Posted on 10/27/2006 6:43:57 AM PDT by jveritas
Document CMPC-2003-016112.pdf contains Iraqi Intelligence memos from December 2000 to January 2001 that talk about a coming meeting between Saddam regime and French officials. In these memos the Iraq put some talking points to discuss with the French and among them is one where they want to ask the French to provide them with information about “US and Zionist Intelligence activities against Iraq”. Also in the talking points the Iraqi wants to ask France to support them in the UN Security Council.
Anyone who questions why France was against the removal of Saddam regime will get a clear idea from this document about the France despicable behavior during the run to the war and after the war. France is not an ALLY.
Partial translation of document CMPC-2003-016112.pdf
The Republic of Iraq
The Presidency of the Republic
The Intelligence Service
Date: 12/12/2000
Number: M1/2/6069
Secret
To: Fourth Directorate Fourth Department
Please provide us with the subjects and clarification that you want to discuss with the French side where there will be direct discussion with them very soon.
With regards
Signature
Director of the Fourth Directorate
11/12/2000.
More translation from document CMPC-2003-016112.pdf
The Republic of Iraq
The Presidency of the Republic
The Intelligence Service
Date: 9/1/2001
Number 109
Secret
To: Fifth Directorate/4/12/3
Your announcement numbered 252 on 8/1/2001 we list below the subjects that we would like to propose to the French side and what is related to our political work and as follow:
1. Push France to take its role to influence the countries of the African Continent due to the political influence she has and to open the embassies of these countries and to widen the political and economical relations.
2. Provide Iraq with the American and Zionist Intelligence and spying activities against Iraq and that it may be under the flagship of a third country in particular the Arab or non Arab African countries and those of sub-Indian Continent.
3. The information of the French side regarding the presence in the Northern Region of those countries that are observed by our political department.
4. The information of the French side regarding the Intelligence activities inside the country by those countries that are under the observation of our political department whether it is under a legal cover (diplomatic presence) or an illegal cover.
5. Information of the French side about what they have available regarding the methods and means used by the Intelligence Services of the countries observed by our political department.
With regards
Signature
Director of the Fifth Directorate/3
9/1/2001.
Below is another partial translation of the CMPC-2003-016112.pdf
1. Take advantage of their relation with the countries of the world and provide us of what concerns Iraq in particular that they have Intelligence relations with the American, Israeli, German Federation, Syrian, and Japanese Intelligence.
Take advantage of their position UN Security Council and take care of Iraq proposals.
Publish the facts that is related to the lies of Americans against Iraq through the different media outlet and to contribute in showing the point of view of Iraq.
With regards
Director of the 7th Section.
8/1/2001.
Ping.
Yes, this is what Saddam asked for from France.
Please publish for us the file from the Iraqi intelligence directorate of what France actually GAVE him in response to this request.
Thank you for your amazing effort.
Protection, oil-for-food cover, time & help to move the WMDs. We could go on and on and on...
Hey, no one here on this forum will consider this revelation a suprise. Good work.
France had a very strong interest in its oil concessions from Iraq, the guarantee of which was the price France demanded of the US for support in the war against Iraq.
The Americans were greedy and refused to guarantee this, and so France did not play ball.
But it is a very different thing to say that France actually gave US intelligence secrets to the Iraqis.
THAT would be a very hostile thing to do.
That Saddam ASKED is not surprising.
Whether France was perfidious or not will be determined not by the request of the Iraqi, but by the response of the French government.
Politically opposing the US move on Iraq in order to protect French oil interests there iwas not perfidious. The French didn't make this a secret to the Americans.
The Americans knew the price for French support.
They refused to pay it.
And so the French stuck it to them politically.
It would have been better for everyone had the US paid it.
France had a very strong interest in its oil concessions from Iraq, the guarantee of which was the price France demanded of the US for support in the war against Iraq.
The Americans were greedy and refused to guarantee this, and so France did not play ball.
But it is a very different thing to say that France actually gave US intelligence secrets to the Iraqis.
THAT would be a very hostile thing to do.
That Saddam ASKED is not surprising.
Whether France was perfidious or not will be determined not by the request of the Iraqi, but by the response of the French government.
Politically opposing the US move on Iraq in order to protect French oil interests there iwas not perfidious. The French didn't make this a secret to the Americans.
The Americans knew the price for French support.
They refused to pay it.
And so the French stuck it to them politically.
It would have been better for everyone had the US paid it.
