Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Key Iraqi said to counter U.S. claims on tubes, bomb project
Associated Press ^ | 07-17-03

Posted on 07/17/2003 4:21:26 PM PDT by Brian S

Edited on 04/13/2004 2:42:59 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

A key Iraqi scientist recently told the CIA that high-strength aluminum tubes bought by Baghdad weren't meant for nuclear bomb production, as President Bush suggested in his State of the Union address, two experts on Iraq's nuclear program say.

Mahdi Shukur Obeidi, who headed a uranium-enrichment unit vital to Iraq's pre-1991 bomb plans, "also said that since '91 they hadn't resurrected a nuclear weapon program," according to ex-Iraq inspector David Albright, an American physicist who acted as go-between for Obeidi to talk to U.S. authorities a few weeks ago.


(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News
KEYWORDS: 16words; aluminumtubes; baute; biden; bobjoseph; centrifuge; centrifuges; foley; iraq; jacquesbaute; joebiden; joseph; mahdiobeidi; mahdishukurobeidi; obeidi; robertjoseph; rotors; ubaydi; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 next last
To: redlipstick
Alan Foley is the boss of Valerie Plame Wilson wife of Joseph C. Wilson IV...
21 posted on 07/17/2003 4:50:01 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Brian S
"The Iraqi was in a position to know, Baute said. "He should have been aware if something had happened," the inspector said of claims Baghdad had revived its bomb-building. "

Yes, let's trust the Iraqi, who was in a trusted position, meaning he was a Saddam loyalist.

Because everyone (in the media) knows you can trust Saddam loyalists. While nobody in any of the West's intelligence are trustworthy. /Sarcasm off

22 posted on 07/17/2003 4:50:21 PM PDT by DannyTN (Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: seamole
See 21.
23 posted on 07/17/2003 4:50:21 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: mystery-ak; Dog Gone; Dog
Where is Karen Hughes, btw?

See, DG, it's not only me. GET HER BACK! NOW!

24 posted on 07/17/2003 4:50:30 PM PDT by swarthyguy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
I came across him the other day when I was researching Valerie Plame Wilson..
25 posted on 07/17/2003 4:51:57 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Pikamax
And as with most things the Democrats focus on, completely irrelevant. The supposed refutation to Bush's assertion here is that the Iraqis were using something even more advanced. Er, that means they were in fact doing what Bush said.

Which we already knew, due to that scientist pointing us to a gas centrifuge component he had hidden in his backyard.

26 posted on 07/17/2003 4:52:01 PM PDT by William McKinley (No thank you please, it only makes me sneeze)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: seamole
LOL This reporter seems to think if he clicks his ruby slippers repeatedly, he can make the past be whatever he wants it to be.
27 posted on 07/17/2003 4:53:02 PM PDT by William McKinley (No thank you please, it only makes me sneeze)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: swarthyguy
I agree with the "where is Karen Hughes" cry!

Hasn't been right around the WH since she left.

But NO! Here comes Mary Matalin to the rescue...

28 posted on 07/17/2003 4:56:07 PM PDT by Brian S
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Brian S
I think the Bush administration is playing this whole 'scandal' pretty smart. Critics on the left accused the President of invading Iraq as a distraction from the economy, but now the media is doing the exact same thing by creating a distraction for him with these reports. Meanwhile the issue that could have really hurt him, tax cuts in the middle of an expensive 'war' goes completely unnoticed.

And though many would dismiss it as irrelevant, the legitimacy of the intelligence is still important, as it was the threat of nuclear weapons that galvanized support for the war. What concerned you more, the gassing of Iraqis in 1988 (which could have been done by Iran) or the thought of nukes on U.S. shores?
29 posted on 07/17/2003 4:57:55 PM PDT by mtxes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
Check out this week old artcile from the Statesman.....dated July 12,2003.

Now note the Joseph -Foley exchange was reported in the NYTIMES before Tenet went to the Hill yesterday.

Click.

Before Bush's speech, conversations between the CIA and White House over whether to include the African reference were held between Bob Joseph, a National Security Council nuclear proliferation expert, and Alan Foley, a CIA proliferation expert, government officials told The New York Times.

There is still a dispute over what exactly was said in their conversations. Foley was said to recall that before the speech, Joseph asked him about putting into the speech a reference to reports that Iraq was trying to buy uranium from Niger. Foley replied that the CIA wasn't sure that information was right.

Joseph then came back to Foley and pointed out that the British had already included the information in a report. Foley said yes, but noted that the CIA had told the British that it wasn't sure that information was correct. Joseph then asked whether it was accurate that the British reported the information? Foley said yes.

This article contains material from wire services.

30 posted on 07/17/2003 5:02:03 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley
Someone is leaking to the Times info about the Foley- Joseph exchange and it seems we are only getting Foley's side so far.

Now why would the media ...(NBC) treat this meeting of Foley-Joseph as a breaking news story unless they have nothing else and want to keep this story alive.

31 posted on 07/17/2003 5:07:58 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Brian S
I'd like to hear this guy's explanation for what was buried under that rose bush....
32 posted on 07/17/2003 5:09:14 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #33 Removed by Moderator

To: mewzilla
This crap is getting dangerous now........our enemies see this whining and second guessing and take it for weakness.
34 posted on 07/17/2003 5:11:22 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: Dog
Ding ding ding ding ding!

I am comfortable with them keeping it alive. The Democrats are far out on a limb, right where I like them being.

35 posted on 07/17/2003 5:11:53 PM PDT by William McKinley (No thank you please, it only makes me sneeze)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Dog
And I should believe this guy why?
36 posted on 07/17/2003 5:12:23 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dog
They'll do that at their peril. But I agree, this is putting our service people at an increased risk by emboldening these expletives-deleted. It's giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
37 posted on 07/17/2003 5:13:10 PM PDT by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: William McKinley

38 posted on 07/17/2003 5:13:30 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Dog
"This crap is getting dangerous now........our enemies see this whining and second guessing and take it for weakness."

I agree. Are others in America noting Saddam's latest audio tape basically quotes dimm US Senators?

When will the DemocRATS be called on this??

39 posted on 07/17/2003 5:18:13 PM PDT by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: Howlin; seamole; mewzilla; William McKinley
Seems TIME reported on this Foley-Joseph exchange back in January of this year.

Here.

Time magazine reported a conversation in January, a few days before the presidential speech, between a top CIA analyst, Alan Foley, and a "a key national security council official", in which Mr Foley objected to including the allegation in the speech.

Robert Joseph, the president's adviser on weapons of mass destruction, denied he was the official who approved the line about British intelligence.

But Time quoted another official as saying: "There was a debate about whether to cite it on our own intelligence. But once the UK made it public, we felt comfortable citing what they had learned."

40 posted on 07/17/2003 5:19:31 PM PDT by Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-72 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson