Author Topic: Anyone planning on watching ABCNews about Saddams WMD plans? (Read 378 times)

Ripsnort · « **on:** February 15, 2006, 12:09:49 PM »

Quote

Intelligence Summit to Air 'Saddam's WMD Tapes'
By Monisha Bansal
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
February 15, 2006

See Related Story: Secret Saddam WMD Tapes Subject of ABC Nightline Special

(CNSNews.com) - Reportedly armed with 12 hours of Saddam Hussein's audio recordings, the organizers of an upcoming "Intelligence Summit" are describing the tapes as the "smoking gun evidence" that the Iraqi dictator possessed weapons of mass destruction in the period leading up to the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

The U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, which according to the New York Sun has already authenticated the Saddam tapes, has reopened its investigation into the possible existence and location of the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (WMD). But some long-time liberal skeptics are showing no inclination to change their minds.

In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq on March 19, 2003, the Bush administration argued that the war was necessary as a preemptive strike because the Iraqi president had WMD and there was a danger that he would use them against the United States.

On Oct. 6, 2004, Charles Duelfer, advisor to the director of Central Intelligence on Iraqi weapons, told the Senate Armed Services Committee that Saddam did not have WMD at the time of the invasion and that the weapons were likely destroyed following the first Persian Gulf War in 1991. On Jan. 12, 2005, the U.S. announced that is was stopping its search for the weapons in Iraq.

But a four-day Intelligence Summit, to be held Feb. 17-20 in Arlington, Va., is re-igniting the debate over the Iraqi WMD. The featured discussion, on Saturday, Feb. 18, is titled: "Saddam's WMD Tapes: 'The Smoking Gun' Evidence." The agenda for the event indicates that the person who will speak about the tapes is at this point "anonymous."

The New York Sun on Feb. 7 reported that Rep. Peter Hoekstra's (R-Mich.) committee had obtained the audio tapes from former federal prosecutor John Loftus. According to the report, Loftus received the tapes "from a former American military intelligence analyst." Loftus is president of the Intelligence Summit, which is a yearly gathering of experts in the fields of counter-terrorism and intelligence gathering.

Jodie Evans of the anti-war group Code Pink, however, told Cybercast News Service that she does not think the Saddam recordings will lead to any new information. The government, according to Evans, has "said a lot of things for a long time."

"There's a difference between what they've been saying and what's real, and when they find something real, I'll comment."

Danny Schechter, author and producer of the film version of "Embedded: Weapons of Mass Deception," said he is "weary of these intercepts."

"Nobody denies that Saddam Hussein did have a WMD program. The United States knows that, we have the receipts, we supplied some of the initial technology," Schechter said.

But the weapons were destroyed in 1991, after the first Gulf War, he asserted.

"The question is not, did he have a program, but did that program represent a threat to the United States, to England, or to anywhere else," Schechter said. "I would be hesitant about raw intelligence that has not been analyzed, but that is being used in a partisan way by members of Congress," he told Cybercast News Service.

"Saddam Hussein is probably one of the most demonized world leaders, with Dick Cheney a close second," Schechter added.

Saddam is currently on trial in Iraq for ordering the killings of more than 140 *****e Muslims in 1982. One of his former military advisors and top generals, Georges Sada, has written a book titled: "Saddam's Secrets: How an Iraqi General Defied and Survived Saddam Hussein."

Sada, who is a national security adviser in Iraq's new government, alleges that in June 2002 Saddam transported weapons of mass destruction out of Iraq and into Syria aboard several refitted commercial jets, under the pretense of conducting a humanitarian mission for flood victims.

A Feb. 2 Cybercast News Service article quoted Jamal Ware, the communications director for Rep. Hoekstra as saying that "the chairman has read General Sada's book ... He will meet with General Sada to hear first-hand him laying out the case that this transferal may have happened." The New York Sun article from Feb. 7 indicated that Sada has since met with Hoekstra to talk about the issue.

.

SirLoin · « **Reply #1 on:** February 15, 2006, 12:16:28 PM »

I hear he quit eating Doritos in his underwear.

Eagler · « **Reply #2 on:** February 15, 2006, 02:24:02 PM »

that's next

he had them but Bush let them slip through his fingers into Syria

they gotta have something to run with in 08 not to mention this Nov

lol

Westy · « **Reply #3 on:** February 15, 2006, 02:54:50 PM »

lol. I had to check the posting dates on this one. I thought someone was tempting the mods wrath by punting one of the uncountable (since 2001) "Saddam has/had/hid the WMD's!!" topics.

So...

Is ABC Nightline suddenly reliable and trustworthy? Or they are if it aligns with one's belief or delusion?

Stringer · « **Reply #4 on:** February 15, 2006, 03:02:17 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Eagler
that's next

he had them but Bush let them slip through his fingers into Syria

they gotta have something to run with in 08 not to mention this Nov

lol

Not that I agree with the political posturing and pandering BS that will happen in '08, but.......

Wasn't that the point of invading in the first place? To make sure those weapons were found and DESTROYED.

If they do exist, which has yet to be proven, and did slip through our fingers to another State on our State Sponsored Terrorist list, then we did not get "mission accomplished".