For Iraq to even suggest asking France to give them information about US intelligence activities against Iraq is a great indication of the strong relation that existed between the two. Saddam regime was so paranoid and if they did not know that they can trust France to give them such information they would not include it as part of the discussions.
Fricking A!
2001 Doc: Saddam Regime Wants France To Provide Info About US Intelligence Work Against Iraq
Release/Translation of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.
Please add the keyword prewardocs to any articles pertaining to this subject.
Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents
WOW!!! Very important article that relates exactly to this document. So there are other documents that show France gave Iraq some US Intelligence and other activities regarding Iraq.
Thank you very much.
Thank you JV. This leaves little doubt about the French support of Saddam
Special@foxnews.com (Brit Hume)
Hannity@foxnews.com
Oreilly@foxnews.com
Studiob@foxnews.com (Shep Smith)
Myword@foxnews.com (John Gibson)
Drudge@drudgereport.com
writemalkin@gmail.com
hhewitt@hughhewitt.com
rush@eibnet.com
Beltway@foxnews.com (Barnes & Kondracke)
Friends@foxnews.com
humanevents@humaneventsonline.com (Ann Coulter)
CNN@cnn.com
CNN.onair@cnn.com
Viewerservices@msnbc.com
Letters@Newsweek.com
Letters@NYT.com
Editor@USAToday.com
Webeditor@Washingtontimes.com
Letterstoed@washpost.com
http://intelligence.senate.gov/ (Senate Intelligence Committee)
No surpirse -- the damned Frogs have cornered the market on the white flag business. Watched a Dennis Miller stand-up last night and he took a couple of nice stabs at the surrender-monkeys.
Publish the facts that is related to the lies of Americans against Iraq through the different media outlet and to contribute in showing the point of view of Iraq.
There you go...and their lap dogs in the enemedia have continued to publish their lies and continue to do so. Excited to see the rest of THIS translation!
The items in that link do indeed show the transfer of information from French officials to Baghdad which should not have been transferred.
This was corrupt and evil action on the part of the current French government, going well past the natural diplomatic gamesmanship aimed at retaining French oil concessions there.
It was indeed duplicitous, and an excellent reason why Americans should be happy to see the current French government go, even though that means it will be replaced by the socialist Segolene Royal. The French Socialists did not do this to the US; the French right-wing government did.
It is very, very bad, this collusion with Saddam.
He was a butcher, very evil.
Wanting to preserve the oil concessions was in the interest of France. Once Chirac's saw that they could not protect them, and that the US would invade anyway, it was alright to diplomatically obstruct America.
But it was very wrong to give Sadam's regime intelligence.
Thank you JAN.
Thanks for the ping and all the hard work.
Yes, America rightly and correctly refused to engage in a colonialistic "guarantee" of the oil contracts France had with Saddam; when such contracts must (at that time) become subject to a future Iraqi government, not America.
France helped perpetuate the myth - in the geopolitical media - that America "went to war for oil" when it was France who would have gone to war with the U.S. if the U.S. bought that cooperation with oil, Iraqi oil that the U.S. had, and even no excercizes no rights to make "guarantees" about.
No, we are glad to have not indulged in the colonialistic gamesmanship of the French in their lust for Iraq's oil, and their willingness to dispose of the trans-Atlantic alliance because we refused that indulgence.
It demonstrated the "my way or the highway" self-centeredness of the standard French foreign policy. It also demonstrated that France seldom has any true multinational partnership interest, unless there is some commercial benefit in it for France.
And for that stance, America went into Iraq without a UN mandate, with a substantial alliance arrayed against her.
And such allies as she did manage to cobble together, mostly inefficient 3rd Worlders, have left. In Europe, the governments that supported the American effort have been voted out of office and replaced.
The Americans did incredible damage to their own war effort by being greedy about Iraqi oil. For let us be clear: the Iraqi government is a puppet state, and will necessary remain so, and the Americans are going to call the show with that state in terms of oil concessions.
The US had to decide what was most important.
They decided, at the outset of the war.
Now the domestic political support for the war is falling apart even within the United States, and the Americans have no plan for either victory nor exit from Iraq.
The Republicans will probably not lose the 2006 elections, but they have no idea how to win the war in Iraq, and without any such idea, the war will simply continue. 2008 will be a replay of 2006, except with thousands more US casualties. And at that point American political will to continue in Iraq will collapse, the Democrats will sweep to power, and the American position in Iraq will collapse in the same humiliation that the US position in Vietnam did.
The so-called "principled" stance on Iraqi oil will not have accomplished anything other than to hand it all over to radicals.
It would have been better to make a deal with Paris and have world support. It would have made it far harder for the terrorists to find traction or allies.
"The Americans did incredible damage to their own war effort by being greedy about Iraqi oil. For let us be clear: the Iraqi government is a puppet state, and will necessary remain so, and the Americans are going to call the show with that state in terms of oil concessions."
Myths generated by France's own greed for that oil.
There is zero evidence that the Iraqi oil ministry has, or has any plans, to make any preferntial concessions to any U.S. oil company. In addition, no American oil company is owned by or has any political control excercized over it by the American government - unlike TotalFina.
The U.S. decided, post 9/11, that the end of Saddam's tyranny, the end of questions about his weapons programs, the end of his assistance to terrorists were, all three more important than securing oil concessions for France.
The American plan for Iraq continues; to support the establishment of democratic government in Iraq and to help that government become stable and obtain domestic security, as long as that help is needed.
Paris is burning and its lack of support over Iraq is the reason. The domestic mujahadeen realized that they could push the "Muslim" button on Chirac and he would stay out of Iraq. Having learned how weak the French government is in the face of Muslim pressure, they will now increase that pressure and expand the burning of all of France until the current "Republic" goes the way of every previous French republic - mort.
UNSCR 1441 was a mandate. That France was too interested in protecting their oil deals with Saddam was the problem. France was also knee deep in the oil-for-food program thereby allowing Saddam to amass $$$ billions for when France got the UN Sanctions lifted for Saddam.
America stood firm and put some meat on the bones of UNSCR 1441. France should be ashamed of itself for allowing that genocidal butcher to prosper at the expense of 26 million innocent Iraqis. You have no shame. You have no pride. You have lost your way in the civilized world! And you will be calling on America, once again!
"The Americans were greedy and refused to guarantee this, and so France did not play ball."
According to your statement above, France was blackmailing the US.
True.
The Americans were greedy and refused to guarantee this, and so France did not play ball.
Quite the opposite, France was the greedy party.
The only reason Saddam was giving France a huge discount on Iraqi oil was to buy the French UN veto to stymie the United States.
France happily sold herself to Saddam and proceeded to throw her oldest ally overboard for a little dirty oil money. Now that Saddam can no longer pay, France has thrown Saddam, her newest ally, overboard as well.
Losing France as an ally is good riddance to bad trash.
Another great find, thanks!!
Without even knowing the precise extent of the French response and collaboration on these intel issues, the mere fact that Saddam's regime felt so cozy with Paris that they could make such requests shows yet again how depraved and contemptible Jacques Iraq Chirac and everyone like him truly is. France was in bed with Iraq in so many ways, from corrupt "oil-for-food" scams to obstruction of UN and IAEA efforts, lame as those were.
Chirac and everyone like him among the Euro-twits are WHORES for the mass-murdering Saddam, period.
Please, Chirac and his kind are whores who betrayed the values that ALL Europeans and Americans should agree upon and defend. You can't put lipstick on this pig, no matter how hard you try (well, you can apply the lipstick but Chirac and Dominique are still pigs).
We can debate the wisdom of taking out Saddam's regime, but to pretend that the French position in the months and years leading up to March 2003 was anything but the most loathsome, corrupt whoredom is futile. Saddam paid the French well to be his whores in the UN, etc. and they worked hard on his behalf.
As for the USA, we are not even being minutely compensated for the enormous expense and effort of liberating Iraq from Saddam. Anyway, the US government had no right to make such corrupt promises to the government of France about Iraqi oil contracts. That's how Saddam and the whores of Paris operated, but I have yet to see any indication that the US is controlling all future Iraqi oil production - in fact, it was just announced that the PRC has revived it deal for development of an Iraqi oil field, so it does not appear that such activities are being limited to US companies.
"I have yet to see any indication that the US is controlling all future Iraqi oil production"
Indeed!
As we saw today with the Iraqi Prime Minister ordering American forces to cease blockading hostile militias who may be holding an American soldier captive, and with the American forces quietly obeying, packing up and leaving the area (and probably leaving their comrade-in-arms to death, probably by torture), it would indeed appear that the Americans are not controlling much of anything in Iraq.
Not the oil.
Not the security situation.
Not the government the US installed.
Nothing much at all.
But Americans sure are dying very bravely, and being maimed, in order to continue to control nothing.
If there is no desire to impose control upon Iraq, what have you got?
There's also another document which suggests that France promised Sadaam that France would keep the U.S. tied up in the U.N., and thus be unable to attack, that was well before the final negotiations.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.