More On The Saddam Tapes: Anyone Else Want To Deny The WMD Desire?
(Scroll down past end for update)
I caught this first thing when I got up this morning, and it took me a while before I could put it up and comment on it. (TY, Sweets for the link; yes, she sent it to me so I wouldn't forget it.) It seems that while the rest of the MSM is busying itself on ideas of impeachment for the president--Russ Feingold has called for his censure--the Washington Times is keeping a close eye on this issue that has been severely downplyed by their media brethren.
Audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his aides underscore the Bush administration's argument that Baghdad was determined to rebuild its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction once the international community had tired of inspections and left the Iraqi dictator alone.
In addition to the captured tapes, U.S. officials are analyzing thousands of pages of newly translated Iraqi documents that tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s.
The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, according to a government official familiar with the declassification process.
But it is not clear whether Baghdad did what the documents indicate, said the U.S. official, who asked not to be named.
"The factories are present," an Iraqi aide tells Saddam on one of the tapes, made by the dictator in the mid-1990s while U.N. weapons inspectors were searching for Baghdad's remaining stocks of weapons of mass destruction.
"The factories remain, in the mind they remain. Our spirit is with us, based solely on the time period," the aide says, according to the documents. "And [inspectors] take note of the time period, they can't account for our will."
The quote is from roughly 12 hours of taped conversations that unexpectedly landed in the lap of Bill Tierney, a former Army warrant officer and Arabic speaker who was translating for the FBI tapes unearthed in Iraq after the invasion.
Mr. Tierney made a copy, which he provided to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The committee in turn gave a copy to intelligence analysts who authenticated the voice as that of Saddam.
Mr. Tierney said that the quote from the Saddam aide, and scores of others, show Saddam was rebuilding his once-ample weapons stocks.
"The tapes show that Saddam rebuilt his program and successfully prevented the U.N. from finding out about it," he said.
There also exists a quote from the dictator himself, who ordered the tapings to keep a record of his inner-sanctum discussions, that Mr. Tierney thinks shows Saddam planned to use a proxy to attack the United States.
"Terrorism is coming ... with the Americans," Saddam said. "With the Americans, two years ago, not a long while ago, with the English I believe, there was a campaign ... with one of them, that in the future there would be terrorism with weapons of mass destruction."
The tapes are spurring a new debate over Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stocks more than a year after the CIA's Iraq Survey Group (ISG) completed a lengthy postwar inspection. It concluded that Iraq did not possess stocks of weapons of mass destruction when the U.S-led coalition invaded in March 2003.
There is more to come. House intelligence committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, told The Washington Times that about 500 hours of additional Saddam tapings are still being translated and analyzed by the U.S. In addition, in Qatar, U.S. Central Command's forward headquarters in the Persian Gulf, sit 48,000 boxes of Iraqi documents, of which the military has delivered 68 pages to the committee.
"I don't want to overstate what is in the documents," Mr. Hoekstra said. "I certainly want to get them out because I think people are going to find them very interesting."
He said the office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, is now weighing the congressman's request to release 40 of the 68 pages.
Of the tapes released so far, Mr. Hoekstra said, "Everything [Saddam] is doing is saying, 'Let's take it and hide it' with a clear intent. 'As soon as this is over, we're going to be back after this.' "
So far, the tapes do not shed light on what ultimately happened to Saddam's large stocks of weapons of mass destruction. None were found by the ISG, whose director, Charles Duelfer, filed a final report in 2004.
Some pundits and recently retired military officers are convinced that Saddam moved his remaining weapons to Syria. They cite satellite photos of lines of trucks heading into the neighboring country before the invasion and the fact Saddam positioned his trusted Iraqi Intelligence Service agents at border crossings.
Mr. Duelfer said there were promising leads that weapons of mass destruction did go into Syria, but the security situation prevented him from closing the loop. Mr. Duelfer concluded that Saddam planned to resume weapons of mass destruction production once the United Nations lifted economic sanctions.
