Skip to comments.
Iraqi army chief backs WMD claim
Associated Press ^
| 12/6/03
| Associated Press
Posted on 12/06/2003 5:24:19 PM PST by Mark Felton
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
To: Mark Felton
How the heck is the AP going to bury this???
2
posted on
12/06/2003 5:27:05 PM PST
by
demsux
To: demsux
They report it once on a Saturday and never mention it again.
3
posted on
12/06/2003 5:29:02 PM PST
by
Moonman62
To: Mark Felton
Hmmm. Could this be the big one?
4
posted on
12/06/2003 5:30:14 PM PST
by
Faraday
To: Mark Felton
"I am the one responsible for providing this information," he was quoted as saying. "It is 100 per cent accurate. "Forget 45 minutes, we could have fired these within half an hour," Col al-Dabbagh added. He said the weapons were not used because most of the Iraqi army did not want to fight for Saddam."
===
Can someone read this to Daschle, the rest of the Dems and the Brits who attacked Blair? Will they all apologize to Bush and Blair?
To: Mark Felton
Will this be featured in a "very special 48 hours" with Dan Rather ?
6
posted on
12/06/2003 5:34:40 PM PST
by
ChadGore
(Kakkate Koi!)
To: Mark Felton; Pokey78
To: Mark Felton
Liberals will try to bury this as fast as Saddam buried his own people.
8
posted on
12/06/2003 5:40:11 PM PST
by
armymarinemom
(I Rocked the Cradle of Death from Above)
To: FairOpinion
"Can someone read this to Daschle, the rest of the Dems and the Brits who attacked Blair?"
To heck with reading this to Daschle et al...I want to hear Russert and Steffy ask HILLARY CLINTON about it on the Sunday talk shows!!! I think she's scheduled to be on all three in the morning (NBC,ABC,CBS). Of course not FOX...whadda you think...she's a dummy?!?
9
posted on
12/06/2003 5:41:18 PM PST
by
Maria S
("…the end is near…this time, Americans are serious; Bush is not like Clinton." Uday Hussein 4/9/03)
To: armymarinemom
What we need, is to get that Iraqi general to come on FoxNews.
====
"When I asked him whether the information in the document relating to the 45-minute issue was 100 per cent accurate, he responded with characteristic Iraqi enthusiasm: "It is 200 per cent accurate!" he exclaimed. "And forget 45 minutes. We could have fired them within half an hour."
The weapons themselves were finally deployed at his own unit towards the end of last year. "They arrived in boxes marked 'Made in Iraq' and looked like something you fired with a rocket-propelled grenade," Lt Col al-Dabbagh explained.
"They were either chemical or biological weapons; I don't know which, because only the Fedayeen and the Special Republican Guard were allowed to use them. All I know is that we were told that when we used these weapons we had to wear gas masks."
He believes that the only reason these weapons were not used during Operation Iraqi Freedom last spring is that the bulk of the Iraqi army refused to fight for Saddam.
"The West should thank God that the Iraqi army decided not to fight," he said. "If the army had fought for Saddam, and used these weapons, there would have been terrible consequences."
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1035385/posts The UK Telegraph article has much more detail, very interesting.
To: Mark Felton
I never doubted this and all the other evidence that brought us to war. It is just a matter of time for the truth to finally come out. It won't make any difference to the Bush-bashers, though.
11
posted on
12/06/2003 5:45:52 PM PST
by
Kirkwood
To: Maria S
Maria S, this is not a scheduled part of the questions, not pre-approved. Forget it.
12
posted on
12/06/2003 5:46:22 PM PST
by
AGreatPer
(Hillary will be drafted. Period. There ain't nothing else. If she looses, she wins recognition,)
To: Mark Felton
And that's why the Iraqi frontline troops had all those chemical suits, etc. Why is this so hard for lib dems and the media to understand?
13
posted on
12/06/2003 5:55:00 PM PST
by
Gothmog
To: FairOpinion
So where are the WMD? They still pose a danger then and the war did not remove the threat-just spread it around.
14
posted on
12/06/2003 5:58:13 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
To: Destro
"So where are the WMD?"
===
Syria.
To: FairOpinion
So why is Bush endangering my life by not invading Syria?
16
posted on
12/06/2003 6:00:43 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
To: FairOpinion
So why is Bush endangering my life by not invading Syria?
17
posted on
12/06/2003 6:00:44 PM PST
by
Destro
(Know your enemy! Help fight Islamic terrorism by visiting www.johnathangaltfilms.com)
To: Destro
"So why is Bush endangering my life by not invading Syria?"
==
My guess is that he would have already done it, if the Dems would support the WoT, instead of obstructing it, by their constant attacks on Bush.
To: Destro
oops in Syria there are no WMD eighter. Sorry. Maybe it's in Iran. Lets go there!!!
19
posted on
12/06/2003 6:11:04 PM PST
by
kaiser80
To: Faraday
Hmmm. Could this be the big one? The leftist press has already established the "fact" that any Iraqi who was cooperating with U.S. or British Intelligence cannot be trusted. Look back at the stories and the comments of the major media talking heads. This one will be tossed on the garbage heap by the media as not even worthy of consideration. DOA in my opinion despite the fact that it is 99% probable that it is the truth.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-29 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson