A U.S. Counterintelligence Agent Reports: Why and How We Are Lied to About Iraq

The Reasons and Methods Used by Authorities to Lie About Iraq

Victor Sanders
Why are we being lied to in Iraq? Why are so many people in the United States buying into what we are being told by all these so called Authorities?

Let me begin by saying that as far as I can tell there is no malicious intent in the part of anyone, including President Bush, in their pursuit of war in Iraq. The United States was involved in Operation Southern and Northern Watch over Iraq for 12 years before we invaded in 2003. There was some intelligence hinting to the storage of WMDs in Iraq. All this was followed by an attack that will forever scar our memories in 9/11. The President, our Leader, was forced to do "something." I have been in Command. The sense of responsibility for your people is quite overwhelming. Having said that, the decision to react in this way was the wrong move.

My experience with the Middle East began in 1996 when I became the Counterintelligence Agent assigned to 5th Group Special Forces. I began to follow Osama Bin Laden long before his name was synonymous with terrorism in every household in America. I was later Commissioned as an Intelligence Officer and was assigned to a MineWarfare Squadron whose area of operations (AOR) was also the Middle East. The world of explosives and imagery really was an exciting learning curve. Before my final assignment as a Commanding Officer of a Reserve Center, a required and mainly administrative role, I was in charge of Counterintelligence Force Protection Source Operations (CFSO) in Bahrain, a small Island Nation off the coast of Saudi Arabia. I was in the Middle East working Counterintelligence for the military during 9/11. Recently, I have been in Iraq as a Contractor since 2004 working Counterintelligence, Force Protection, and Interrogations of Iraqi Detainees. I know a thing or two about what's going on.

Having ground-level experience is quite different than the purported experts who love to comment on television. I have learned to temper my comments whenever speaking to those who will translate my words into something that can be peddled on television. I have learned a thing or two about the media. The main point learned is why these professionals, these Generals, and all these experts report the news the way they have been.

As a military officer I know the importance of being "successful" in one's endeavors. Its a system that was well-bred during the Clinton years when competition, plain survival, in the military was fierce. The system is still very much alive today. The Generals of today were the junior and mid-level leaders of yesterday. These guys are extremely sensitive to what is titled success and failure. They want to hear the positive and will go to great lengths to measure it. Whatever may seem as a failure, will and are categorized as momentary challenges. Surely, it is a positive concept and to my fellow Soldiers, could be recognized as part of the warrior's code. However, this is all working against us and against our political leadership. To further the problem, our political leaders are also stuck in a system that depends on their success and thus their own survival. They too need to report the success element to a greater extent.

So what happens? We have a conflict between unclear or incomplete reports from the field and testimonies from those we are supposed to trust. Field reporters have an immensely difficult job. For the most part, they do not have the classified intelligence required to find the baseline information. Even if they did, it would be too dangerous to report it. They can not travel with the Force Protection necessary to accumulate the number of interviews and photos necessary. The military does not share their classified sources. They can not for many reasons. The CIA must follow the same basic principle. News media are at a terrible disadvantage. In the end, what is reported are continuous annunciations about children approaching Soldiers asking for candy or food. Specific instances, full of positive images, of Iraqis shaking the hands of Soldiers are also reported. The imaginative highlight of construction projects, such as hospitals, in different areas of Iraq are popular. My favorite, is the constant reminder of the number of Iraqis who voted in the last election. How can a third-party, even the media in-country, dispute these so called facts? If ever Benjamin Disraeli was correct when he said about statistics, "there are three kinds of lies, lies, damn lies, and statistics," he really hit the nail on the head for this scenario.

There is a way to really help the Iraqis, if that's what our intent is. If by helping the Iraqis we are helping ourselves, then we need a different approach. We need to press the reset button. We need to allow people like me to speak freely without the fear of clear imprisonment by disclosing classified information. Moreover, we need courage to change direction and act quickly.