Mr. Tierney said he thinks the regime poured chemical weapons into lakes and rivers and sent other stocks over the border to Syria. Mr. Tierney served as a U.N. weapons inspector in the 1990s.
"The ISG, they were lied to in a very systematic way," he said. "Lying. They were very good at it."
It's telling to see this, to hear about this, and to view what exactly this regime was doing in the year, or so, while the world twiddled it's thumbs over what to do with Saddam Hussein. For three years, we have listened to the detractors proclaim that the president lied about WMDs in Iraq. Well, these documents and tapes are proving the detractors wrong. I have cited Richard Miniter's work in debunking those myths, and pointed to numerous other sources that have gone on the record and stated that while there were no "stockpiles" like we were led to believe by our intelligence agaencies, and those agencies worldwide, we have found some WMDs and components there. We have General Georges Sada who has confirmed that WMDs were shipped out of Iraq to Syria and other "Saddam friendly" nations.
What more will it take befoire the MSM and the Left concede that this argument is over, and that they lost it? I mean, even if we drop the schematics and prototype for a nuclear warhead on a desk in front of them, they'd probably call it a map and an espresso machine. That's what is, perhaps, the more irritating thing about this debate; the Left refuses to admit that they were wrong. They refuse to admit that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the region, that he was collaborating with terrorists--including those of al Qaeda--and that he was deliberately hiding his capabilities, and lying about said capabilities, to the world community.
If that does not show where their loyalty lies, then I don't know what else will. I see a party so angry, so seething over their loss of power that they're willing to throw everything by the wayside in an effort to regain that power. And that includes exposing this nation danger. The Democrats of old are long gone--they left with Zell Miller. Joe Lieberman is the closest thing to a Zell Miller that we have, and he is virtually frozen out of his party because of his support for this president, and the nation's military during a time of war. The rest of his party disdain him for that move. To them, power is everything. We little people don't know what to do with our patrhetic, meaningless lives, and they alone hold the keys to changing that.
No offense, but I'd rather have this nation be led by a "twit," a "moron," and an "idiot" than let this nation be led by a party that refused to acknowledge--when it meant something--that Saddam Hussein really was a threat, and a growing one at that with the ties he had to the unsavories in the region.
Publius II
ADDENDUM:
Mark Taylor filled in for Dennis Prager this morning (Dennis is still on vacation) and had an interview with Bill Tierney. It was telling as he relayed to Mark Taylor what he did when he was involved with the ISG. He stated, point blank, that the Iraqis were adept at hiding and manipulating the weapons inspectors that were sent in. Tierney stated that his group would split into three separate groups to throw the Iraqis off, and had them running around trying to cover up their programs and any documents that the inspectors might find. He admitted that the Iraqis knew they weren't fools and that they would find things if they didn't move fast enough.
Bill Tierney admitted that at one location that they were about to inspect he witnessed trucks leaving the place at a high rate of speed. In one such instance, when they questioned the payload of those trucks, the Iraqis claimed they were "guard towers" and not missiles, as the inspectors contended. The Iraqis quickly ushered them elsewhere so they couldn't follow the trucks to confirm their payload.
Bill Tierney also admitted that much of the damage done by attacks by the Clinton administration was cosmetic; the buildings were already empty. He admitted to seeing where the US was striking, and telling his superiors that they weren't hitting the right targets. He admitted that the places most unlikely to house such things--schools, hospitals, city offices--were where the weapons had been hidden, bot no one in the administration wanted to even consider bombing such a site.
Tierney also stated that the Bush Administration wasn't aggressive enough in it's bombing, either. We could have stopped the insurgency quickly and decisively. And while they did hit targets that were worth it, but again, not nearly aggressive enough. When questioned about Scott Ritter, Tierney stated that Ritter was good ... too good for the Clinton Administration. Clinton wanted enough evidence to warrant sanctions, but not enough to force the closure of the first Gulf War. He stated that because the Clinton Administration did basically stab him in the back that Ritter turned bitter, and the DC establishment became an enemy to him. Tierney did state that there were things that Ritter did state a few untrue statements (no details to those statements), but that was why Tierney started coming out in late 2002, early 2003 to debunk some of Ritter's claims.
