posted on February 15, 2006 12:57:46 PM new
This should be interesting to see.
Secret Saddam WMD Tapes Subject of ABC Nightline Special
By Sherrie Gossett
CNSNews.com Staff Writer
February 15, 2006
(1st Add: Includes additional comments from former federal prosecutor John Loftus.)
(CNSNews.com) - Secret audiotapes of Saddam Hussein discussing ways to attack America with weapons of mass destruction will be the subject of an ABC "Nightline" program Wednesday night, a former federal prosecutor told Cybercast News Service.
The tapes are being called the "smoking gun" of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in Iraq. The New York Sun reported that the tapes have been authenticated and currently are being reviewed by the U.S. House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence.
The panel's chairman, Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), declined to give the Sun details of the content or context of the recordings, saying only that they were provided to his committee by former federal prosecutor John Loftus.
Loftus has been tight-lipped about the tapes, telling the Sun only that he received them from a "former American military intelligence analyst." However, on Wednesday he told Cybercast News Service, "Saddam's tapes confirm he had active CW [chemical weapons] and BW [biological weapons] programs that were hidden from the UN."
On Tuesday night, Loftus told Cybercast News Service that ABC's "Nightline" would air an "extensive report" on the tapes Wednesday night. Loftus also described an ABC News "teaser," which reportedly contains audio of Saddam Hussein discussing ways to attack America with WMD. "Nightline will have a lot more," said Loftus.
The tapes are scheduled to be revealed to the public Saturday morning at the opening session of The Intelligence Summit, a conference which brings together intelligence professionals from around the world.
Loftus is president of The Intelligence Summit. Its advisory council includes generals, a former F.B.I. official, a former senior Israeli Mossad officer and the former chair of the British Joint Intelligence Committee, according to information posted on the summit website. Currently a private attorney, Loftus says he works pro bono to help intelligence agents obtain lawful permission to declassify and publish the "hidden secrets of our times."
He purportedly has held some of the highest security clearances in the world with special access to NATO Cosmic, CIA codeword and Top Secret nuclear files.
This year's Intelligence Summit will bring together top terrorism experts including Dr. Rachel Ehrenfeld, author of "Funding Evil," 9/11 investigator Jean-Charles Brisard, author of "Zarqawi: the New Face of Al-Qaeda;" former CIA agent Michael Scheurer, author of "Imperial Hubris," and Richard Marcinko, former head of SEAL Team Six, and author of "Rogue Warrior."
The Intelligence Summit will be featured not only in the Wednesday Nightline report but also on ABC World News Tonight.
In a March 2005 addendum to the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) report on Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction, ISG head Charles Duelfer wrote that while there continue to be reports of WMD in Iraq, the ISG found "such reports are usually scams or misidentification of materials or activities."
A limited number of cases involved the discovery of old chemical munitions produced before 1990, Duelfer wrote. He also reported in the addendum that a large collection of audiotapes from Iraq's Revolutionary Command Council meetings chaired by Saddam was in the process of translation. While he conceded there were "remaining uncertainties," the chief weapons hunter said it was "not likely" the documentation would provide "significant surprises" regarding WMD.
Loftus told Cybercast News Service that the documentation referenced by Duelfer ended in 1991, and was not related to the new audiotapes.
"[T]here were no weapons," Sen. Hillary Clinton, (D-N.Y.) recently commented, "or if there were, they certainly weren't used or they were in some way disposed of or taken out of the country." Her comments were reported in The New York Sun.
On Tuesday night, Loftus praised a Cybercast News Service article published on Oct. 4, 2004, entitled Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror Ties.
The exclusive report featured documents showing numerous efforts by Saddam Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans.
The documents also demonstrate that Saddam's government possessed mustard gas and anthrax, both considered weapons of mass destruction, in the summer of 2000, during the period in which United Nations weapons inspectors were not present in Iraq. The papers showed that Iraq trained dozens of terrorists inside its borders.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on February 15, 2006 01:23:56 PM new
Bear, I don't think anyone would doubt Saddam was a threat. It's the degree of his threats that come into play. Were his threats about having nuclear weapons true? Were these nuclear weapons pointing at the US before Iraq was attacked? Could he have been making up all this stuff about how powerful he was to add to the fear-factor/brain-washing he doled out to his staff and country? Did the US also buy into it?
posted on February 15, 2006 02:01:43 PM new
Kraft, I think it all relates to proving Saddam's links to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.
I don't see him making threats about using WMD if he didn't have them available for use. It has been proven he did use gas on his own people.
The fact that other than traces of gas being found doesn't mean he didn't have them.
There are new accounts now from two of his former Generals stating Saddam moved all those weapons to Syria shortly before the American liberation. It will take the cooperation of Syria to authenticate the claims and I don't see that happening anytime soon.
