Home > White House challenges UK Iraq memo
Wars and conflicts International USA UK
WASHINGTON (CNN) — Claims in a recently uncovered British memo that intelligence was "being fixed" to support the Iraq war as early as mid-2002 are "flat out wrong," White House press secretary Scott McClellan said Monday.
McClellan insisted the process leading up to the decision to go to war was "very public" — and that the decision to invade in March 2003 was taken only after Iraq refused to comply with its "international obligations."
"The president of the United States, in a very public way, reached out to people across the world, went to the United Nations and tried to resolve this in a diplomatic manner," McClellan said.
"Saddam Hussein was the one, in the end, who chose continued defiance. And only then was the decision made, as a last resort, to go into Iraq."
However, McClellan also said he had not seen the "specific memo," only reports of what it contained.
Earlier this month, the Times of London published the minutes of a meeting of top British officials in mid-2002, including Prime Minister Tony Blair, Bush’s staunchest ally in the Iraq war.
According to the minutes cited by the Times, a British official identified as "C" said that he had returned from a meeting in Washington and that "military action was now seen as inevitable" by U.S. officials.
"Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy," the memo said, according to the newspaper.
The minutes also quoted the unnamed British official as saying the U.S. National Security Council had "no patience" with taking the dispute to the United Nations and "no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime’s record."
"There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action," the official said, according to the minutes published by the Times.
The memo also quoted British Defense Secretary Geoff Hoon as saying that the final push to war would likely begin a month before the U.S. congressional elections in November 2002, with an actual attack coming in January 2003.
President Bush did begin trying to build public support for military action against Iraq during the mid-term election, which saw Republicans pick up seats in both the House and Senate. The invasion came four months later, in March 2003.
British officials have not disputed the authenticity of the memo published by the Times.
After the minutes of the meeting became public, 89 Democratic members of Congress sent a letter to Bush asking for an explanation.
The memo "raises troubling new questions regarding the legal justifications for the war, as well as the integrity of your administration," the letter said.
Forum posts
17 May 2005, 18:22
"flat our wrong"? Where are the facts that back up this statement? The Bush Administration has squandered all credibility, so it it amusing that they expect us to take their word for it.
Representative Slaughter does a great job illustrating the situation in this video from Keith Olberman
"If we can’t trust what the British tell us, we can’t trust anybody"
watch video
"The truth would be refreshing"
17 May 2005, 18:41
Information for McCain and Scott McClellan....Denial of the truth is not an answer. The evidence points to the fact that the decision for regime change came before the false evidence and threats to justify it. If just one piece of ’evidence’ they presented to the UN turned out to be true, they might have something. But what are the chances that all of the ’evidence’ was plagarized, forgeries or just plain wrong? It is basic logic folks.
This timeline includes key documentary evidence used in the British film " Iraq, Tony & the Truth" with links to the Prime Minister’s speeches. The leaked secret documents were obtained and published by The Daily Telegraph.
17 May 2005, 21:29
Come on you Repug cowards, step up to the plate and act like men, take responsibility for your lies. They cannot change the truth, try as they might. Repugs want others to do their dirty AND take the fall....how much more dishonesty will Americans and the world take?
18 May 2005, 11:22
Well said. It’s amazing that all these right wing cheerleaders have such a great problem with facing the most self evident of truths. Of course they’re always quick to condemn anyone who opposes their fatuous position but very, very slow at accepting their own lies and mistakes.
Just shouting out... "it’s not true," really isn’t much of an argument.
When you were kids - physically as well as mentally - you were the kids who took your ball home if you lost weren’t you? Well, it wasn’t impressive then and when you’re supposed to be adults it’s just downright stupid.
Reality check - He lied and 100,000 died. Face it - after all it was done in your name.
18 May 2005, 19:30
That’s because everything the Republicans have are based on a house of lies. Only via more denial will they be able to sustain their existence. Only by denying fraud occurred in the election, only by denying they had a hidden agenda in Iraq, and only by denying that they want total power will they achieve exactly what they want, total power. This is not a slippery slope argument, just look at their actions concerning the senate and what they are trying to produce, a unilateral world that mirrors their faith.
Of course, as a result of this they will be destroying whatever remnant of democracy we ever had. It is sad that more people don’t know what that means.