February 18, 2006 - CD of Saddam Hussein's WMD admission. "BIGGEST STORY OF THE YEAR"

Jonathon Batchelor Show - ABC Radio | 1-25-06 | Me

[ALWAYSWELDING]

We'll see if it's true. If it is, it would be a major blow to the Dems. Here's my soap box....

We don't need any more proof. Anyone who can't see that Saddam didn't have enough time to take his stuff somewhere is blind as a mole. He used the stuff for pete's sake. How could he use stuff he didn't have?

I mean this whole thing is a joke. A canard set up by the MSM and repeated enough to create lollipop land.

[woofie]

Info will be released at a non poltical forum...


Rope a Dope been a comin?

[SevenMinusOne]

The Bush Administration needs no "exoneration." Saddam hussein shot at U.S. war planes enforcing the UN no-fly zones over Iraq. That's an act of war. Hussein paid rewards to the families of suicide bombers in Israel, our ally. Hussein violated the terms of his 1991 Gulf War Surrender Agreement. Again, an act of war. Hussein housed and fed noted terrorists in Iraq for years prior to 2003 (e.g. Abu Abbas and Abu Nidal...both of whom died in Iraq). And the U.S. Congress said that we could use force to rectify all of the above. We don't need some tape recording to tell us that we were right. We already know it.

Exactly right - Those who keep thinking that we "need" the WMD proof to "prove" something are completely falling for a false premise to begin with -

We removed Saddam and his regime because they were a threat. Period.

al Qeade did not have WMDs....but would anyone seriously try and deny that they weren't a threat? Of course not.

Our actions to remove Saddam and begin the phase of bringing the values of freedom and self-worth to the heart of the ME were exactly right and the World is safer because of it.

The idea that this guy has "CD/Tapes" with "all" the proof begs one to "wait and see". My experience tells me he seems to be more concerned with "hyping" something then worried about finding out the actual truth.

Additionally if these discussions on these tapes (1988-2002) are talks regarding Saddam's (already known) earlier WMDs program (late 80's, early 90's)...then there is no new information here.

But again, Southack has it exactly right (above).

[dervish]

"The Israeli officer, Lieutenant General Moshe Yaalon, asserted that Saddam spirited his chemical weapons out of the country on the eve of the war. "He transferred the chemical agents from Iraq to Syria," General Yaalon told The New York Sun over dinner in New York on Tuesday night. "No one went to Syria to find it."

'snip'

"An article in the Fall 2005 Middle East Quarterly reports that in an appearance on Israel's Channel 2 on December 23, 2002, Israel's prime minister, Ariel Sharon stated, "Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria." The allegation was denied by the Syrian government at the time as "completely untrue," and it attracted scant American press attention, coming as it did on the eve of the Christmas holiday."

http://www.nysun.com/pf.php?id=24480

[Cold Heat]

Additionally if these discussions on these tapes (1988-2002) are talks regarding Saddam's (already known) earlier WMDs program (late 80's, early 90's)...then there is no new information here. But again, Southack has it exactly right (above).

I would agree to all of that, and add that we certainly had all the justification needed to invade Iraq. We need no further justification, but it sure would be nice to locate any stockpiles, and also the missing Russian explosive materials that I believe Moscow retrieved just prior to the first bomb dropping. There was a lot of stuff missing that was tagged during the inspections. It has never turned up, from what I can understand.

There was likely some chemical/bio munitions with that stuff as well, which would explain the chem/bio suits and atropine pens.

[Apercu]

Those who think there were no WMDs precluding the Iraq invasion because they despise Bush will never, ever believe otherwise. The irrational haters on the left are nothing but 500 BC pagans looking into pig entrails for their next sign that Bush is to blame for whatever ill winds blow or disaster happens.

[Phocion]

Liberals are always moving the goalposts for the administration. If it's ever proven that Iraq had WMDs, they would fall back on saying that Iraq wasn't planning to attack the US with them. And if that were ever proven, I'm sure the lib talking points would just fall back onto the next excuse down the line.

Unfortunately their propaganda has worked enough that a good 35% of the country at least wouldn't support the president even if he cured cancer and found a way to transmute all metals into gold. They just hate his guts.

[Mo1]

later read

[doug from upland]

The good thing about internet technology is that this stuff will be all over the web for everyone to hear.

[al_again]

I just have a hard time believing this. How many times have similar stories been started that turn out to be nothing.

David Kay spent a tremendous amount of effort looking for evidence of WMD's and came to the conclusion that there weren't any and that Saddam didn't have an active WMD program. I think we need to quit with the wishful thinking and jumping up and down every oddball claims to have proof of WMD's.

At the end of the day, we did not have good intelligence. However, there certainly was reasonable suspicion and the inspectors were not allowed to do their job (by Saddam). After 9/11, there is a reasonable argument to make a pre-emptive strike in this scenario. Saddam could have prevented this by complying with the UN resolutions.

A more interesting question is now what do we do with Iran. Here is a country with an active WMD program that is also threatening to use it against Israel. Iran is a much greater threat than Iraq ever was.

[cgk]

*ping!*

[ntnychik]

Rope a dope been a comin?

John Loftus is no Bushbot. Neither is John Bachelor, for that matter. Looking forward to the release of the information in February. We'll have to "broadcast" it in the alternative media, because the major newsweeklies will have cover stories of the latest gay western that week instead.

[Rocky]

I just don't see some CIA (or other) "source" just giving this type of data to a talk show host. Something does not seem right here.

I'm with you on this one. This sounds like bait. Like the phony memo from Italy in the Plamegate case.

[rvoitier]

diverteach,

IF this is true, history would say you're right. But how *could* they keep it under wraps?

No doubt (again, if it's true), the MSM will downplay it and only for the minimum news cycle.

This calls for a

JUMBO TUB
of
POPCORN!

LoL

[Dad yer funny]

I'm amazed that the democRATS let Beckel get so much "face time"

... he really doesn't sell bogus talking points very well ,

... when networks first started having him on,it was a delicious sort of novelty

... I'd imagine he's a better "behind the scenes/handler" , no??

[Gribbles141]

THIS BETTER BE TRUE OR I SWEAR I WILL JUST IMPLODE.

[Salem]

---

AMERICA AT WAR
At Salem the Soldier's Homepage ~
Honored member of FReeper Leapfrog's "Enemy of Islam" list.
Islam, a Religion of Peace®? Some links...  by backhoe
Mohammed, The Mad Poet Quoted....  by PsyOp
The Clash of Ideologies - A Review

[jmc1969]

Don't get your hopes up.

[AmeriBrit]

But what's the odd's of two separate, individual reports confirming WMD's coming out at the same time being fake?

First General Georges Sada on Hannity then John Loftus on John Batchelor.