Saddam’s Tapes, WMDs and the Osama Connection

FrontPageMagazine.com ^ | March 20, 2006 | Jamie Glazov

[SJackson]

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney, the co-author with Maj. Gen. Paul Vallely on their book Endgame: The Blueprint for Victory in the War on Terror. He is a retired Air Force Fighter Pilot who has been a Fox News Military Analyst for the last four and a half years and continues to appear regularly on Fox. He just returned from his second visit to Iraq in December, 2005.

 

FP: Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

 

McInerney: Thank you Jamie.

 

FP: The released audiotapes of Saddam Hussein's conversations with his key officials are turning up more and more evidence of WMDs and the Osama connection. The documents released by the U.S. government last Wednesday, for instance, reveal more about the Saddam-Al Qaeda link. Can you shed some light on this for us?

McInereny: I just reviewed this additional release of documents. This release continues to confirm that Osama bin Laden and Al Qaeda were in contact with Iraq intelligence for sanctuary, training, and plans for acts of terrorism against the US and in the US.

 

This just supports the 12 hours of tapes we heard of Saddam Hussein’s that discussed using proxies (Al Qaeda) to attack the US with WMD i.e. nuclear or biological. The latest release has pictures of Zarqawi while he was in Iraq prior to our liberation. It is obvious that he was living there as a sanctuary after he left Afghanistan. Stephen

 

Hayes of the Weekly Standard has done a superb job in describing this relationship in great detail in several articles and TV appearances on Fox News. In addition the CIA director George Tenet confirmed this prior to the liberation of Iraq as did Under Secretary Doug Feith in a memo on Al Qaeda’s  involvement with Iraq prior to hostilities. However some people are still in denial even with the latest release as it gets in the way of their agenda.

 

FP: It appears that many people also remain in denial about the WMD issue. The released audiotapes reveal Saddam Hussein and his key officials discussing their WMD programs from the mid-1990s onwards, correct?

 

McInerney: Yes, Jamie. It was a fascinating experience to see the transcripts of Saddam’s conversations. He discussed hiding WMDs from the UN inspectors and knowing where the inspectors were going to go in advance. He discussed their efforts to develop Plasma Enrichment for nuclear weapons totally unknown to the UN inspectors.

 

But the most telling to me was the conversation between Tariq Aziz his foreign minister and Saddam in which they discussed having proxies implant nuclear and biological weapons in US cities. They concluded that Iraq would be blamed for an explosion but not biological as they could use deception and blame US facility ( Ft Dietrick) which makes me conclude that Iraq was responsible for the anthrax attack in US less than 30 days after 9/11.

 

The FBI has not determined who did it although they tried to charge unsuccessfully a former Ft Dietrick employee. It is obvious that we should aggressively be translating the remaining 3,000 hours of tapes!

 

FP: So the evidence appears to suggest the Russians moved the WMD’s out of Iraq, correct?

 

McInerney: Yes -- to three locations in Syria and one in Lebanon (Beka Valley) in the Sept – Dec 2002 time frame.  This information was provided by Jack Shaw, the former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for international technology security. He charged that Saddam’s stockpiles of WMDs were moved by a Russian Spetznatz team headed by Yevgeny Primakov, the former Russian Intelligence Chief, who came to Iraq in December 2002 to supervise the final cleanup.

 

Mr. Shaw found this out through a meeting in London with the head of MI–6 (UK CIA), the Ukrainian Intelligence Chief and others in the summer of 2003. The Ukrainians were very close and supportive of the Russians at that time.

FP: This information destroys the Left’s main arguments and vindicates the Bush administration. Why do you think the administration is not talking about this?

 

McInerney: The President is being ill served by his Intelligence staff. In some cases the diplomats don’t want the world to know this as the three primary violators were Russia, China and France -- all permanent members of the UN Security Council and whom they need to deal with Iran and future contingencies in the war on terror. I assume he did not want to trash our future “allies.” However, he directed in mid-Feb that they all be released and I understand that it is imminent.

 

FP: Your book instructs that we must go after the state sponsors of terrorism in order to win the terror war. You even argue that some nations might have to be invaded by U.S. forces. Can you talk a bit about this strategy and what it entails?

 

McInerney: There existed a Web of Terror group of nations before 9/11. They were Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and North Korea. Three have been removed two by regime change and Libya voluntarily. Iran is now our most serious threat and the regime must be changed -- but I would use the Afghanistan model using covert operations with massive coalition air support. We should let the Iranian people take back their country. 

FP: Your thoughts on Islam?

McInerney: Islam needs a reformation just like Christianity had plus they need a cultural renaissance to bring them into modernity. This must come from within driven by moderate Muslims. Dr Tawfik Hamid has just written a brilliant book ‘The Roots of Jihad” that describes our challenge. He states that Islamic Terrorism has the support of the majority of Muslims and must be reformed to become a religion of tolerance. Now it is a religion of intolerance. I think it will get worse before it gets better. Al Qaeda are killing more Muslims than coalition forces in Iraq and until the Muslim world acknowledges this and destroys this cancer from within we will have continued conflict that will spread. It could be catastrophic for Islam. Dr Abdurrahman Wahid the former President of Indonesia wrote an excellent OP ED in the Wall street Journal on December 30, 2005 describing what must be done to defeat the Wahhabi ideology.
 
FP: Is Islamic extremism an ideology just like Fascism and Communism?
 
McInerney: Exactly and it must be fought in much the same way. The West has not acknowledged this and consequently we have not educated our population that it is an ideology rather than a religion. This is confusing people because of our tolerance for the diversity of religion.

FP: So overall, where is the central front in the terror war? Iraq? Are we winning this war? What are we going to have to do to win it?

McInerney: Iraq is the central front on the war on terror and that is why the insurgency is so intense. Al Qaeda is indiscriminately killing innocent people and the Iraqi people recognize this and we are seeing them providing much more intelligence to the coalition forces. In the final analysis it will be the Iraqi Security Forces and the Iraqi people who will defeat this insurgency. Hopefully Iraq will be a corner stone for reform in the region. It will take time but it spreads like a virus which terrifies the Extremists so much. Unfortunately the left does not understand this.

We are winning but it is a tough fight. 50 million people are now free in Afghanistan and Iraq and Saddam Hussein is on trial and Osama bin Laden is in hiding as are his aides moving every 3-6 hours. We still must change the regimes in Syria and Iran but I would use the Afghan model and let the Syrian and Iranian people take their countries back assisting them covertly. In addition Saudi Arabia must stop funding the expansion of this extreme form of Islam called Wahabiism which is driving the Extremists with funding and ideology

FP: Tom McInerney, thank you for joining us today.

McInerney: Thank you.

 

[true_blue_texican]

ping for later

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on or off this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.
Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking the keyword or topic Israel.

---------------------------

[justa-hairyape]

McInerney: ... He discussed hiding WMDs from the UN inspectors and knowing where the inspectors were going to go in advance...

Concerning this very topic. Here is yet another interesting audio translation posted on the Leavenworth site.

ISGQ-2003-M0004932 Page 6

...
Male 3
When we decide what machines he will monitor using surveillance cameras, I think we should move them all and put them in one location. And we should carefully choose our people to maintain these machines. That way we can rid our sites of their movements. But we shouldn’t rush; he might get greedy and want more machines

Male 2
Our administrative form can be talked about with them so we don’t reveal all our cards

Male 4
We still have two issues sir. Very simple. What the doctor said about the experts. They’re held in Germany. They have detailed knowledge of our weaponry. So we should go and give the information that they gave already

Male 2
So we know what information they…

Male 4
Yes sir. [Unintelligible] we have a company called H and H…

Male 2
Don’t rush in your decision about them. It has more future impacts than present. And it has a moral perception that’s deep

[lonster]

MSM.....ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzZZZZZZZZZZZ.

[R.W.Ratikal]

America's foes, including the Democrat leadership and their dupes, cannot possible admit that these tapes might contain the truth.

The entire Democrat opposition is built on the twin claims that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that Hussien had no connection with terrorists.

The world's intelligence agencies all agreed that Hussein had WMD and was connected to the Muslim terrorist Jihad. Let's face it, Iraq was no clever regime whose secrets were impenetrable.

It was fairly easy to move around in Iraq and openly see what was going on. Iraq was not a totally closed country like, say, North Korea and we know pretty well what goes on in that benighted country.

The Democrat arguments that Hussein had no WMD flies in the face of the fact that he used such weapons against the Kurds in northern Iraq, as is well known.

Once a fiction is decided on by a political group they must stick by it and never admit they are wrong or the whole thing falls apart.

What is happening to the Democrats is that they are falling apart because the truth is so obvious.

[Holicheese]

"The Democrat arguments that Hussein had no WMD flies in the face of the fact that he used such weapons against the Kurds in northern Iraq, as is well known." Didn't you get the memo? Bill Clinton destroyed them all with the cruise missile attacks.
Every last scrap of them was destroyed by the greatest president in the history of the universe, Bill Clinton.

Juan Williams was in prime form on Sunday. Repeated the phrase, "We all know that there was no connection between Bin Laden and Sadam: and "There were no WMDs"

[Valin]

ping

[eyespysomething]

Thanks for the ping Valin!

Saddam’s Tapes, WMDs and the Osama Connection

Release of Classified PreWar Docs ping. If you want to be added or removed to the ping list, please Freepmail me.

Operation Iraqi Freedom Documents

Documents from the Harmony Database

[Calpernia]

bttt

[angcat]

I see the news has yet to report this?

[angcat]

But the most telling to me was the conversation between Tariq Aziz his foreign minister and Saddam in which they discussed having proxies implant nuclear and biological weapons in US cities. They concluded that Iraq would be blamed for an explosion but not biological as they could use deception and blame US facility ( Ft Dietrick) which makes me conclude that Iraq was responsible for the anthrax attack in US less than 30 days after 9/11.

