February 17, 2006
------
Not only are the 12 hours of tapes set to be released to the public by John Loftus tomorrow a fizzling non-event, but the media and many on the Right side of the blogosphere have taken those tapes out of context, twisting them to find hidden meaning where no meaning is to be found.
Without naming names, can I just say that it is totally out of context to read Saddam Hussein's warnings that 'terrorism is coming to America' as a veiled threat. Many on the Right have been so eager to find WMDs in Iraq that they are letting wishful thinking cloud their judgement. The tapes are no 'smoking-gun' In fact, it appears that the tapes show a Saddam Hussein worried that the U.S. would blame any acts of terrorism on Iraq. After all, the U.S. was in a shooting war with Iraq in 1995 over the no-fly zone and it would be natural for President Clinton to suspect that the man who had ordered President Bush (Senior) assassinated, would also have no qualms about sending a nuclear device to the American shores.
The tapes show a Saddam Husseing trying to warn the U.S. of the danger so as not to be held responsible when the inevetable came. Which is exactly what happened in the hours right after the 9/11 attack when the natural suspicion was that Hussein may have played a part in the attack!
The tapes do show that in the mid 1990s Hussein was actively thwarting U.N. inspections. But we knew that already. The tapes do show that prior to the Iraq invasion that Hussein was given reassurances that after sanctions were lifted that a WMD program could be quickly started once again. But we knew that already.
In fact, the tapes simply seem to confirm what has been known for quite some time. They offer no insight into allegations that WMD were moved to Syria.
Further, it turns out John Loftus is more than a little bit of a nutjob. Don't believe me? Then read this from Debbie Schlussel and this from Right Wing Nut House.
UPDATE: John Henke agrees.
Posted by: Rusty at
10:44 AM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 442 words, total size 3 kb.
Are the other 11 hours 59 minutes spent with Saddam singing Frank Sinatra hits and playing Boggle with his henchmen?
Posted by: dave at February 17, 2006 11:40 AM (CcXvt)
Posted by: john ryan at February 17, 2006 12:28 PM (TcoRJ)
I think you will find both were being held for intelligence purposes only, not for a possible criminal trial. So being released means that they have no further useful intelligence only.
Posted by: dave at February 17, 2006 12:49 PM (CcXvt)
Here is something from NewsMax that might gain some steam:
---------
The FBI translator who supplied the 12 hours of Saddam Hussein audiotapes excerpted by ABC's "Nightline" Wednesday night now says the network discarded his translations and went with a less threatening version of the Iraqi dictator's comments.
"What you heard on ABC News was their translation," former U.N. weapons inspector Bill Tierney told ABC Radio's Sean Hannity on Thursday.
"They came up with something different on a key element regarding terrorism in the United States," Tierney insisted.
In the "Nightline" version of the 1996 recording, Saddam predicts that Washington, D.C., would be hit by terrorists. But he adds that Iraq would have nothing to do with the attack.
Tierney says, however, that what Saddam actually said was much more sinister. "He was discussing his intent to use chemical weapons against the United States and use proxies so it could not be traced back to Iraq," he told Hannity.
In a passage not used by "Nightline," Tierney says Saddam declares: "Terrorism is coming. ... In the future there will be terrorism with weapons of mass destruction. What if we consider this technique, with smuggling?"
Tierney's full translations are set for release this weekend by The Intelligence Group in Washington, D.C.
-------------
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/2/17/125334.shtml?s=ic
Posted by: JohnMc at February 17, 2006 01:46 PM (y+I+a)
Those 12 tapes (out of 35,000 (?)) weren't ''cherry picked'' by a supporter of this administration.
Anyone who treats Saddam Hussein with more respect than our CinC, even as Saddam's brutalized, ignored victims wait for justice in Iraq, isn't intending to enlighten.
imfuo
I'll wait - indefinitely if necessary - for reliable sources who put national security ahead of politics, who keep WMD info out of the New York Times - Al Jazeera until WMDs are out of reach of genocidal jihadists, and nutcase wannabe-prophets.
Saddam Hussein was a WMD.
