Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

FBI Interviews: Hussein Lied About WMD Out of Fear of Iran


Recommended Posts

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/07/02/fbi-interviews-hussein-lied-wmd-fear-iran/

Times of London -- Saddam Hussein let the world believe Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because he did not want to appear weak to Iran, according to the Washington Post.

In interviews with the FBI before he was hanged, the former Iraqi president also denounced Usama bin Laden as "a zealot" and said the United States was not Iraq's enemy, the Post reports.

In fact, he claimed, he felt so vulnerable to the threat from "fanatic" leaders in Tehran that he would have been prepared to seek a "security agreement with the United States to protect [iraq] from threats in the region," according to declassified accounts of the interviews released on Wednesday and published in the Washington Post

George W. Bush, supported by former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, ordered the invasion of Iraq six years ago on the grounds that Hussein's regime possessed weapons of mass destruction, despite the failure of U.N. weapons inspectors to uncover any such weapons.

During his interviews -- 20 formal interrogations and five "casual conversations" which were carried out in 2004, Hussein admitted that he should have allowed the United Nations to witness the destruction of his country's weapons stockpile after the 1991 Gulf War.

The FBI summaries of the interviews were obtained under the Freedom of Information Act by the National Security Archive, an independent non-governmental research institute, and posted on its Web site on Wednesday. The last formal interview, held on May 1 was completely redacted but the others had few deletions, the Washington Post reports.

The formal interviews, held from Feb. 7 to May 1, covered Hussein's rise to power, the Kuwait invasion, and the crackdown on the Shiite uprising in extensive detail, while the subject of the weapons of mass destruction and Al Qaeda were raised in the casual conversations, held after the formal interviews from May 10 to June 28.

George Piro, the agent who conducted the interviews, raised Iraq's alleged links with Al Qaeda in his last conversation with Hussein but Hussein's replies negated the Bush administration's efforts to link him with Usama bin Laden.

Hussein told Piro that he had never met bin Laden and that the two men did not share "the same belief or vision."

He said that "he was a believer in God but was not a zealot . . . that religion and government should not mix."

When the FBI agent said there were reasons why Hussein and Al Qaeda should have cooperated, as they had the same enemies in the United States and Saudi Arabia, Hussein replied that the United States was not Iraq's enemy, and that he simply opposed its policies.

He also made it clear that he considered Iran a greater threat than the United States, saying that he was convinced Iran was trying to annex the largely Shiite southern Iraq.

"The threat from Iran was the major factor as to why he did not allow the return of U.N. inspectors," Piro wrote. "Hussein stated he was more concerned about Iran discovering Iraq's weaknesses and vulnerabilities than the repercussions of the United States for his refusal to allow U.N. inspectors back into Iraq."

Hussein was later transferred to Iraqi custody, and he was hanged in December 2006.

Click here to read the Hussein Interrogation Interview

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People in Jail always lament what they should and "would" have done if ONLY they could go back in time. ...

Hussein replied that the United States was not Iraq's enemy, and that he simply opposed its policies

As we oppose NK policy and China policy and Iran Policy and Russia policy. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dumb ass, got himself hanged for it. Pride, it will get you every time.

Assuming the information is accurate, it seems to me this could be more apply described as fear. He was more afraid of Iran than us.

Clearly, he was wrong, but that doesn't make it pride.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this was the argument of the detractors before going into Iraq. That he was saying it to scare his neighbors.

It was part of it. I, for one, believed that Iraq had WMD's, but that they weren't a threat to us or our allies. That was where my conflict with the invasion and war came from. I did think Sadam was a monster to the Kurds and so on a humanitarian level you could find justification, but the main reasons given never felt true.

I wonder how the world would stand today if we had chosen differently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When the FBI agent said there were reasons why Hussein and Al Qaeda should have cooperated, as they had the same enemies in the United States and Saudi Arabia, Hussein replied that the United States was not Iraq's enemy, and that he simply opposed its policies.

Yeah right...

That's why this was hanging in one of his palaces.