On the question of why Saddam made these tapes, Tierney admits that Saddam wanted the record so he could keep his staff straight, and in line. He also admitted to why he had these tapes dropped in his lap. They were, and still are as far as he knows, to be used against Saddam during his trial. He makes the point that the tapes also seemed to be used on the off chance that a subordinate decided to overstep his boundaries; an attempt to keep those people on a leash so they wouldn't stab him in the back. (This is sound reasoning. We know that Saddam's sons had been talking with intelligence operatives in Iran about possibly assassinating their father. With sons like that, it would only stand to reason that he felt that his direct subordinates could be a threat someday.)
At first, Tierney believed that these tapes might have been a plant; an effort to throw off the US investigators. It was a claim made by Saddam that the first Gulf War wasn't over. He believed that his cease-fire agreement was nothing more than ink on a page. He carried on with the war through covert means, including the attempt on Pres. Bush (41)'s life. There is an admission on the tapes of an "early warning system" that the Iraqis had in place to avoid any inspector's detection of the programs or WMDs. There is a lot of talk, Tierney points out, regarding hidden programs, and overt programs. Details are stated, including locations of buildings, and materials obtained under the UN sanctions.
Tierney points out that the IAEA basically had "tea parties" in Iraq while UNSCOM was almost as aggressive as the ISG teams. Saddam was more rattled by the UNSCOM investigators than the IAEA; clearly, Saddam didn't think he could manipulate the UNSCOM guys nearly as well as he had the IAEA teams. It was obvious to Tierney that there was a marked increase in anxiety in the discussions regarding UNSCOM. And as Tierney pointed out, UNSCOM had to be equally aggressive in all the nations they inspected. They could not go easy on one, and harder on another. So, instead of playing the typical UN games of "slap the wrist, shame on you," UNSCOM came out with both barrels, and demanded accountability. This was, of course, a worry to the dictator who was busy constructing WMDs, and covering up those operations.
On the subject of a possible WMD attack on America, Tierney alludes to the use of a proxy. This is a serious point of contention in this debate. Many on the Left disregard Saddam's ties to terrorism. But this is something that has a lot of people paying attention to the subject now. Had Saddam actually produced a nuclear weapon, his terrorist connections would have made him a dangerous individual. We are already contemplating the possibility of a terrorist-laid, Iranian-made nuclear weapon in Israel, so why is it out of the realm of possibility that the same could have happened through Saddam? The attack by proxy--what I highlighted above--was a real possibility, according to Tierney. He also admits that he has spoken with General Georges Sada, who has confirmed the tapes, Saddam's statements, and that yes, he was working on attacks against the US by proxies. According to Tierney, CNN mistranslated the portion talking about the proxies. He said that Tariq Aziz specifically brought up proxy attacks to Saddam, utilizing WMDs, and Saddam agreed it would be the best way to hit the US without Iraqi fingerprints.
Tierney also brings up the fact that he didn't like the fact that the administration right now is claiming they were wrong when these tapes clearly show that they weren't. Tierney points his finger to Negroponte, a former official at State that is either ignoring the evidence, or is blatantly defying the president after his call this past February to realease this information to the people. This has prompted the president to go "back out on the trail" and remake the argument for the Iraq invasion. That wouldn't be needed if Negroponte would pull his head out of State's @$$ and do as the president has commnaded. Tierney makes it clear that these tapes were dropped into his lap as "not classified." As a former intelligence officer, Tierney assumed they were, but stipulates that what he has talked about, and the bulk of the information he has translated, shouldn't be. It merely reinforces the point that Saddam hadn't disarmed and he was still working on his WMD programs.