Posted by: b at February 17, 2006 02:37 PM (UwUis)
I take it you've read the full 12 hours transcript so you know the proper context? Where can we find the complete transcript so we can see the full context of these quotes?
And it is no surprise ABC has their own pre-spin on the story using the most innocent possible translation. I'm reminded of CBS' verification process for those TANG memos.
Posted by: dvorak at February 17, 2006 03:00 PM (FJ/ua)
Keep putting your faith in Bill Tierney, he sounds like a modern day Joan of Arc:
Bill Tierney, a former weapons inspector who worked with UNSCOM in Iraq in the late 1990s, was the guest for the first two hours of Friday night’s show. He believes that Iraq has nuclear capability and the intention to use such weapons. Further, Tierney claims that he has pinpointed a hidden location in Iraq (map here) where there is a uranium enriching processing facility. “You can’t put an underground chamber on the back of a truck,” Tierney said, indicating that if an inspection were made in this suggested area, the Iraqis would not be able to haul off the evidence.
Tierney’s methods of ascertaining this location were rather unconventional. “I would ask God and just get a sense if something was valid or not, and then know if I needed to pursue it,” he said. His assessments through prayer were then confirmed to him by a friend’s clairvoyant dream
Posted by: dave at February 17, 2006 03:23 PM (CcXvt)
Posted by: hondo at February 17, 2006 03:47 PM (fyKFC)
Posted by: dube stir at February 17, 2006 09:55 PM (jW4w7)
Posted by: sandpiper at February 18, 2006 09:30 AM (162Hn)
Posted by: Mark at February 18, 2006 10:54 AM (6su+T)
On July 25,President Saddam Hussein of Iraq summoned the United States Ambassador to Baghdad, April Glaspie If you use pressure, we will deploy pressure and force. We know that you can harm us although we do not threaten you. But we too can harm you. Everyone can cause harm according to their ability and their size. We cannot come all the way to you in the United States, but individual Arabs may reach you.
That sounds like as clear a warning as a couutry is likely to get. Any more clear and the United States would have been forced to war with Iraq much sooner and the drive to Baghdad would have happened in 1990. I suspect Saddam knew this.
Posted by: Pierre Legrand at February 19, 2006 09:54 AM (8+Mab)
Never mind that Saddam and his men tried to blow up George Sr. during the Clinton administration. He was just a poor guy who didn't deserve what was coming to him.
Posted by: Don at February 19, 2006 03:28 PM (0XEcj)
I see your point but my target is not trying to target moonbats. Who cares about them?
No my target has been and continues to be those Moms and Dads who send their children over to war and are not news hounds, maybe don't have internet, perhaps depend on MSM for news it is those folks whose will to fight the left is targeting. By discrediting the connections to terror that Saddam had we are taking away reasons for those people to feel like their children are risking their lives for something worthwhile.
Our biggest problem and perhaps its endemic to democracies is our will to fight. Take away our reasons for fighting and our will will vanish as well. Fighting for UN Resolutions isnt very inspirational eh?
Pierre Legrand
The Pink Flamingo Bar
Posted by: Pierre Legrand at February 19, 2006 08:52 PM (8+Mab)
I agree and disagree with you. Moms and Dads do not send their kids to any foreign land to fight a war. The soldiers, some being admittedly young, are nonetheless adults and have made the career decision to be a full-time soldier on their own accord.
The will to fight, or lack thereof, is not endemic to democracies. It occurs when democracies have been beaten down to a politically correct pulp, de-christenized (or any religion for that matter), and run through ringer, effectively, with socialist, anarchistic, or communist ideologies that poison the mind with utopian dreams of happiness. The main effort of the left is to beat down American culture, and when that happens, nationalism and patriotism dwindle along with the moral values our country once proudly boasted.
With that being said, I do agree with you that Saddam was not only a threat, he was a guided missle pointed due west to shores of the U.S.. History will eventually show that this man was not only evil, but one of the most notorious individuals to ever lead the government of any country.
Posted by: Roland St. Denis at March 17, 2006 10:54 PM (jU/Vp)
34 queries taking 0.129 seconds, 170 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