3rd-infantry-saddam_sml.jpg

But lets review the facts shall we?

http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/pa032008.html

The Iraqi Perspectives Project. In September 2003 the Commander, United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM), asked the Joint Advanced Warfighting Program (JAWP) at the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) to help develop the operational and strategic lessons from OPERATION IRAQI FREEDOM (OIF) from the perspectives of former senior Iraqi decision-makers. By creating a historical narrative of the events surrounding OIF, interviewing captured prisoners, and reviewing translations of enemy documents and media archives, IDA researchers were able to report on the inner workings-and sometimes delusional behavior en masse-of the Saddam Hussein regime. For this paper, the JAWP Iraqi Perspectives Project (IPP) research team screened more than 600,000 original captured documents I and several thousand hours of audio and video footage archived in a US Department of Defense (DOD) database called Harmony.

Abstract

Captured Iraqi documents have uncovered evidence that links the regime of Saddam Hussein to regional and global terrorism, including a variety of revolutionary, liberation, nationalist, and Islamic terrorist organizations. While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a “de facto” link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust. Though the execution of Iraqi terror plots was not always successful, evidence shows that Saddam’s use of terrorist tactics and his support for terrorist groups remained strong up until the collapse of the regime.

Two other memoranda in this folder are from Saddam through his Presidential Secretary to a member of the Revolutionary Council and to the IIS Director, respectively.

• In the first, from January 1993, and coinciding with the start of the US

humanitarian intervention in Somalia, the Presidential Secretary informed the council member of Saddam's decision to "form a group to start hunting Americans present on Arab soil; especially Somalia."

• In the second memorandum, Saddam orders the IIS Director to revise a

plan the IIS director had previously forwarded to include setting up

operations inside Somalia.44 The overlap between bin Laden's and

Saddam's interests in Somalia provides a tactical example of the parallel

between Iraq and radical Islam: at the same time Saddam was ordering action in Somalia aimed at the American presence, Osama bin Laden was doing the same thing.

Other documents show Saddam's terror organizations could be deadly. They were willing to target not only Western interests but also to directly attack Americans. Uday Hussein reports to his father the results of one such terrorist strike that specifically targeted American aid workers with the UN
When attacking Western interests, the competitive terror cartel came into play, particularly in the late 1990s. Captured documents reveal that the regime was willing to co-opt or support organizations it knew to be part of al Qaeda-as long as that organization's near-term goals supported Saddam's longterm vision. A directive (Extract 24) from the Director for International Intelligence in the IIS to an Iraqi operative in Bahrain orders him to investigate a particular terrorist group there, The Army of Muhammad.

"[July 2001]

We have learned of a group calling themselves The Army ofMuhammad... has threatened Kuwaiti authorities and plans to attack American and Western interests ...We need detailed information about this group, their activities, their objectives, and their most distinguished leaders. We need to know [to] whom they belong to and with whom they are connected. Give this subject your utmost attention."

"Information available to us is that the group is under the wings of bin Laden. They receive their directions from Yemen. Their objectives are the

same as bIll Laden..."

A later note84 lists the group's objectives, among them:

• Jihad in the name of God.

• Striking the embassies and other Jewish and American interests anywhere in the world.

• Attacking the American and British military bases in the Arab land.

• Striking American embassies and interests unless the Americans pull out their forces from the Arab lands and discontinue their support for Israel.

• Disrupting oil exports [to] the Americans from Arab countries and

threatening tankers carrying oil to them.

A later memorandum from the same collection85 to the Director of the IIS reports that the Army of Muhammad is endeavoring to receive assistance [from Iraq] to implement its objectives, and that the local IIS station has been told to deal with them in accordance with priorities previously established. The IIS agent goes on to inform the Director that "this organization is an offshoot of bin Laden, but that their objectives are similar but with different names that can be a way of camouflaging the organization."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is total bunk. Saddam's Iraq was telling us for a decade they didn't have WMD. WE DIDN'T BELIEVE THEM...

We know today that Sadam did allow the weapons inspectors to dismantal his WMD program shortly after the first gulf war ended. The Weapon's inspectors which included CIA analysts had the run of Iraq to open nearly any door and investigate to their hearts delight; and still they uncover the truth after more than a decades long effort.

Claiming it was an elaborate trick by Saddam to hoodwink our tens of billion dollar intelligence effort; is just ingnorant. Fact is the intelligence system failed internally without any assistance from Saddam's government. Fact is our intelligence effort is supposed to work without nearly the access to weapons sites, documents, enemy politicians, or enemy scientists, they benifited from in Iraq.

If we know anything today, it's that the folks who were in power from 2000-2008 were liers, and had an agenda which they didn't feel obligated to share with the American people. That agenda was never to stop a WMD program in Iraq, never to stop Iraq's support for terrorism, never a retaliation for 911, never an attack against AlQuada, and was never to keep WMD out of the hands of Terrorists. The WMD program in Iraq, like the rest of the given goals were just a long line of ficticious justifications for pursuing their true agenda which the American people can still only try to surmise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah right...

That's why this was hanging in one of his palaces.

3rd-infantry-saddam_sml.jpg

Yes but this was also in his palace.

_thumbnail?cb=1115204527

And this was found in the locker of the popular child series star.

laden.jpg?cb=1115204527

And of coarse we know Burt has been leading a double life for some time.

PAM.JPG?cb=1115204527

Yet the liberal media would claim this is not conclusive enough evidence that Burt is an evil pupet and should be removed from his federally sponsored television role where he speaks to millions of American children weekly.

But lets review the facts shall we?

Fact is George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Richard Clark, Condi Rice, Collan Powel, have all stated there were no operational ties between AQ and Saddam.... Even George Tennant has made that statement. The bi partisan 911 commition made that conclusion after a multi million dollar eight months investigation. No creditable person believes Al Quada and Iraq had operational ties or cooperated with each other. Dick Cheney clung onto this statement the longest, but when pushed he's backed away and controdicted himself several times on this and his own president and terrorism czar

They've gone further than that even saying Iraq was not a player on the International terrorist scene; and there hadn't been only one terrorist incident in the last two decades linked to Iraq. That was the attempt on George Bush Sr life when he visited Kuwait shortly after leaving office. An attempt most intelligence analysts today don't believe ever occured.... ( The Kuwaities uncovered the "plot" and "foiled" it, to date have not produced any evidence, purputrators, or witnesses about said plot. )

Still none of that is good enough for the conspiracy folks. After 911 90% of the public believed Saddam had ties to 9/11 and AQ. On the eve of the invasion 70% of the public believed Saddam had those ties. You sir are what's left from that pool of folks who were all lied to and mislead into supporting this war.

I include myself in that pool of original folks who were mislead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This article is total bunk. Saddam's Iraq was telling us for a decade they didn't have WMD. WE DIDN'T BELIEVE THEM...

We know today that Sadam did allow the weapons inspectors to dismantal his WMD program shortly after the first gulf war ended. The Weapon's inspectors which included CIA analysts had the run of Iraq to open nearly any door and investigate to their hearts delight; and still they uncover the truth after more than a decades long effort.

Claiming it was an elaborate trick by Saddam to hoodwink our tens of billion dollar intelligence effort; is just ingnorant. Fact is the intelligence system failed internally without any assistance from Saddam's government. Fact is our intelligence effort is supposed to work without nearly the access to weapons sites, documents, enemy politicians, or enemy scientists, they benifited from in Iraq.

If we know anything today, it's that the folks who were in power from 2000-2008 were liers, and had an agenda which they didn't feel obligated to share with the American people. That agenda was never to stop a WMD program in Iraq, never to stop Iraq's support for terrorism, never a retaliation for 911, never an attack against AlQuada, and was never to keep WMD out of the hands of Terrorists. The WMD program in Iraq, like the rest of the given goals were just a long line of ficticious justifications for pursuing their true agenda which the American people can still only try to surmise.

