| Topic: |
Politics > Politics-USA |
| User: |
"David Hartung" |
| Date: |
27 Mar 2006 05:29:12 AM |
| Object: |
Of interest |
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
.
|
|
| User: "Dion" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 07:41:06 AM |
|
|
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:c0QVf.42096$g91.38206@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
I do believe in fairies, I do, I do. I do believe in fairies, I do, I do. I
do believe in fairies, I do, I do.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Joe S." |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 07:20:32 AM |
|
|
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:c0QVf.42096$g91.38206@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
This should be of more interest.
QUOTE
On tapes, Saddam says Iraq didn't have WMD
Documents from 1990s detail attempts to convince U.N.
By CHARLES J. HANLEY, Associated Press
March 26, 2006
BAGHDAD - Exasperated, besieged by global pressure, Saddam Hussein and top
aides searched for ways in the 1990s to prove to the world they'd given up
banned weapons.
"We don't have anything hidden!" the frustrated Iraqi president interjected
at one meeting, transcripts show.
At another, in 1996, Saddam wondered whether U.N. inspectors would "roam
Iraq for 50 years" in a pointless hunt for weapons of mass destruction.
"When is this going to end?" he asked.
It ended in 2004, when U.S. experts, after an exhaustive investigation,
confirmed what the men in those meetings were saying: that Iraq had
eliminated its weapons of mass destruction long ago, a finding that
discredited the Bush administration's stated rationale for invading Iraq in
2003 - to locate WMD.
The newly released documents are among U.S. government translations of
audiotapes or Arabic-language transcripts from top-level Iraqi meetings -
dating from about 1996-97 back to the period soon after the 1991 Gulf War,
when the U.N. Security Council sent inspectors to disarm Iraq.
Even as the documents make clear Saddam's regime had given up banned
weapons, they also attest to its continued secretiveness: A 1997 document
from Iraqi intelligence instructed agencies to keep confidential files away
from U.N. teams, and to remove "any forbidden equipment."
Since it's now acknowledged the Iraqis had ended the arms programs by then,
the directive may have been aimed at securing stray pieces of equipment, and
preserving some secrets from Iraq's 1980s work on chemical, biological and
nuclear weapons.
Saddam's inner circle entertained notions of reviving the programs someday,
the newly released documents show. "The factories will remain in our
brains," one unidentified participant told Saddam at a meeting, apparently
in the early 1990s.
At the same meeting, however, Saddam, who was deposed by the U.S. invasion
in 2003 and is now on trial for crimes against humanity, led a discussion
about converting chemical weapons factories to beneficial uses.
When a subordinate complained that U.N. inspectors had seized equipment at
the plants useful for pharmaceutical and insecticide production, Saddam
jumped in, saying they had "no right" to deny the Iraqis the equipment,
since "they have ascertained that we have no intention to produce in this
field (chemical weapons)."
Saddam's regime extensively videotaped and audiotaped meetings and other
events, both public and confidential. The dozen transcribed discussions
about weapons inspections largely dealt with Iraq's diplomatic strategies
for getting the Security Council to confirm it had disarmed.
Scores of Iraqi documents, seized after the 2003 invasion, are being
released at the request of the U.S. House Intelligence Committee chairman,
Rep. Peter Hoekstra, who has suggested that evidence might turn up that the
Iraqis hid their weapons or sent them to neighboring Syria. No such evidence
has emerged.
Repeatedly in the transcripts, Saddam and his lieutenants remind each other
that Iraq destroyed its chemical and biological weapons in the early 1990s,
and shut down those programs and the nuclear-bomb program, which had never
produced a weapon.
"We played by the rules of the game," Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz said
at a session in the mid-1990s. "In 1991, our weapons were destroyed."
Amer Mohammed Rashid, a top weapons program official, told a 1996
presidential meeting that he laid out the facts to the U.N. chief inspector.
"We don't have anything to hide, so we're giving you all the details," he
said he told Rolf Ekeus.
In his final report in October 2004, Charles Duelfer, head of a
post-invasion U.S. team of weapons hunters, concluded Iraq and the U.N.
inspectors had, indeed, dismantled the nuclear program and destroyed the
chemical and biological weapons stockpiles by 1992, and the Iraqis never
resumed production.
Saddam's goal in the 1990s was to have the Security Council lift the
economic sanctions strangling the Iraqi economy, by convincing council
members Iraq had eliminated its WMD. But he was thwarted at every turn by
what he and aides viewed as U.S. hard-liners blocking council action.
The inspectors "destroyed everything and said, 'Iraq completed 95 percent of
their commitment,' " Saddam said at one meeting. "We cooperated with the
resolutions 100 percent and you all know that, and the 5 percent they claim
we have not executed could take them 10 years to (verify).
"Don't think for a minute that we still have WMD," he told his deputies. "We
have nothing."
END QUOTE
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "What Me Worry?" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 11:37:59 AM |
|
|
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:c0QVf.42096$g91.38206@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
post hoc ergo propter hoc
.
|
|
|
| User: "bully bully" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 11:44:56 AM |
|
|
What Me Worry? wrote:
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:c0QVf.42096$g91.38206@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
post hoc ergo propter hoc
We already know the basis of the liberal belief system ;)
.
|
|
|
| User: "What Me Worry?" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 12:31:49 PM |
|
|
"bully " <"bully "@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:swVVf.9169$Mj.478@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
What Me Worry? wrote:
"David Hartung" <dhart1ng@quixnet.net> wrote in message
news:c0QVf.42096$g91.38206@tornado.ohiordc.rr.com...
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
post hoc ergo propter hoc
We already know the basis of the liberal belief system ;)
liberal (adj)
1. Not limited by orthodox or authoritarian dogma
2. Free from bigotry
3. Favoring proposals for reform
4. Open to new ideas
5. Generous
Jesus was a liberal, but most of his followers are not.
Bush is a Fascist, and so are his followers.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "bully bully" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 06:01:43 AM |
|
|
David Hartung wrote:
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
It is of interest! But stand by for the postings attacking Bush,
downplaying the article, the owner of the paper etc. The liberal 'game
book' does not allow for that option.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mitchell Holman" |
|
| Title: Re: Of interest |
27 Mar 2006 08:34:25 AM |
|
|
"bully " <"bully "@nospam.com> wrote in news:HuQVf.34185$jf2.10030
@twister.nyroc.rr.com:
David Hartung wrote:
This should be of interest:
http://www.nysun.com/article/29746?page_no=1
It is of interest! But stand by for the postings attacking Bush,
downplaying the article, the owner of the paper etc. The liberal 'game
book' does not allow for that option.
Silly boy.
Everything but Fox News is "liberal media", and
even they are too liberal sometimes.
Didn't you get the memo?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
