The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
Quite! Knowingly supplying false information to the UNSC is Watergate type stuff if it's origin is traced to the US aor UK Government Can you (or anyone) get an MP to ask a question about it next week? It was reported on the front page of the Guardian, but hardly in a big way and they didn't really ask the question of where it came from. See the article below. Richard http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,909946,00.html UK nuclear evidence a fake British intelligence claims that Saddam Hussein has been trying to import uranium for a nuclear bomb are unfounded, according to UN nuclear inspectors Ian Traynor Saturday March 8, 2003 The Guardian British intelligence claims that Saddam Hussein has been trying to import uranium for a nuclear bomb are unfounded and based on deliberately fabricated evidence, according to an investigation by the UN nuclear inspectors in Iraq. The chief nuclear inspector for Iraq, Mohammed El Baradei, yesterday flatly contradicted Downing Street's and British intelligence's claims of attempted uranium smuggling by Iraq and said that the documents used to substantitate the British claim were "not authentic". In a 55-page report last September detailing British intelligence evidence of Baghdad's ongoing attempts to acquire weapons of mass destruction, the government said that since 1998 "Iraq has sought the supply of significant supplies of uranium from Africa". British officials named the state of Niger as the source of the uranium and passed their evidence to the UN nuclear watchdog, the international atomic energy agency, in Vienna. "Close scrutiny and cross-checking of the documents, the letterheads on them, the signatures on them, led us to conclude with quite absolute certainty that the documents were false," an IAEA official said. "They were fabricated," said another IAEA official. The fabrication was transparently obvious and quickly established, the sources added, suggesting that British intelligence was either easily hoodwinked or a knowing party to the deceit. There was no suggestion that the British were involved in falsifying the evidence which is believed to have been manufactured in Africa, probably in Niger, and then passed to western intelligence agencies. ----- Original Message ----- From: Glen Rangwala <gr10009@cam.ac.uk> To: CASI discuss list <casi-discuss@lists.casi.org.uk> Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 6:19 PM Subject: [casi] False documents used by UK/US governments > Dear List > > Perhaps the most striking claim in today's proceedings at the Security > Council was that made by IAEA director-general Mohamed ElBaradei that the > documents provided by the US and UK to substantiate their case that Iraq > has tried to import uranium "are in fact not authentic." > > He came to this conclusion after reviewing the evidence extensively - > including "correspondence coming from various bodies of the Government of > Niger" - and "compar[ing] the form, format, contents and signatures of that > correspondence with those of the alleged procurement-related > documentation". > > One can only conclude then that these documents are deliberate forgeries. > > To go over the background, the Blair govt in its 24 Sept 02 said - I think > for the first time - that "there is intelligence that Iraq has sought the > supply of significant quantities of uranium from Africa." > > This was clarified by the US State Dept on 19 Dec 02 as "efforts to procure > uranium from Niger". > > Now ElBaradei reports today as follows: > > "The IAEA has made progress in its investigation into reports that Iraq > sought to buy uranium from Niger in recent years. The investigation was > centred on documents provided by a number of States that pointed to an > agreement between Niger and Iraq for the sale of uranium between 1999 and > 2001. > > "The IAEA has discussed these reports with the Governments of Iraq and > Niger, both of which have denied that any such activity took place. For its > part, Iraq has provided the IAEA with a comprehensive explanation of its > relations with Niger, and has described a visit by an Iraqi official to a > number of African countries, including Niger, in February 1999, which Iraq > thought might have given rise to the reports. The IAEA was also able to > review correspondence coming from various bodies of the Government of > Niger, and to compare the form, format, contents and signatures of that > correspondence with those of the alleged procurement-related documentation. > > "Based on thorough analysis, the IAEA has concluded, with the concurrence > of outside experts, that these documents - which formed the basis for the > reports of recent uranium transactions between Iraq and Niger - are in fact > not authentic. We have therefore concluded that these specific allegations > are unfounded." > > ElBaradei concluded: "There is no indication that Iraq has attempted to > import uranium since 1990." > > This should be a major scandal: who (specifically) provided the false > documents to the IAEA? Who produced them? And what indication should the US > and UK have that the documents were false? > > URLs below: > > UK dossier - the claim is at p.25: > http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/Page271.asp > > State Department, 19 December: > http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2002/16118pf.htm > > ElBaradei statement of 7 March 2003: > http://www.iaea.org/worldatom/Press/Statements/2003/ebsp2003n006.shtml > > In addition to the claims above, ElBaradei's arguments today were stronger > than ever: > > "After three months of intrusive inspections, we have to date found no > evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons > programme in Iraq." > > "There is no indication of resumed nuclear activities in those buildings > that were identified through the use of satellite imagery as being > reconstructed or newly erected since 1998, nor any indication of > nuclear-related prohibited activities at any inspected sites." > > "There is no indication that Iraq has attempted to import aluminium tubes > for use in centrifuge enrichment. Moreover, even had Iraq pursued such a > plan, it would have encountered practical difficulties in manufacturing > centrifuges out of the aluminium tubes in question." > > Comments on Blix today are forthcoming. > > Best, > > Glen. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. > To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss > To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk > All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk