Curveball

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

You know who/what's Curveball? That's the coded pseudonym of the Iraqi chemistry engineer who leaked information to the German intelligence and practically brought down Saddam. Except his info was pure bullshit.

Nowadays, Curveball is convinced that he had been treated unfairly by the German intelligence BND. The former Iraqi chemistry engineer (real name: Rafid al Janabi) gave a large amount of secret intel from Iraq to the Germans, just before the beginning of the Iraq War v.2.0 in 2003. In response, the intelligence started paying him via a fictitious company, the monthly "salary" being 3000 euros. But in 2008 the German intelligence decided to stop the payments. Meanwhile, Al Janabi who was already living in Karlsruhe and had obtained German citizenship, had to return the Mercedes he had been lended.

Al Janabi never gave up though, so he turned to court, using the fact that the fictitious company for which he had been working, was issuing written invoices for the payments. In order to cover it up, he was officially hired at the marketing department as an "assistent in innovative advertisement" (LOL). What's more, the firm gave him a permit for a 15 year working contract that he could use at the Karlsruhe bank. And it's exactly this permit that he's now using at the Munich court that's supposed to settle labor cases. Because this is being viewed as a mere argument between employer and employee. Yeah, Germany is weird like that...

So basically a former informer is suing the intelligence services. No wonder that the judges are seeing so much potential danger in this situation that the whole court case is being held behind closed doors, no journalists allowed. Eventually the sides reached an agreement, and Al Janabi got a one-time compensation of 5000 euros. Wow, that was pretty cheap. So that should have settled it, you'd think? Um, actually no.

The thing is, the whole story is breaking out just now, and some curious details are coming up to the public. Details with much deeper implications about the Iraq War (although they might not be telling us anything that we don't already know or suspect, but now it's being officially confirmed).

The whole episode is a wacky epilogue to one of the biggest spying scandals in modern history. Al Janabi's "intel" about Saddam's regime turned out to be pure fiction. But that didn't stop the Americans from using that "data" to explain their invasion of Iraq. Since no WMDs ever turned up in the process, the US tried several times to make it look as if the whole blame was on Al Janabi's faked info and the Germans' naive belief in it. Like anyone is buying that.

Now for the first time the German intelligence has expressed some opinion on the matter. The former BND chief August Hanning himself said, "Washington misused our intel to justify the Iraq war". His words, verbatim. At the Welt am Sonntag, he said the US government had presented Curveball's intel as hard truth, despite the fact BND had warned them multiple times about their doubts in the veracity of his fantasies.

Hanning also added that Bush had planned the war right after 9-11. Just two weeks after the terrorist attacks the German intelligence received a letter from CIA, asking for all the information they got on Iraq. CIA was particularly interested in Curveball's testimony. He had been living in Germany since 1999 under political asylum and he instantly drew the attention with his statements that he had worked in Saddam's chemical labs. Only later he admitted that he had lied about this.

Several top-ranking members of the German intelligence are confirming that CIA had been warned several times and through several separate channels that Curveball's intel was untested and untrustable. The BND chief Hanning had even written to then CIA chief George Tenet. But despite everything, Bush's administration decided to use the fake informer's made up info as a keystone in their attempt to sell the war on Iraq. They simply created a narrative to justify their adventure in the Gulf, and they found the perfect story-teller to do it for them.

A few days ago Al Janabi gave his first interview for a German media. He told Welt am Sonntag that he had lied many times. He did it in order to increase the pressure on Saddam Hussein. He also told the newspaper how, for years after the Iraq war the German intelligence still wanted to send him under cover and keep a low profile for him, because in 2007 the NYT had uncovered his true identity.

BND recommended that Al Janabi should change his looks through plastic surgery. That could happen in Italy or Greece. But he refused. He's convinced that BND shares some of the guilt too for compromising his identity. He thinks the Germans had given that info to CIA, from where it probably became accessible to the public via the press. We all know how leaky CIA is these days. For Al Janabi this was the latest reason to start asking himself whether he shouldn't sue the intelligence once more. And for that part of the public who are interested in something more beyond the spicy superficial sensationalism, the whole story puts some uncomfortable questions about the war in Iraq, as well as the credibility of the intelligence community.

Comments

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'Don't you mean the US bought support internationally? '

You could say the same for Iraq considering the big nations opposed to the invasion had oil and military contracts.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately the Secretary of Defense had given Hussein some of the WMDs he claimed were there during the 1980s. By the Bush Administration's own logic the same traitor who gave aid and comfort to America's enemy was running the Defense Department.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'Unfortunately the Secretary of Defense had given Hussein some of the WMDs...'

Fortunately... no.

No WMDs were given to the Iraqi gov't or their agents by the US.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

SO that whole trade Rumsfeld did in the Reagan Administration never happened?

Who's wearing the Rummy mask in this photo, then?



