SADDAM TAPES: WHY IT’S ALWAYS GOOD TO LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP
When I first heard of the existence of the Saddam Tapes, I was mildly interested. After all, from a purely academic point of view, it would be fascinating to listen to the dictator and try and discover how his mind worked. Saddam is surely one of the most destructive leaders that lived during the 20th century. Not quite in the Hitler/Stalin/Mao class but rather more of a second tier thug, easily as evil as Idi Amin or Slobodon Milosivec.
But when John Loftus, the organizer of this weekend’s “Intelligence Summit” came out and said that there was a “smoking gun” in these tapes that proved the existence of WMD in Iraq prior to our invasion, I was skeptical. I remembered from the Duelfer Report that close aides to Saddam had routinely lied to the dictator about his own WMD program so any conversations about WMD on the tapes would have to be listened to bearing that in mind.
And I also had to consider the source himself. Yesterday, I said that Loftus was considered a “gadfly” by the intelligence establishment. As it turns out, I was being too kind by half. Here’s Byron York on Loftus:
I first encountered his name in the fall of 2003, when I was working on a story about Bush hatred. I was looking at the people who claim that the Bush family got its wealth from financing the Nazis, and I discovered that one of the sacred texts of that particular worldview is a book, The Secret War Against the Jews, by the authors Mark Aarons and…John Loftus. In 1995, when the book appeared, Anti-Defamation League director Abraham Foxman, who can reasonably be counted on to speak out against people who financed the Nazis, called it “so exaggerated, so scantily documented, so overwrought and convoluted in its presentation, that Loftus and Aarons render laughable their claim to offer ‘a glimpse of the world as it really is.’”
A curious gent, this Loftus fellow. It seems also that he is absolutely convinced of a connection between the Enron scandal and…(wait for it) 9/11:
In the article, Loftus reports that the now-defunct energy company had a contract with the Taliban to build a pipeline, and that Vice President Dick Cheney, determined to help out Enron, forbade U.S. intelligence sources from investigating the Enron/Taliban/al Qaeda connection in the months leading up to the September 11 terrorist attacks. After outlining this somewhat Fahrenheit 9/11-like theory, Loftus concludes, “The Enron cover-up confirms that 9/11 was not an intelligence failure or a law enforcement failure (at least not entirely). Instead, it was a foreign policy failure of the highest order. If Congress ever combines its Enron investigation with 9/11, Cheney’s whole house of cards will collapse.”
Does his kookiness rule out the possibility that there might be something valuable on the Saddam tapes? Not necessarily, although for the sake of credibility, one needs to look not only at the message, but the messenger as well.
And in this case, the messenger - the person with actual possession of the tapes - was a former weapons inspector, former translator at Gitmo, and a confessed spy named Bill Tierney.
Actually, Tierney was spying for us while working for UNSCOM which is OK by me but probably didn’t sit well with those fairminded, impartial countries like Libya and France. The problem with Mr. Tierney - depending on who you talk to - is that he is either a certifiable wacko or someone who likes to exaggerate things a little. Taking him at his word is hazardous to the truth.
In 2003, in the immediate aftermath of the Iraq invasion he told Sean Hannity:
“In addition, Tierney said that he has told our government where Hussein has hidden an underground uranium plant. “I can drive there with my eyes shut.”
Also in 2003, Tierney appeared on George Noory’s Coast to Coast radio show and made some startling admissions:
Bill Tierney, a former weapons inspector who worked with UNSCOM in Iraq in the late 1990s, was the guest for the first two hours of Friday night’s show. He believes that Iraq has nuclear capability and the intention to use such weapons. Further, Tierney claims that he has pinpointed a hidden location in Iraq (map here) where there is a uranium enriching processing facility. “You can’t put an underground chamber on the back of a truck,” Tierney said, indicating that if an inspection were made in this suggested area, the Iraqis would not be able to haul off the evidence.
Tierney’s methods of ascertaining this location were rather unconventional. “I would ask God and just get a sense if something was valid or not, and then know if I needed to pursue it,” he said. His assessments through prayer were then confirmed to him by a friend’s clairvoyant dream, where he was able to find the location on a map. “Everything she said lined up. This place meets the criteria,” Tierney said of a power generator plant near the Tigris River that he believes is actually a cover for a secret uranium facility.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is not the way one should go about trying to ascertain whether Saddam Hussein had WMD. It may be a good way to divine a well or fortell the future. But when it comes to “smoking guns” about WMD, I’d trust Michael Moore before I trusted this guy.
An indication of just how loony this whole business with the tapes and the “Intelligence Summit” has gotten is that two top intelligence professionals and dedicated public servants - James Woolsey and John Deutch - have resigned from participation in the event. It seems that there are some very shady characters behind the scenes. Mr. York:
Now, the Sun reports that Woolsey and Deutch resigned from Loftus’ group because of their concern over “new information they received regarding one of the summit’s biggest donors, Michael Cherney, an Israeli citizen who has been denied a visa to enter America because of his alleged ties to the Russian mafia.”
Does any of this matter as to the legitimacy of the tapes? Not really, although according to ABC News, the tapes were taken from the FBI where presumably Mr. Tierney was translating them. As for their impact, Lori Byrd has it about right:
If the tapes are authentic, the discussion of efforts to deceive the inspectors and to be ready to quickly resume WMD production is huge news, but it obviously will not be reported that way. As I said yesterday, it is going to take a heck of a lot to convince the media, and those on the left, that Bush didn’t lie about Saddam’s WMD. Scratch that. They already know he didn’t lie about it. It will take a heck of a lot to convince them to admit that Bush didn’t lie about it.
We already knew there were chemical weapon precursors on site with the artillery shells to deliver them. The fact that they weren’t assembled was the reason given for not listing them as “stockpiled” WMD. Be that as it may, Lori has a good point. The tapes confirm once and for all that Saddam was a threat. Given the left’s eagerness toward lifting sanctions on the dictator’s regime in 2000, it would only have been a matter of time before he had his labs of death up and running again.
There are still nearly two million documents and tapes that our government, for whatever reason, has refused to look at in any meaningful way. The historical value of those documents alone is astonishing, a priceless glimpse into one of the 20th century’s most organized criminal regimes. While it is doubtful the whole truth of Saddam’s WMD’s will ever come out, those documents and tapes can answer other questions that are just as valuable in aiding our understanding of the organized terror and calculated evil that was Saddam and his regime.
UPDATE 2/17
Add to the list of distinuished Americans who have pulled out of the “Intelligence Summit” Debbie Schlussel who has some additional shocking information about John Loftus.
I caught Loftus’ connection with the Bush/Nazi meme yesterday afternoon. It certainly raises a red flag in my mind as to what’s going on here. Loftus is no friend of the Bushes, that much is clear.
Comment by Brainster — 2/16/2006 @ 3:32 pm
The US has EIGHTEEN TONS of Hussein’s government papers in the National Archive. Not a peep out of anyone yet on why those papers aren’t the basis of Hussein’s trial, considering that they contain shoot-to-kill orders, lists of depopulated villages, and such.
Loftus may be a nut, but there are oil and NG pipelines going in across Afghanistan (with new, secret airbases to protect them) and Pakistan (with wink and nod harboring of Al Qaeda, Bin Laden, and the Pak scientist responsible for giving Libya, Iran, and N. Korea nuclear secrets and materiel). And there is the famous “carpet of gold or carpet of bombs” statement made in front of the Pak ambassador in July 01, along with the report that the Taliban was warned that they would be invaded in October if they didn’t comply.
Given that the geopolitics of Pipelinestan currently accords with aspects of the Loftus’ theory in W. Asia, his statements have to be accorded something more than ‘he is a nut.’ And I find it odd that hack Brian York had time to research Prescott’s warmongering. Opposition research?
Would it be too much to ask for SOMEONE to confirm that Harry Truman was the one who busted Prescott? Considering that Prescott was apparently involved in steel and shipping transfers to the Nazis during WWII (post 1941), he got off light.
Comment by Paul in LA — 2/16/2006 @ 7:23 pm
This article is still available free on the web from Asia Times. I’ve included a sizeable excerpt to give a sense of its scope.
http://atimes.com/c-asia/DA25Ag01.html
Pipelineistan
By Pepe Escobar
“In this geostrategic grand design, the Taliban were the proverbial fly in the ointment. The Afghan War was decided long before September 11. September 11 merely precipitated events. Plans to destroy the Taliban had been the subject of international diplomatic and not-so-diplomatic discussions for months before September 11. There was a crucial meeting in Geneva in May 2001 between US State Department, Iranian, German and Italian officials, where the main topic was a strategy to topple the Taliban and replace the theocracy with a “broad-based government”. The topic was raised again in full force at the Group of Eight (G-8) summit in Genoa, Italy, in July 2001 when India - an observer at the summit - also contributed its own plans.
“Nor concidentally, Pipelineistan was the central topic in secret negotiations in a Berlin hotel a few days after the G-8 summit, between American, Russian, German and Pakistani officials. And Pakistani high officials, on condition of anonymity, have extensively described a plan set up by the end of July 2001 by American advisers, consisting of military strikes against the Taliban from bases in Tajikistan, to be launched before mid-October.
“More recently, while most of the planet that has access to news was distracted by New Year’s Eve celebrations, and only nine days after Hamid Karzai’s interim government took power in Kabul, Bush II appointed his special envoy to Afghanistan. It comes as no surprise he is Afghan-American Zalmay Khalilzad - a former aide to the Californian energy giant UNOCAL. Khalilzad wasted no time in boarding the first flight to Central Asia. The Bush II team now does not even try to disguise that the whole game is about oil. The so-called brand-new American “Afghan policy” is being conducted by people intimately connected to oil industry interests in Central Asia.
…
“Khalilzad is a very interesting character indeed. He was always a huge Taliban supporter. Four years ago, he wrote in the Washington Post that “the Taliban does not practice the anti-US style of fundamentalism practiced by Iran”. Khalilzad only abandoned the Taliban after Bill Clinton fired 58 cruise missiles into Afghanistan in August 1998, in retaliation for the alleged involvement of Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda in the bombing of the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. Only one day after the attack, UNOCAL put Centgas on hold - and two months later abandoned plans for the trans-Afghan pipeline.
“A little more than a year ago, Khalilzad was reincarnated in print in The Washington Quarterly, now stressing his four mains reason to ged rid of the Taliban regime as soon as possible: Osama bin Laden, opium trafficking, oppression of the Afghan people and, last but not least, oil.
“Afghan diaspora sources in Paris acidly comment that Khalilzad will be regarded as nothing less than a traitor by fiercely proud and independent Afghans. Born in Mazar-i-Sharif in 1951, he is part of the Afghan ruling elite. His father was an aide to King Zahir Shah. Khalilzad was studying at the notoriously conservative University of Chicago when Afghanistan was invaded by the Red Army in December 1979. Later he became an American citizen and a special adviser to the State Department during the Reagan years. He was a strident lobbyist for more US military aid to the mujahedeen during the anti-USSR jihad - campaigning for widespread distribution of Stinger missiles.
“Khalilzad was undersecretary of defense for Bush I, during the war against Iraq. After a stint at the Rand Corp think tank, he headed the Bush-Cheney transition team for the Defense Department and advised Donald Rumsfeld. But he was not rewarded with any promotions. The required Senate confirmation would raise extremely uncomfortable questions about his role as UNOCAL adviser and staunch Taliban defender. He was assigned instead to the National Security Council - no Senate confirmation required - where he reports to National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice.
Rice herself is a former oil-company consultant. During Bush I, from 1989-92, she was on the board of directors of Chevron, and was its main expert on Kazakhstan. Chevron has invested more than $20 billion in Kazakhstan alone….”
Comment by Paul in LA — 2/16/2006 @ 7:40 pm
What’s up with these Saddam tapes?
Two former directors of the CIA, John Deutch and James Woolsey, have resigned from the board of directors of Intelligence Summit. This is the organization that got its hands on some of the tapes of meetings between Saddam Hussein and his flunkies.
Trackback by Mark in Mexico — 2/16/2006 @ 7:46 pm
As I said with C/W accidental shooting, I prefer not to speculate before a certain amount of time passes, allowing things like additional or even some facts to surface. I draw the line on things like the time I was accosted by a small group of druggies. Action has to be immediate, as brazen as certain circumstances occasionally dictate . Speculating in this case, would certainly be considered foolish at best. Others would argue that my actions were equally foolish, but instincts are irreplaceable. Perhaps an ends to a means thing or the inverse of same.
