Carol Platt Liebau: Speaking for Itself

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Speaking for Itself

Cindy Sheehan, and all the lefties who think the world would have been better off with Saddam Hussein remaining in power, should take a listen to these tapes.

Not that it will convince them. Not that anything would.

9 Comments:

Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Wow! These are the same tapes that Carol claimed supported her contention that "it may be time for those who proclaimed that Iraq had no WMDs to start sweating." (Actually Jack Kelly claimed it, Carol just endorsed his opinion.) Now that the tapes are out, let's see how close Carol and Jack came.

Quoting from the article...

"A spokeswoman for the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, said information contained in the transcriptions of the tapes was already known to intelligence officials.

"'Intelligence community analysts from the CIA, and the DIA reviewed the translations and found that while fascinating from a historical perspective the tapes do not reveal anything that changes their post war analysis of Iraq's weapons programs nor do they change the findings contained in the comprehensive Iraq Survey group report,' the spokeswoman said in a statement."


Why am I not surprised that Carol's killer proof doesn't say what she told us it would?

9:16 PM  
Blogger Orphan in Bama said...

From a transcript of the tapes:

"At one point Hussein Kamel, Saddam's son-in-law and the man who was in charge of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction efforts can be heard on the tapes, speaking openly about hiding information from the U.N.

"We did not reveal all that we have," Kamel says in the meeting. "Not the type of weapons, not the volume of the materials we imported, not the volume of the production we told them about, not the volume of use. None of this was correct." Shortly after this meeting, in August 1995, Hussein Kamel defected to Jordan, and Iraq was forced to admit that it had concealed its biological weapons program. (Kamel returned to Iraq in February 1996 and was killed in a firefight with Iraqi security forces.)"

Any validity to those comments? How can you hide what you don't have.

david

3:10 AM  
Blogger Greg said...

Mr. Twister,

Are you comfortable with the fact that a head of state and his closest aids are talking about ways that nuclear and biological weapons could be unleashed on the American public without Iraqi fingerprints being detected?

6:05 AM  
Blogger Greg said...

Also, is it relevent at all that Saddam knew ahead of time that major terrorist attacks were coming to the United States?

6:07 AM  
Blogger suek said...

Here is an interesting commentary on the topic of the WMDs that some here will enjoy... mr.twister may pooh-pooh it, but leopards don't change their spots, and to pretend they're just big pussycats is incredibly dangerous. AFAIC, there is not question whether he _had_ WMD, the question is where are they now. I find it hard to believe he would entrust them to Syria - it would give Syria too much power if Saddam succeeded in lasting out the conflict. I _do_ think he could have hid them in Syria without Syrian knowledge, but even that's a stretch, considering the man. Bearing in mind that he buried a whole fleet of jets, there's still a lot of space in Iraq, and the WMDs being talked about wouldn't take up much space. On the other hand, the enemy hasn't used any...yet.

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles.php?article_id=5254
or (same url)
http://tinyurl.com/c9kd9

11:27 AM  
Blogger R Platt said...

Debating this issue with the left is a fruitless endeavor. If Saddam unloaded tons of WMD in Yankee Stadium the left would still deny that it exists. Thankfully, most of the country is comprised of rational people that will make reasoned judgments based on credible evidence and unbiased facts.

4:24 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

R Platt writes, "Thankfully, most of the country is comprised of rational people that will make reasoned judgments based on credible evidence and unbiased facts."

Yep, and what are those reasoned judgements, R. Platt? Well, the President's hand-picked man to serve as Director of National Intelligence, the staunchest of Republicans, John Negroponte said, "nor do they [the tapes] change the findings contained in the comprehensive Iraq Survey group report."

Which of course leads us to the credible evidence and unbiased facts found in the comprehensive Iraq Survey group (i.e. Deulfer) report...

Nuclear Weapons:
Saddam Husayn ended the nuclear program in 1991 following the Gulf war. ISG found no evidence to suggest concerted efforts to restart the program.

Chemical Weapons:
While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter,...

Biological Weapons:
ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. Indeed, from the mid-1990s, despite evidence of continuing interest in nuclear and chemical weapons, there appears to be a complete absence of discussion or even interest in BW at the Presidential level.

7:04 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

Greg bleats, "Also, is it relevent at all that Saddam knew ahead of time that major terrorist attacks were coming to the United States?"

In August of 2001 the CIA presented a briefing to the President entitled Bin Laden Detemined to Strike Within the United States where they mentioned the possibility of terrorists flying planes into buildings. By Greg's logic, the CIA must have been in on the plot too.

At the time this tape was made, Islamic terrorists had already struck the World Trade Center. Osama bin Laden had already declared the United States a primary target and had been stripped of his Saudi Arabian citizenship for claiming responsibility for attacking US military bases in Saudi Arabia.

You are right, Toolman, there is absolutely no way Saddam would have been able to predict that terrorists would strike inside the United States unless he was in on it.

7:20 PM  
Blogger Mr. Twister said...

SueK writes, "AFAIC, there is not question whether he _had_ WMD, the question is where are they now."

Well, SueK, the Bush administration's official position (as reiterated by President Bush's Director of National Intelligence as quoted above) is provided in the Deulfer Report. According to the administration, by the mid 1990's there was no Iraqi nuclear program, Saddam's regime had destroyed their chemical weapons, and the UN had dismantled the Iraqi biological weapons program.

These are of course--as R Platt notes below--merely "reasoned judgments based on credible evidence and unbiased facts."

7:31 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Google