Tierney appealed to the Sec/Def's office to have these tapes released, and there was no response. He stated that they--his private organization--made it clear they were going to release them. He states that Negroponte launched a smear campaign against the intelligence conference they were putting together, but they still went ahead with it, and have released these tapes. Tierney has a theory that it is Negroponte's moves behind the scenes trying to cover up anything that might be damaging to our allies--Russia, France, or Germany. (This is utterly retarded on Negroponte's part. America knows the culpability of our allies with Saddam Hussein.) He claims that there is a lot of "pettiness" in the intelligence community over these tapes; as such he has been smeared and stabbed in the back by those within the administration because of these tapes.
Now, for some people Bill Tierney may not seem "credible." He was challenged during his interview by a caller who stated that he didn;t believe him because of previous interviews where he alleged certain sites were areas where WMDs or their components were at, and yet no one has said anything. Tierney explained that many sites he brought up in previous interviews still have not been searched, compiled and categorized. In other words, we haven't reached those sites, as yet. (All in good time, moonbats; it's a big country, and we're a bit busy right now getting a government on it's feet.) I find Mr. Tierney quite credible. After looking at his credentials, his travels, and what he has done for the country, I can find little to "take with a grain of salt." Naturally, I do, but it is a tiny grain in comparison to some of the moonbats out there attemtping to discredit him.
Just a couple of links for our readers to peruse. The first is an interview he gave toFront Page Magazine. The second is to Pajamas Media's interview with him (links to Apple's QuickTime and Windows Media Player at cite to view interview). And last, but not least, Bill Tierney alluded to a piece written by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard in which Mr. Hayes comments on the administration's inability to get these tapes released. The piece talks about the efforts being made by Negroponte to stop the release of these tapes, including his attempts to block the legislation of Rep. Pete Hoekstra, and keep these tapes under wraps.
If you're as ticked as I am that members of our government are blocking the release of this information, call your representatives in the House, and tell them to back up Rep. Hoekstra, and get all of this information out in the open. It will be the only way we end this debate, once and for all.
Publius II (Updated 11:45 a.m., AZ Time)
(Scroll down past end for update)
I caught this first thing when I got up this morning, and it took me a while before I could put it up and comment on it. (TY, Sweets for the link; yes, she sent it to me so I wouldn't forget it.) It seems that while the rest of the MSM is busying itself on ideas of impeachment for the president--Russ Feingold has called for his censure--the Washington Times is keeping a close eye on this issue that has been severely downplyed by their media brethren.
Audiotapes of Saddam Hussein and his aides underscore the Bush administration's argument that Baghdad was determined to rebuild its arsenal of weapons of mass destruction once the international community had tired of inspections and left the Iraqi dictator alone.
In addition to the captured tapes, U.S. officials are analyzing thousands of pages of newly translated Iraqi documents that tell of Saddam seeking uranium from Africa in the mid-1990s.
The documents also speak of burying prohibited missiles, according to a government official familiar with the declassification process.
But it is not clear whether Baghdad did what the documents indicate, said the U.S. official, who asked not to be named.
"The factories are present," an Iraqi aide tells Saddam on one of the tapes, made by the dictator in the mid-1990s while U.N. weapons inspectors were searching for Baghdad's remaining stocks of weapons of mass destruction.
"The factories remain, in the mind they remain. Our spirit is with us, based solely on the time period," the aide says, according to the documents. "And [inspectors] take note of the time period, they can't account for our will."
The quote is from roughly 12 hours of taped conversations that unexpectedly landed in the lap of Bill Tierney, a former Army warrant officer and Arabic speaker who was translating for the FBI tapes unearthed in Iraq after the invasion.
Mr. Tierney made a copy, which he provided to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence. The committee in turn gave a copy to intelligence analysts who authenticated the voice as that of Saddam.
Mr. Tierney said that the quote from the Saddam aide, and scores of others, show Saddam was rebuilding his once-ample weapons stocks.
"The tapes show that Saddam rebuilt his program and successfully prevented the U.N. from finding out about it," he said.
There also exists a quote from the dictator himself, who ordered the tapings to keep a record of his inner-sanctum discussions, that Mr. Tierney thinks shows Saddam planned to use a proxy to attack the United States.