Before this gets into some digression from your post, there is a precious amount of metaphoric analogies people can use in such an example of this but, I’m no braggart nor do I wish to be thought of that kind of light, so I’ll let that rest.
Simply put there’s a time to wait and a time to vote. See through the pressure of reacting and act, according to circumstances.
Comment by forest hunter — 2/16/2006 @ 7:55 pm
I have no idea whether the charges against Cherney have merit. The definition of crimnal in the FSU was always very elastic.
In nay case, Cherney sponsored an interesting and impressive organization (http://www.jerusalemsummit.org/eng/)
Comment by MarcH — 2/16/2006 @ 10:06 pm
Caution!: Saddam Tapes By the Bear
This all sounds good but there is a major problem surrounding John Loftus. He has major credibility problems and has come up with some wild conspiracy theories in the past.
…
Trackback by The Absurd Report — 2/16/2006 @ 10:49 pm
[...] Right Wing Nut House » SADDAM TAPES: WHY IT’S ALWAYS GOOD TO LOOK BEFORE YOU LEAP When I first heard of the existence of the Saddam Tapes, I was mildly interested. After all, from a purely academic point of view, it would be fascinating to listen to the dictator and try and discover how his mind worked. Saddam is surely one of the most destructive leaders that lived during the 20th century. Not quite in the Hitler/Stalin/Mao class but rather more of a second tier thug, easily as evil as Idi Amin or Slobodon Milosivec.But when John Loftus, the organizer of this weekend’s “Intelligence Summit†came out and said that there was a “smoking gun†in these tapes that proved the existence of WMD in Iraq prior to our invasion, I was skeptical. I remembered from the Duelfer Report that close aides to Saddam had routinely lied to the dictator about his own WMD program so any conversations about WMD on the tapes would have to be listened to bearing that in mind. [...]
Pingback by The Politburo Diktat » Blog Archive » Loftus and the Saddam tapes — 2/17/2006 @ 9:13 am
Saddam Tapes Fizzle, Right Chases Ghosts
Not only are the 12 hours of tapes set to be released to the public by John Loftus tomorrow a fizzling non-event, but the media and many on the Right side of the blogosphere have taken those tapes out of…
Trackback by The Jawa Report — 2/17/2006 @ 11:45 am
The Loftus Tapes
It could turn out that Loftus over-hyped his tapes for publicity reasons. Rick Moran has it right in his piece in which he quotes Lori Byrd thus:If the tapes are authentic, the discussion of efforts to deceive the inspectors and to be ready to quickly res
Trackback by Maggie's Farm — 2/17/2006 @ 1:01 pm
The Saddam Tapes: Hardly A Smoking Gun
This is my first post concerning the newly acquired Saddam tapes because I am, frankly, underwhelmed by what they reveal; they …
Trackback by The Political Pit Bull — 2/17/2006 @ 2:00 pm
Rick, if one utilizes the ‘foxhole’ trust standard, you may consider rephrasing: “I’d trust Michael Moore before I trusted this guy”, to: “…Loftus is about as trustworthy as Michael Moore”.
Other than that…very fine writing.
Comment by P. Aaron — 2/17/2006 @ 3:51 pm
I’m very, very impressed that this sort of work is being done; Web Design is getting stagnant with people using just styled
block-level elements to produce artwork. The incorporation of SVG into sites excites me a lot.
How long do you expect it will take for this sort of technology to be widespread?
Obviously you can only speak about WebKit realistically, but if it’s going to take ten years for IE Win to gain (full) support,
we can’t design with it.
I’m amused by the “Becoming more important” line in the first paragraph. This has been a HUGE problem for years -
ever since HTML-2.0 was introduced to be more of a layout language and less of a markup language. For an example,
you just have to look at this site. sex partners Why is all the text
crammed over on the left side of the page with a big blank space on the right side?
Why is the default font tiny and unreadable? Fortunately most browsers now let you override the latter problem.
Comment by Michael Z. — 5/6/2006 @ 3:40 pm