And if it is proven that they are in Syria, do we invade? IMO, we should, if Syria does not give them up, or prove that they have destroyed them.

john9001 · « **Reply #5 on:** February 15, 2006, 03:26:07 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Westy

Is ABC Nightline suddenly reliable and trustworthy? Or they are if it aligns with one's belief or delusion?

yes westy, all the kurds saddam gased died from a "delusion".

Ping · « **Reply #6 on:** February 15, 2006, 03:43:49 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Stringer
And if it is proven that they are in Syria, do we invade? IMO, we should, if Syria does not give them up, or prove that they have destroyed them.

And even more importantly, Do you invade to find them so you can prove they exist?

Ripsnort · « **Reply #7 on:** February 15, 2006, 03:52:34 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Stringer
Not that I agree with the political posturing and pandering BS that will happen in '08, but.......

Wasn't that the point of invading in the first place? To make sure those weapons were found and DESTROYED.

If they do exist, which has yet to be proven, and did slip through our fingers to another State on our State Sponsored Terrorist list, then we did not get "mission accomplished".

And if it is proven that they are in Syria, do we invade? IMO, we should, if Syria does not give them up, or prove that they have destroyed them.

Pre-emptive excuses! And we've not even seen these alleged "tapes" yet! Beautiful!

Stringer · « **Reply #8 on:** February 15, 2006, 04:09:48 PM »

You may have to show me the pre-emptive excuse part, so could you please do so?

I know it's a direct question, and you have a (cough) mental (cough) block about answering direct questions.

Unless you think it's OK for a Middle Eastern country with terrorists ties to possess WMD's?

Tell me, what is your opinion on what we should do, if those weapons are in Syria?

Ooops, there's that direct answer to a direct question thingy again.

Ripsnort · « **Reply #9 on:** February 15, 2006, 04:15:08 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Stringer
You may have to show me the pre-emptive excuse part, so could you please do so?

I know it's a direct question, and you have a (cough) mental (cough) block about answering direct questions.

Unless you think it's OK for a Middle Eastern country with terrorists ties to possess WMD's?

Tell me, what is your opinion on what we should do, if those weapons are in Syria?

Ooops, there's that direct answer to a direct question thingy again.

Of course, we're building a straw horse here, we don't know whats on the tape...however if Saddam is on tape, and its authentic, giving orders to send them to Syria, then I think we should tell the Syrian Govt to turn them over immediately. If they don't, then we'll certainly be able to stem the wave of insurgency from the west, don't you agree?

I think we should listen to what they have before building anymore straw horses. But I'm quite certain the tapes will leave more questions than answers at this point.

And regarding the pre-emptive excuse..."If they do exist, which has yet to be proven, and did slip through our fingers to another State on our State Sponsored Terrorist list, then we did not get "mission accomplished"

"Our" hands? I don't believe we were in Iraq in 2002. UN might have been but we were definately not.

Stringer · « **Reply #10 on:** February 15, 2006, 04:19:15 PM »

Rip,
I agree with your post as originally posted before the edit.

As far as the our hands part that you edited into your post, I do not agree. Given that our stated intention was to go in there and make sure that area was free of WMD's and would not be associated with Leaders of States that Sponsor Terrorism, than our hands part is US.

I am no fan of the UN at all, but as your former signature line from Bush stated with regards to responsibility, we took as our responsibility to do that, and IF, a big IF, given, as you said the tapes will probably have more questions than answers, they did get away from us, then we need to finish that job, if they do/did exist and are in Syria now.

Straw horse now saddled

Westy · « **Reply #11 on:** February 15, 2006, 06:13:28 PM »

Delusion = "Bush let them slip through his fingers into Syria"

I could careless (as the US has) what Saddam did the the Kurds - or any other Iraqi for that matter.

And while Saddam could have easily ourfoxed Bush I do not think he could have done the same to the several Western intelligence agencies. If the WMD had indeed gone to Syria then why haven't the US and UK gone in and revealed them?

Silat · « **Reply #12 on:** February 16, 2006, 01:15:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Westy
Delusion = "Bush let them slip through his fingers into Syria"

I could careless (as the US has) what Saddam did the the Kurds - or any other Iraqi for that matter.

And while Saddam could have easily ourfoxed Bush I do not think he could have done the same to the several Western intelligence agencies. If the WMD had indeed gone to Syria then why haven't the US and UK gone in and revealed them?

Westy why do you hate our freedom?

Ping · « **Reply #13 on:** February 16, 2006, 03:46:03 AM »

A number of other interesting points made in that report.

http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/7101284/detail.html

Charles Duelfer, who led the official U.S. search for weapons of mass destruction, told ABC News the tapes show extensive deception but don't prove that weapons were still hidden in Iraq at the time of the U.S.-led war in 2003.

"What they do is support the conclusion in the report which we made in the last couple of years, that the regime had the intention of building and rebuilding weapons of mass destruction, when circumstances permitted," he said.

On another note:
If I'm not mistaken, hasn't Syria been providing help in the "War On Terror"
by providing intelligence and a convenient place to imprison difficult prisoners for Washington?
Their usefullness is still there so invasion isn't a current option.