And again, why should we take that man's word about the threat he created seriously? Given how easily we crushed Iraq and the three bombing raids in the 1990s if it's a serious threat to us that means our military ain't worth jack shit.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'SO that whole trade Rumsfeld did in the Reagan Administration never happened? '

There were no WMD's involved.

[peristaltor.livejournal.com]

Other than the gas, baby. Other than the gas.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Nope. We didn't even sell them gas.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

No, we simply sold them the means to make it in a trench war. If we did not expect them to make it, then that's akin to selling weapons-grade uranium to say, the Soviets or the PRC and being surprised when years later they've got more nukes than one might expect. If this was not intended, somebody fucked up somewhere.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

Really?? Think again.

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp

Read it very thoroughly.

Reality. How does it work?

Question. Do you ever do any actual research before speaking?

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Instead of thorough reading you should have read it carefully.

We sent samples of biological agents to Iraqi research bases for biological research. None of those were weaponized. As such there was no concern because at the time Iraq was not trying to create biological weapons per our assessment. During the same time period we shipped the same agents to many other countries for biological research.

Should we be outraged if we sold them scrap steel because we essentially sold them guns?

'Question. Do you ever do any actual research before speaking?'

Yes, now that I proved you wrong I bet you feel like a real dumbass. Perhaps a basic primer in argument structure and logic should be reviewed by you?

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

We sent samples of biological agents to Iraqi research bases for biological research. None of those were weaponized.

...

Should we be outraged if we sold them scrap steel because we essentially sold them guns?

If we were sending scrap steel to a gun factory, yes. Plausible deniability only goes so far.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

Thanks for backing me up here unwittingly. We didn't send those samples to weapons labs. At the time they were just research labs.

[mylaptopisevil.livejournal.com]

Saying they were research labs is different from being research labs

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

By the same token, the uranium centrifuges that Iran is maintaining have nothing to do with nuclear weapons. They're entirely about electricity production. Then why is all this fuss about their nuclear program? Do you even notice how your logic fails? You sent them samples that eventually result in biological weapons, just they didn't build any weapons "at the time", according to your "assessments". That's stupid and naive. I'm glad you're not a CIA analyst. Or maybe that's exactly the kind of people they hire there, which explains their current level of inadequacy.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

We sent them biological samples, identical to the weapons they used on the Kurds and identical to the biological weapons that the UN removed after the 1st gulf war. How can you be in such denial when the reality is completely in front of your face? Do you ever get a pang of conscience for being so obviously deceptive? Do you get a voice in the back of your head saying "You know, everyone sees this for what it is, there's no way I'm going to pull it off"

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'...identical to the weapons they used on the Kurds...'

Except that they used chemical weapons on the Kurds and not biological agents.

But really, who fucking cares about details. It's not like we're talking about how the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor!

'...and identical to the biological weapons that the UN removed after the 1st gulf war.'

Assert... don't prove. Assert. Don't lose sight of the goal, man.

'How can you be in such denial when the reality is completely in front of your face? Do you ever get a pang of conscience for being so obviously deceptive? Do you get a voice in the back of your head saying "You know, everyone sees this for what it is, there's no way I'm going to pull it off"'

Fucking prove something for once man. Goddammit! You say we gave them WMD then nobody actually posts not a goddamn thing backing it up.

News-FUCKING-Flash! Precursors and dual-use items are not WMD. Especially when they're done under WHO and UN guidelines for transference for research purposes. It's very simple. Now deal with it.

My conscious is fan-fucking-tastic, thanks for asking. Now how's the part of your brain that controls logical thought, want to show me it's up to the task and you actually use it? Can you do that? Can you?

This is the bullshit I have to deal with. People making assertions based on their own belief with reckless disregard for the specifics of the matter. All the while expressing the cocksure attitude so full of piss and vinegar that they're brilliant and anyone who disagrees is an idiot. And yet her we are. Everyone so sure they're goddamned Einstein's for conflating selling dual-use items with actually selling banned weapons.

[the-rukh.livejournal.com]

Wow dude. You're right I misspoke and said biological instead of chemical, but my point still stands. You getting angry because everyone knows you're wrong?

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

U mad?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Iranian soldiers would have disagreed with that one.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

So?

We never sold them WMD. They made their own.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

We sold WMDs to Iraq to use on Iran. In any case if he was an enemy of the USA by giving aid and comfort to him Rummy more than confirmed himself as a traitor.

[mrbogey.livejournal.com]

'We sold WMDs to Iraq to use on Iran.'

No. We didn't.

Do some research.

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

I did.

http://links.org.au/node/405

I expect you as usual to ignore this and not retract your own incorrect statements as I do when I make statements that are either untrue or from improper assumptions.

[allhatnocattle.livejournal.com]

possibly. Most countries opposed or with the coalition of the willing had some financial interests in Iraq. However, Canada certainly has never had major oil contracts with Iraq. What is damming is the evidence that the nations who joined the coalition for substantial financial incentives from USA.

[ddstory.livejournal.com]

But, but I thought the Old Europe is now irrelevant. After all, Bush said so.