy, he’s shifting to secondary objectives, like spreading the seal story.

  • Diogenes

    says:

    Nancy Pelosi basically let Bush say whatever he wanted starting in 2006. As soon as she took impeachment off the table, she basically said, “You know what, tell everyone anything you want. Do whatever you want. We have no spine. You’ll be fine.” The only possible good that could come from this would be if the press corpse actually reported on all of this, and people listened. To quote Guys and Dolls “That is a sucker bet.”

  • Diogenes

    says:

    Look, Watergate was so exceptional, they made movies about it. Prior to Watergate, you’ve got JFK’s womanizing, FDR in a wheelchair, the Spanish-American war. The only difference is that post Watergate, reporters have to work harder to keep their connections since it’s so much easier to classify information. The pre-Watergate press wasn’t any more toothy than the current de-fanged watchdogs that we have now.

  • SickofBushMcCainLiebermann

    says:

    #9 -Although I’ll say that I don’t believe at all there was a 9/11 conspiracy. It was terrorists, and they did more than any government conspiracy could have to open up the doors of power to this president.

    The only conspiracy I think was a conspiracy of incompetence to parse known intel and do nothing about it. As to Bush deciding to attack Iraq, I let the Downing Street Memo and White House memo reflect that.
    and then there was the pre-war appetizer:
    http://www.newstatesman.com/200505300013

    The Cheney speedboat story seems kind of silly, though. Sort of a meme that got carried away after we first heard of Iranian speedboats buzzing US ships months ago- easy for someone to retro-craft a scenario that way.

  • Racer X

    says:

    Stevio nailed it.

    Pelosi is compromised, and that’s why she will never move to impeach.

    We need to remove her if we’re ever going to get anything done.

  • BuzzMon

    says:

    Interesting that we have some “It’s a good thing we went into Iraq” commenters here today. Were you guys brought here by Rush?

    Let’s make this quick – by going into Iraq, Bush let Al Quida go in Afganistan – Bad.
    The Republican/Bush gang lied to get us in there, ever hear of the Office of Special Plans? Ever hear of the Downing Street Memos? Ever hear about the transcripts of conversations between President Bush and then Spanish Prime Minister Aznar about a peaceful resolution averting war with Iraq?

    The fired anyone speaking anyting close to the truth about going to Iraq (Lawrence Lindsay, Gen. Eric Shinseki), then sent our troops over without adequate numbers or equipment.

    Impeach Cheney & Bush? We would really like to see them in prison garb in the docket before a war crimes tribunal in the Hague.

  • ctrents

    says:

    OK… so what part of impeachment do our elected leaders not understand yet? This is unreal. What next?

  • Bruno

    says:

    Mark E @ 24.

    Do you have any sources that can be validated? OR… Are you just spewing some more Right Wing talking points. You do know that they make their own reality at the White House.

  • Angel

    says:

    I have been waiting for this to all be uncovered. anyone who has done there research can clearly see that the pieces of the puzzle just DONT FIT.
    1. bush urged the cia to forge a letter saying that Hussein was linked to Alqueida. Turns out, not only is that incorrect, but Hussein has been fighting AGAINST Alqueida with the Bush administration.
    2. that letter was forged before the falling of the twin towers. the suggestion of instigating a war was before the twin towers. The forged letter was also written to instigate a war. I find it very interesting that all of this happened before the twin towers. I also find it very interesting that the passport of the suppossed “pilot” of one of the planes was found in the rubble, but the man was found alive a week later? Its also very interesting that all of the suppossed “terrorists” that were arrested were released with no charges immediatly after they were presented to the media.

    america, lets do ourselves a favor and open our eyes

  • Beenthere

    says:

    I have no doubts that Bush, Cheney, and gang would do this kind of thing. It is closer to murder than forgery. Bush and company caused the death of over 4,000 U.S. military and a much larger number of Iraqis with their lies. Many more wounded and mutilated. Then there is the cost.

    They were crafty and we didn’t speak loud enough. I agree with the notion that it is our own damn fault. We have a lot of work to do. Obama is a change and we need it.

  • Phillip

    says:

    This doesn’t surprise me at all. I am constantly in awe of how much corruption is taking place in Washington, and most of it is pretty blatant. But, it’s not surprising at all when you consider how much power we’ve given to the White House. The more power we feed it, the more dirty the politicians it’ll attract IMHO.

  • Tim Mewhinney

    says:

    I just saw a picture of Obama, look at his eyes. His eyes have the look of death in them, that same look that one of the 9/11 highjackers had. Evil, hollow, indifferent, the look of death. Study his eyes, they are a picture to his soul. There is something wrong with this person, Barack Obama.