:rolleyes: :insane:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes but this was also in his palaces and we have taken no action at all against Sesemi Street, which as you know is partially funded by Federal dollars.

Fact is George W. Bush, Bill Clinton, Richard Clark, Condi Rice, Collan Powel, have all stated there were no operational ties between AQ and Saddam....

They've gone further than that even saying Iraq was not a player on the International terrorist scene; and there hadn't been only one terrorist incident in the last two decades linked to Iraq. That was the attempt on George Bush Sr life when he visited Kuwait shortly after leaving office. An attempt most intelligence analysts today don't believe ever occured.... ( The Kuwaities uncovered the "plot" and "foiled" it, to date have not produced any evidence, purputrators, or witnesses about said plot. )

Still none of that is good enough for the conspiracy folks. After 911 90% of the public believed Saddam had ties to 9/11. On the eve of the invasion 70% of the public believed Saddam had those ties. You sir are what's left from that pool of folks who were all lied to and mislead into supporting this war.

Dude. I just showed you notes from captured Iraqi documents SHOWING Saddam directly supported terrorism targeting the united states. It's not opinion. It's fact. Period. End of story. :doh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't need notes to remember Hans Blix and his inspection teams being thrown OUT of Iraq on a weekly basis whenever they got close to a building the Iraqis didn't want them to inspect. A few days later they were invited back to inspect a (now) empty storage facility.

But, in reading through JMS post, I never saw that, and I must be remembering something else entirely.

~Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dude. I just showed you notes from captured Iraqi documents SHOWING Saddam directly supported terrorism targeting the united states. It's not opinion. It's fact. Period. End of story. :doh:

Actually you didn't. Actually you quoted an article which quoted Iraqi documents which if given in context proved Iraq didn't support terrorism and hasn't ever targeted American interests with terrorism, with or without Al Quada...

If you read the 911 report, they actually did quote these documents accurately....

While these documents do not reveal direct coordination and assistance between the Saddam regime and the al Qaeda network, they do indicate that Saddam was willing to use, albeit cautiously, operatives affiliated with al Qaeda as long as Saddam could have these terrorist–operatives monitored closely. Because Saddam’s security organizations and Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some ways, a “de facto” link between the organizations.

How do you "use" Al Quada, without direct ties or coordination and without giving them aid? I think you highlighted the wrong sentence.

A later memorandum from the same collection85 to the Director of the IIS reports that the Army of Muhammad is endeavoring to receive assistance [from Iraq] to implement its objectives, and that the local IIS station has been told to deal with them in accordance with priorities previously established. The IIS agent goes on to inform the Director that "this organization is an offshoot of bin Laden, but that their objectives are similar but with different names that can be a way of camouflaging the organization."

So AQ was "endeavoring" to recieve assistance.. and Saddam stiff armed them. What does that proove? Nothing.

In that meeting Saddam's representatives declined to give financial or material aid to AQ and refused to let AQ have bases inside Iraq. Saddam did not trust Al Quada, and he had good reason to not trust them. They wanted to overthrow his secular government in favor of a religous caliphate, that's one of AQ's primary goals.

The 911 commission investigated this report!!!.... But of coarse that was a multi million dollar serious bipartisan investigation, so it must be less reliable than an unvetted article posted on an obscure military web site.... Obscure compared to the Director of the CIA, national security advisor, secretary of state, senate subcommitees, house sub comittees, president, and national terrorism czar who all publically refute these conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In that meeting Saddam's representatives declined to give financial or material aid to AQ and refused to let AQ have bases inside Iraq.

At least you agree that they were talking to each other.

Which means there was indeed a connection.

And, obviously, we should believe them when they say, nothing happened. Cause they are both so honest.;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't need notes to remember Hans Blix and his inspection teams being thrown OUT of Iraq on a weekly basis whenever they got close to a building the Iraqis didn't want them to inspect.