Holy crap!

[Inwoodian]

But, but Bush lied and people died. Fifteen words in the State of the Union. Valerie and Joe. Cindy Sheehan. George Clooney. No WMD's. No Al Qaeda connection. Right? Right??

[shield]

bttt

[gardencatz]

The entire Democrat opposition is built on the twin claims that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and that Hussien had no connection with terrorists

This has always puzzled me about Dem leadership, especially those in congress who are privy to intelligence documents. They KNOW Saddam had WMD's yet they continue to beat the Bush Lied meme. The truth always comes out. Considering how much ground they've lost because of their fact twisting and denial you'd think they'd learn. You'd think they'd figure out that as soon the truth can be proved, despite MSM's blatant attempts to have a few more Dan Rather moments, that it would be them looking incompetent. How could anyone base their entire political future on a lie that couldn't possibly stay hidden. There stupidity is underwhelming.

[Richard Axtell]

Over the weekend I had a "conversation" with a liberal Democrat friend of mine. He is a friend, and is an intelligent and really nice guy. That conversation evolved into a debate about Bush, and of course "the fact that there were no WMDs". I pointed out that what the Democrat and leftist pundits and political leaders have really said, and said in monolithic lockstep, is that there "is no evidence that Saddam had WMD's or that Saddam had any connection to Al Qaida." It can be worded or phrased in varying ways, but that is essentially it, "no evidence". He accepted this interpretation, as I showed him example after example of leftist pundits making this particular point. NO EVIDENCE. Period.

I then pointed out that all anyone had to do is find evidence, any kind of evidence, and the Democrat-leftist argument collapses, and they are forced to argue the merits of the evidence. That is something they are not prepared to do, and have avoided even thinking about, with the exception of attacking the messenger. In effect, they have painted themselves into the proverbial corner, by playing the polemical card of the moment, which was "WMDs? I don't see any WMDs! Bush lied! He misled us into this war!" Now, they must prove a negative, which simply cannot be done. Prove Saddam never secretly talked, cooperated, or conspired with Al Qaida. How can that be proved? Answer: it can't.

The Anti-war Democrats and leftists must now deny, obfuscate, ignore, or in desperation "censor" any and all information that brings into question their "NO EVIDENCE" stance. This untenable situation was blindly adopted by the far left of the Democrat party, when Senators Ted Kennedy, Richard Durbin, John Kerry, Jay Rockefeller, and others jumped over the line and made this their weapon, their "hill to die on" to try and get a knockout in the 2004 election. It failed, and now the chickens are going to come home to roost, 48,000 of them (the documents), and they will cackle and squawk for 3000 hours (the tapes) or more. The only remaining stance left to the left will be that of the ostrich, denying what everyone else can see. I don't envy that stance, at least philosophically.

So, when I mentioned the treasure trove of primary evidence that now has come to light in the form of the Saddam tapes and the 48,000 released documents, he was speechless, totally shut down. At least until he regained his composure, and said "Well, I haven't heard any of this is the press." I even mentioned that ABC was reporting it currently. He simply could not accept it. This is the Achilles heal, the key card in the Left's house of cards, and when this falls, as it must, so will any "consensus that Bush lied" must collapse. We can expect the hardcore Marxists to remain boneheaded, but they will also return to the tiny minority fringe where they belong. So, when arguing this point, remember my distinction, they have staked everything on "No evidence."

[petercooper]

bttt

[dynoman]

I have to wonder if moving the WMDs was Russia's contribution to Operation Iraqi Freedom, it could have been a way to get the WMDs out of Iraq so they would not be used against coalition troops. It could have been planned this way.

[EdnaMode]

It really annoys me how so many people bought into the "no WMD" theory based on the fact that none had been found. Based on this logic, Osama Bin Laden can't exist either, since we haven't captured him.

I think a lot of people picture WMD to look like the Death Star so they think finding it should be easy. None of them stop to consider that many nerve agents and chemical weapons are small and can easily be hidden. Just look at those canisters on "24." Some terrorist could hide it in his basement if he wanted to!

[BARLF]

Lt. Gen. Tom McInerney- McInerney: Yes -- to three locations in Syria and one in Lebanon (Beka Valley) in the Sept – Dec 2002 time frame. This information was provided by Jack Shaw, the former Deputy Under Secretary of Defense for international technology security. He charged that Saddam’s stockpiles of WMDs were moved by a Russian Spetznatz team headed by Yevgeny Primakov, the former Russian Intelligence Chief, who came to Iraq in December 2002 to supervise the final cleanup.

Saddam had fourteen months to move WMD out of Iraq. Senator Jay Rockefeller, minioity chairman on Intelligence Committee seen fit to warn Syria, Saudi Arabia and Jordan in January 2002 that George Bush had already made up his mind to go to war against Iraq.