I still believe the WMD's will be found somewhere in the region. After all mass graves of people he killed are still being discovered. Who knows how many graves haven't been located.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
posted on February 15, 2006 02:46:30 PM new
We know that Saddam had WMD at one point, because the US gave them to him to use in the Iran/Iraq conflict. What happened to them is a mystery.
As far as nuclear weapons go, Iraq has never possesed the missile capabilities necessary to come anywhere close to US soil, even if they were ever able to obtain the warheads.
But let's be very clear on something. Saddam and Al-Qaeda/Bin Laden have as much in common as McVeigh and Bush. Similar ethnicity.
posted on February 15, 2006 02:56:16 PM new
Bear, with all the satellite technology available, you would think the US would see if weapons were being moved to Syria. If there was movement, it would be a key factor in justifying the invasion, wouldn't you say?
Nerf, at the time, it was nuclear weapons of mass destruction, then it was changed to chemical and biological when none were found (even thought they claim they knew where they were hidden in Iraq.)
posted on February 15, 2006 03:03:58 PM new
Correct. I've honestly lost track of all of the evolving justifications that have been given for the invasion and occupation.
posted on February 15, 2006 03:34:17 PM newBear, with all the satellite technology available, you would think the US would see if weapons were being moved to Syria.
Read all of the news, not just what you agree with. I saw spy satellite imagery of one such convoy with a talking head asking why nothing was being done.
BTW, the Syrians are preparing for a major confrontation.
__________
The raghead fig-puckers are fighting to spread their culture and religion, and to destroy ours
posted on February 15, 2006 04:31:42 PM new
Time will tell...
A second Iraqi former commander confirms WMDs
Slowly, very slowly, we are beginning to discover what happened to the WMDs of Saddam. The left and the antique media have made it an article of faith that there never were any WMDs, and that “Bush lied.” So deep is their investment in a political position premised on this conclusion that they will pay no attention to contrary evidence.
Via Peter Glover’s website Wires from the bunker, we learn of an interview between Ali Ibrahim al-Tikriti, a southern regional commander for Saddam Hussein’s Fedayeen militia in the late 1980s and a personal friend of the dictator and Ryan Mauro of Worldthreats.com.
Only two weeks ago, General Sada, formerly Sadaam’s no 2 Air Force Commander, told the New York Sun that Sadaam’s WMD was moved to Syria just six weeks before the US-led invasion. Now Ali Ibrahim confirms this and explains the underlying strategy of Saddam:
I know Saddam’s weapons are in Syria due to certain military deals that were made going as far back as the late 1980’s that dealt with the event that either capitols were threatened with being overrun by an enemy nation. Not to mention I have discussed this in-depth with various contacts of mine who have confirmed what I already knew. At this point Saddam knew that the United States were eventually going to come for his weapons and the United States wasn’t going to just let this go like they did in the original Gulf War. He knew that he had lied for this many years and wanted to maintain legitimacy with the pan Arab nationalists. He also has wanted since he took power to embarrass the West and this was the perfect opportunity to do so. After Saddam denied he had such weapons why would he use them or leave them readily available to be found? That would only legitimize President Bush, who he has a personal grudge against. What we are witnessing now is many who opposed the war to begin with are rallying around Saddam saying we overthrew a sovereign leader based on a lie about WMD. This is exactly what Saddam wanted and predicted.
Moreover, Ali Ibrahim debunks other shibboleths of the left, including the allegation of no ties between al Qaeda terror and Saddam:
As far as Al-Qaeda is concerned this support was limited for a long time, mainly due to the fact that Al-Qaeda had the hopes of creating an Islamic empire while Saddam wanted a secular Arab nationalist empire. They only really came to terms in the mid-90’s due to the fact that both knew they shared the same short term enemy. Once they came to terms on this Saddam provided Al-Qaeda with intelligence support and whatever money or munitions they could provide. Saddam has had very long standing contacts in the black market as well as with Moscow and would provide whatever munitions he could through these contacts.
He also addresses the claim that the US bears responsibility for bringing Saddam to power and for armning him with WMDs:
This is absolutely ludicrous. I was in the Ba’athist Revolution who received support from the Soviet Union because of the socialist ideology behind it. The Soviet Union openly supported and backed the Ba’athist revolution in Iraq at the time and I am sure you can find news articles about it in European press agencies and others at the time. I was there helping with the revolution and worked on two occasions with Soviet KGB officials to help train us, much like the United States did with the Taliban during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan. The United States never directly gave us any WMDs but rather ingredients. They were not mixed and these ‘ingredients’ could have been easily used for commercial use but were rather used to build low life chemical weapons.
The tape recordings of Saddam discussing WMDs are said by Ryan Mauro of Worldthreats.com to be a “smoking cannon.” If all of this information proves out, the left in the US and UK are going to face an awful reckoning. As usual, it will take some time for the new information to travel from the blogosphere to the alternative media, and finally into the antique media.