"Terrorism is coming ... with the Americans," Saddam said. "With the Americans, two years ago, not a long while ago, with the English I believe, there was a campaign ... with one of them, that in the future there would be terrorism with weapons of mass destruction."
The tapes are spurring a new debate over Iraq's weapons of mass destruction stocks more than a year after the CIA's Iraq Survey Group (ISG) completed a lengthy postwar inspection. It concluded that Iraq did not possess stocks of weapons of mass destruction when the U.S-led coalition invaded in March 2003.
There is more to come. House intelligence committee Chairman Rep. Peter Hoekstra, Michigan Republican, told The Washington Times that about 500 hours of additional Saddam tapings are still being translated and analyzed by the U.S. In addition, in Qatar, U.S. Central Command's forward headquarters in the Persian Gulf, sit 48,000 boxes of Iraqi documents, of which the military has delivered 68 pages to the committee.
"I don't want to overstate what is in the documents," Mr. Hoekstra said. "I certainly want to get them out because I think people are going to find them very interesting."
He said the office of John D. Negroponte, the director of national intelligence, is now weighing the congressman's request to release 40 of the 68 pages.
Of the tapes released so far, Mr. Hoekstra said, "Everything [Saddam] is doing is saying, 'Let's take it and hide it' with a clear intent. 'As soon as this is over, we're going to be back after this.' "
So far, the tapes do not shed light on what ultimately happened to Saddam's large stocks of weapons of mass destruction. None were found by the ISG, whose director, Charles Duelfer, filed a final report in 2004.
Some pundits and recently retired military officers are convinced that Saddam moved his remaining weapons to Syria. They cite satellite photos of lines of trucks heading into the neighboring country before the invasion and the fact Saddam positioned his trusted Iraqi Intelligence Service agents at border crossings.
Mr. Duelfer said there were promising leads that weapons of mass destruction did go into Syria, but the security situation prevented him from closing the loop. Mr. Duelfer concluded that Saddam planned to resume weapons of mass destruction production once the United Nations lifted economic sanctions.
Mr. Tierney said he thinks the regime poured chemical weapons into lakes and rivers and sent other stocks over the border to Syria. Mr. Tierney served as a U.N. weapons inspector in the 1990s.
"The ISG, they were lied to in a very systematic way," he said. "Lying. They were very good at it."
It's telling to see this, to hear about this, and to view what exactly this regime was doing in the year, or so, while the world twiddled it's thumbs over what to do with Saddam Hussein. For three years, we have listened to the detractors proclaim that the president lied about WMDs in Iraq. Well, these documents and tapes are proving the detractors wrong. I have cited Richard Miniter's work in debunking those myths, and pointed to numerous other sources that have gone on the record and stated that while there were no "stockpiles" like we were led to believe by our intelligence agaencies, and those agencies worldwide, we have found some WMDs and components there. We have General Georges Sada who has confirmed that WMDs were shipped out of Iraq to Syria and other "Saddam friendly" nations.
What more will it take befoire the MSM and the Left concede that this argument is over, and that they lost it? I mean, even if we drop the schematics and prototype for a nuclear warhead on a desk in front of them, they'd probably call it a map and an espresso machine. That's what is, perhaps, the more irritating thing about this debate; the Left refuses to admit that they were wrong. They refuse to admit that Saddam Hussein was a threat to the region, that he was collaborating with terrorists--including those of al Qaeda--and that he was deliberately hiding his capabilities, and lying about said capabilities, to the world community.
If that does not show where their loyalty lies, then I don't know what else will. I see a party so angry, so seething over their loss of power that they're willing to throw everything by the wayside in an effort to regain that power. And that includes exposing this nation danger. The Democrats of old are long gone--they left with Zell Miller. Joe Lieberman is the closest thing to a Zell Miller that we have, and he is virtually frozen out of his party because of his support for this president, and the nation's military during a time of war. The rest of his party disdain him for that move. To them, power is everything. We little people don't know what to do with our patrhetic, meaningless lives, and they alone hold the keys to changing that.
No offense, but I'd rather have this nation be led by a "twit," a "moron," and an "idiot" than let this nation be led by a party that refused to acknowledge--when it meant something--that Saddam Hussein really was a threat, and a growing one at that with the ties he had to the unsavories in the region.
Publius II
ADDENDUM:
Mark Taylor filled in for Dennis Prager this morning (Dennis is still on vacation) and had an interview with Bill Tierney. It was telling as he relayed to Mark Taylor what he did when he was involved with the ISG. He stated, point blank, that the Iraqis were adept at hiding and manipulating the weapons inspectors that were sent in. Tierney stated that his group would split into three separate groups to throw the Iraqis off, and had them running around trying to cover up their programs and any documents that the inspectors might find. He admitted that the Iraqis knew they weren't fools and that they would find things if they didn't move fast enough.
Bill Tierney admitted that at one location that they were about to inspect he witnessed trucks leaving the place at a high rate of speed. In one such instance, when they questioned the payload of those trucks, the Iraqis claimed they were "guard towers" and not missiles, as the inspectors contended. The Iraqis quickly ushered them elsewhere so they couldn't follow the trucks to confirm their payload.
Bill Tierney also admitted that much of the damage done by attacks by the Clinton administration was cosmetic; the buildings were already empty. He admitted to seeing where the US was striking, and telling his superiors that they weren't hitting the right targets. He admitted that the places most unlikely to house such things--schools, hospitals, city offices--were where the weapons had been hidden, bot no one in the administration wanted to even consider bombing such a site.
Tierney also stated that the Bush Administration wasn't aggressive enough in it's bombing, either. We could have stopped the insurgency quickly and decisively. And while they did hit targets that were worth it, but again, not nearly aggressive enough. When questioned about Scott Ritter, Tierney stated that Ritter was good ... too good for the Clinton Administration. Clinton wanted enough evidence to warrant sanctions, but not enough to force the closure of the first Gulf War. He stated that because the Clinton Administration did basically stab him in the back that Ritter turned bitter, and the DC establishment became an enemy to him. Tierney did state that there were things that Ritter did state a few untrue statements (no details to those statements), but that was why Tierney started coming out in late 2002, early 2003 to debunk some of Ritter's claims.
On the question of why Saddam made these tapes, Tierney admits that Saddam wanted the record so he could keep his staff straight, and in line. He also admitted to why he had these tapes dropped in his lap. They were, and still are as far as he knows, to be used against Saddam during his trial. He makes the point that the tapes also seemed to be used on the off chance that a subordinate decided to overstep his boundaries; an attempt to keep those people on a leash so they wouldn't stab him in the back. (This is sound reasoning. We know that Saddam's sons had been talking with intelligence operatives in Iran about possibly assassinating their father. With sons like that, it would only stand to reason that he felt that his direct subordinates could be a threat someday.)
At first, Tierney believed that these tapes might have been a plant; an effort to throw off the US investigators. It was a claim made by Saddam that the first Gulf War wasn't over. He believed that his cease-fire agreement was nothing more than ink on a page. He carried on with the war through covert means, including the attempt on Pres. Bush (41)'s life. There is an admission on the tapes of an "early warning system" that the Iraqis had in place to avoid any inspector's detection of the programs or WMDs. There is a lot of talk, Tierney points out, regarding hidden programs, and overt programs. Details are stated, including locations of buildings, and materials obtained under the UN sanctions.
Tierney points out that the IAEA basically had "tea parties" in Iraq while UNSCOM was almost as aggressive as the ISG teams. Saddam was more rattled by the UNSCOM investigators than the IAEA; clearly, Saddam didn't think he could manipulate the UNSCOM guys nearly as well as he had the IAEA teams. It was obvious to Tierney that there was a marked increase in anxiety in the discussions regarding UNSCOM. And as Tierney pointed out, UNSCOM had to be equally aggressive in all the nations they inspected. They could not go easy on one, and harder on another. So, instead of playing the typical UN games of "slap the wrist, shame on you," UNSCOM came out with both barrels, and demanded accountability. This was, of course, a worry to the dictator who was busy constructing WMDs, and covering up those operations.