Published by Victor Sanders

MI Career Professional.  View profile

24 Comments

Post a Comment
  • WatchDog4/28/2011

    Well, the main thing is that this guy is not proclaiming to be a Special Forces soldier. As far as the title, we have seen written both the "5th Gp" or even a "5th Gp SF" (less common) format as informal communication even by Operators. The proper format you, CI Joe, have clearly stated, is always seen in formal communications or documents. This author did not formally write his other unit titles as well. The bottom line is,like thousands of other soldiers, he only temporarily assigned to the unit. In his MOS, it is also likely he was exposed to related issues he proclaims he knows. I make no comment as to the quality or correctness of the rest of his statements as I am not qualified to do so. I see no reason to pursue this matter any further.

  • CI Joe2/10/2011

    5th Group Special Forces...really?....if you were really part of that organization you would have listed it correctly, 5th Special Forces Group (A) or 5th SFG (A). It's aways the little things......

  • Daniel Doyle1/10/2007

    Mark, you are not looking deep enough into something that while it is distasteful to Americans is nevertheless necessary to look into. That is that some people will destroy lives including their own over their perceptions of religion. America has devised a way to separate religion and secular life. We call it choice and freedom, and that is what it is. The middle East has never done that. They are OK with religion being the brute of their policymaking and decision making. There is no argument that the US has to do something with that "25%" of the world's population to help them understand that there is an ability to be what you are and be here with others that are not that. Iraq was a perfect place to do it. The people there wanted it done.
    Now, refer to what Mr Sanders teaches us...

  • Mark Kochinski1/8/2007

    "We have had to engage an enemy who has devised a manifest of hate and then hi-jacked a religion called Islam in order to give their agenda a credible face." That's a great quote. Why would Bush have to refrain from mentioning that? Oh, because Iraq was secular, and an enemy of Al Qaeda, that's right.

  • Daniel Doyle1/8/2007

    AWWWWW! I just realized the "other" take on what I just wrote...I should have used these words: We have had to engage an enemy who has devised a manifest of hate and then hi-jacked a religion called Islam in order to give their agenda a credible face, and Bush has had to refrain from mentioning anything about that aspect of the war on terror. In that regard there has been a manipulation of language, but no manipulation of the intents or purposes which are to extricate terror minded people from the mainstrwam of society and the threat thereto...

  • Daniel Doyle1/8/2007

    "Rightfully manipulated" = How does an American president say we are going to fight a "religion"? We all know it, but he has had to extricate himself from saying that. It is simply not sane to do it, or say it -which would be sheer suicide politically- there, you feel better now Sexton? Damn, you are so lost in your own sense of your own brilliance you can't allow yourself outside of your own hovel of thought.

  • Timothy Sexton1/8/2007

    Hey Greg. I agree with your UN statement why even make resolutions. After all, your good buddies in Israel have ignored three times as many resolutions as Saddam ever did. All right, boys, let's invade them Jews! (That's sarcasm, by the way, not Mel-Semitism.)

  • Timothy Sexton1/8/2007

    Good article, but when a man stands up before hundreds of millions, smirks through his teeth and pulls one whopper of a lie after another, I'm hard pressed to buy your argument there was no malice involved. Bush, Rumsfeld and especially Cheney have profited royally off this invasion and the longer it goes on the more money in their pockets. In the meantime, thousands are dying. Oh, and I love Doyle's justification: We weren't lied to, we were rightfully manipulated. That's some scary stuff right there.

  • Shana Dines1/7/2007

    Amen, to that, I honor you with this honest, article, from someone who knows what they are really talking about.

  • Mark Kochinski1/7/2007

    And Victor, good article. I prize information from people who actually have some from sources other than talking heads. I backed the Afghanistan invasion, with the understanding that if went in and actually made life better for the majority of Afghans, the plan might actually work, instead of inflaming a war with Islam. We might have brought more moderates to our side. Instead we went to Iraq, never really fixed Afghanistan, and now reap what our impatience has sown.

Displaying Comments
Next »

To comment, please sign in to your Yahoo! account, or sign up for a new account.