Thomas Lifson 2 15 06
UPDATE: Reader David Bell writes:
In debunking the myth that the U.S. funded, armed and equipped Saddam and therefore is somehow responsible for him, Gen. Sada, unfortunately, perpetuates another. Namely, that the U.S. “trained” the Taliban. He says the Soviets trained the Iraqis “much like the U.S. did with the Taliban during the Soviet campaign in Afghanistan.” The U.S. had a role in equipping and training some anti-SovietAfghan forces in northern Afghanistan during the Soviet invasion, but these people later become the Northern Alliance that fought against the Taliban, which was a largely Arab-led movement. The U.S. never trained or in any other wat supported the Taliban or forces that later turned into the Taliban. This is just as big a myth of the Left as the story that the U.S. trained and equipped Saddam.
I can’t indpendently confirm this, but it sounds consistent with my vague memories.
posted on February 15, 2006 04:49:53 PM new"After Saddam denied he had such weapons why would he use them or leave them readily available to be found? That would only legitimize President Bush, who he has a personal grudge against. What we are witnessing now is many who opposed the war to begin with are rallying around Saddam saying we overthrew a sovereign leader based on a lie about WMD. This is exactly what Saddam wanted and predicted."
What a silly statement! Is he saying Saddam gave up his leadership, sons and country to make Bush look bad? Ahahahaha!
posted on February 15, 2006 06:44:23 PM new
You know what I STILL can't understand...is the lefties/liberals who keep saying they HAD NO womd.
Why did they believe clinton then when HE said several times they did?
In his Dec. 1998 statement as we were bombing Iraq...he said they DID have a womd program.
But all of a sudden according to the Bush-haters he didn't have them. NEVER had them.
They refuse to put ANY blame for the war on saddam's lack of cooperation with the UN or the US.
Denial, denial they LIVE in denial. Not even giving the slightest bit of a doubt that he could have destroyed them in the month before we invaded. Not even accepting he COULD have moved them out of the country....nope, according to them this President lied about exactly what the previous dem administration said.
<shaking my head in total disbelief at their double standard>
-------
Oh and Bear, thanks for the 'heads up' on Nightline tonight. I appreciate you letting us know. I plan to watch it for sure.
posted on February 15, 2006 07:54:45 PM new"Why did they believe clinton then when HE said several times they did?".
Because we all knew Iraq had chemical (supplied by the US) and suspected he had biological weapons. That was never a secret. Nobody knew he had nuclear weapons of mass destruction pointed at the US until Bush & Co lead everyone to believe that. That's the difference.
[ edited by kraftdinner on Feb 15, 2006 07:59 PM ]
posted on February 15, 2006 09:45:52 PM new
No one ever posed the scenario "pointed at the US".
The region is good enough. And the fact of Iraq's possession of components for these weapons was never in doubt. The documentation for laudering of shipments of this stuff is huge. It is also hard to say the rail gun components, etc, that the British seized en route did not exist.
I wonder what's going to happen with our poor liberal friends trying to double-speak the Iranian's announcement yesterday of resuming a nuclear program. They need it to heat the sand.
A news poll said 80% of Americans believe the Iranians will develop weapons AND supply them to the wackos for use against OUR COUNTRY. I wonder if any of the wacky left will be slashing their wrists when we hit Iran.
posted on February 15, 2006 10:13:04 PM new
I know, desquirrel....it's like here we are Iran doing what it pleases, Al Gore in SA slamming our Nations actions after 9-11...and what is the stupid liberal press worried about?
Why Cheney didn't let them know FIRST. grrrrrr....
-----
KD, I have posted the link to clinton's address to our nation in Dec. 1998 AT LEAST a dozen times.
Why you STILL can't GRASP what HE said is beyond my understanding and a HUGE part of why I've grow tired of your posts.
Clinton said: Bio weapons program, chem weapons program AND NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM.
What part of that is so difficult for YOU to grasp?
-----------------
Bear - I watched that program and other than the very interesting tapes they showed that is EXACTLY what I had previously posted here that had been found by our soldiers after things calmed down after the invasion.
They spoke about all these things that needed to be looked at, translated and that they believed at that time would hold some extremely important info. that would support our countries actions of invading.
Now...this offers further proof...I hope a ton of American's saw it...and that it will be reshown or spoken about in that anti=American left MSM....so word gets out to more BEFORE the Nov. elections.
posted on February 16, 2006 07:36:43 AM new
I watched it also. What I need to do is find the transcripts (they weren't online last night) fron the Nightline site.
"“More Iraqis think things are going well in Iraq than Americans do. I guess they don’t get the New York Times over there.”—Jay Leno".