On the subject of a possible WMD attack on America, Tierney alludes to the use of a proxy. This is a serious point of contention in this debate. Many on the Left disregard Saddam's ties to terrorism. But this is something that has a lot of people paying attention to the subject now. Had Saddam actually produced a nuclear weapon, his terrorist connections would have made him a dangerous individual. We are already contemplating the possibility of a terrorist-laid, Iranian-made nuclear weapon in Israel, so why is it out of the realm of possibility that the same could have happened through Saddam? The attack by proxy--what I highlighted above--was a real possibility, according to Tierney. He also admits that he has spoken with General Georges Sada, who has confirmed the tapes, Saddam's statements, and that yes, he was working on attacks against the US by proxies. According to Tierney, CNN mistranslated the portion talking about the proxies. He said that Tariq Aziz specifically brought up proxy attacks to Saddam, utilizing WMDs, and Saddam agreed it would be the best way to hit the US without Iraqi fingerprints.
Tierney also brings up the fact that he didn't like the fact that the administration right now is claiming they were wrong when these tapes clearly show that they weren't. Tierney points his finger to Negroponte, a former official at State that is either ignoring the evidence, or is blatantly defying the president after his call this past February to realease this information to the people. This has prompted the president to go "back out on the trail" and remake the argument for the Iraq invasion. That wouldn't be needed if Negroponte would pull his head out of State's @$$ and do as the president has commnaded. Tierney makes it clear that these tapes were dropped into his lap as "not classified." As a former intelligence officer, Tierney assumed they were, but stipulates that what he has talked about, and the bulk of the information he has translated, shouldn't be. It merely reinforces the point that Saddam hadn't disarmed and he was still working on his WMD programs.
Tierney appealed to the Sec/Def's office to have these tapes released, and there was no response. He stated that they--his private organization--made it clear they were going to release them. He states that Negroponte launched a smear campaign against the intelligence conference they were putting together, but they still went ahead with it, and have released these tapes. Tierney has a theory that it is Negroponte's moves behind the scenes trying to cover up anything that might be damaging to our allies--Russia, France, or Germany. (This is utterly retarded on Negroponte's part. America knows the culpability of our allies with Saddam Hussein.) He claims that there is a lot of "pettiness" in the intelligence community over these tapes; as such he has been smeared and stabbed in the back by those within the administration because of these tapes.
Now, for some people Bill Tierney may not seem "credible." He was challenged during his interview by a caller who stated that he didn;t believe him because of previous interviews where he alleged certain sites were areas where WMDs or their components were at, and yet no one has said anything. Tierney explained that many sites he brought up in previous interviews still have not been searched, compiled and categorized. In other words, we haven't reached those sites, as yet. (All in good time, moonbats; it's a big country, and we're a bit busy right now getting a government on it's feet.) I find Mr. Tierney quite credible. After looking at his credentials, his travels, and what he has done for the country, I can find little to "take with a grain of salt." Naturally, I do, but it is a tiny grain in comparison to some of the moonbats out there attemtping to discredit him.
Just a couple of links for our readers to peruse. The first is an interview he gave toFront Page Magazine. The second is to Pajamas Media's interview with him (links to Apple's QuickTime and Windows Media Player at cite to view interview). And last, but not least, Bill Tierney alluded to a piece written by Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard in which Mr. Hayes comments on the administration's inability to get these tapes released. The piece talks about the efforts being made by Negroponte to stop the release of these tapes, including his attempts to block the legislation of Rep. Pete Hoekstra, and keep these tapes under wraps.
If you're as ticked as I am that members of our government are blocking the release of this information, call your representatives in the House, and tell them to back up Rep. Hoekstra, and get all of this information out in the open. It will be the only way we end this debate, once and for all.
Publius II (Updated 11:45 a.m., AZ Time)
posted by Syd And Vaughn | 12:54 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home