~Bang

Actually you do need notes, because the weapons inspectors were inside Iraq doing their jobs and withdrawn on the eve of our invasion by United States request....

You must be thinking of the time when the weapons inspectors after a decade of "investigating" were denied access to Presidential Palaces looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction under Saddam's presidential bed.

You are also right in thinking that was used at the time as proof positive Saddam had WMD. Which was the wrong conclusion. Fact is it seems, Saddam didn't think his bedroom was a reasonable WMD search location, something that is a lot more reasonable than it was presented in the United States Press or by the administration.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least you agree that they were talking to each other.

Which means there was indeed a connection.

Pedantics... All 14 of the 911 hijackers had Virginia drivers liscenses in their own names and had traveled to the United States under their own names. Does that mean the US government had "ties" to them. Certainly it does. Meaningless ties.

Ties which go bellow aiding, abetting, coordinating, or sheltering are meaningless. Fact is America now is holding talks with Hezbollah and Hamas, does that mean Israel would be justified in invading us?

And, obviously, we should believe them when they say, nothing happened. Cause they are both so honest.;)

Well you can't have it both ways. The documents are either reliable or they aren't. If they are reliable evidence of a connection, then they are also reliable evidence the connection was irronous. Fact is investigators have scoured this relationship for years spending millions of dollars on this very point. Every rational responsible creditable voice refutes what you are claiming.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually you didn't. Actually you quoted an article which quoted Iraqi documents which if given in context proved Iraq didn't support terrorism and hasn't ever targeted American interests with terrorism, with or without Al Quada...

I quoted a document put together by the United States Joint Forces Command quoting actual Iraqi documents. And if that is your interpretation of what it says, you are quite insane, or a complete moron.

http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/pa032008.html

United States Joint Forces Command (USJFCOM) has released online an unclassified redacted version of the Joint Center for Operational Analysis (JCOA)-sponsored study entitled “The Iraqi Perspectives Project -- Saddam and Terrorism: Emerging Insights from Captured Iraqi Documents.”

One more time for the reading impaired....

Two other memoranda in this folder are from Saddam through his Presidential Secretary to a member of the Revolutionary Council and to the IIS Director, respectively.

• In the first, from January 1993, and coinciding with the start of the US

humanitarian intervention in Somalia, the Presidential Secretary informed the council member of Saddam's decision to "form a group to start hunting Americans present on Arab soil; especially Somalia."

And no, the 9/11 commission was closed. This report came after the war and is a review of captured Iraqi documents. You simply don't have a clue what you are talking about. In all honesty you seem to have a serious disconnect with reality and the sad thing is that it appears to be by choice.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Actually you do need notes, because the weapons inspectors were inside Iraq doing their jobs and withdrawn on the eve of our invasion by United States request....

You must be thinking of the time when the weapons inspectors after a decade of "investigating" were denied access to Presidential Palaces looking for Weapons of Mass Destruction under Saddam's presidential bed.

You are also right in thinking that was used at the time as proof positive Saddam had WMD. Which was the wrong conclusion. Fact is it seems, Saddam didn't think his bedroom was a reasonable WMD search location, something that is a lot more reasonable than it was presented in the United States Press or by the administration.

No, I'm thinking of the time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time after time that inspectors were booted out of industrial complex after industrial complex after industrial complex after industrial complex after industrial complex after industrial complex.

Over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over.

It wasn't THAT long ago.

~ Bang

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I quoted a document put together by the United States Joint Forces Command quoting actual Iraqi documents. And if that is your interpretation of what it says, you are quite insane, or a complete moron.

http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2008/pa032008.html

You quoted a press release put out by a Public Affairs group. The actual documents are hundreds of megabytes large. I think my synopsis of what they say is significantly more accurate than your assertions of what the report says.

By USJFCOM Public Affairs

One more time for the reading impaired....

So twenty five years ago after we had just kicked is butt out of Kuwait, he wrote a memo saying he was going to do something nasty to us, and we have no evidence that he followed that up and actually did anything.....

Let's invade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...