SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: calgal who wrote (434237)7/27/2003 1:10:10 AM
From: calgal  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 769670
 
Saddam: In His Own Words
What do the tyrant's own press clippings say about his efforts to acquire nuclear weapons?
by Nimrod Rapaheli
07/25/2003 12:00:00 AM

MUCH OF THE RECENT political controversy about the existence in Iraq of a nuclear program (and WMD) has focused only on the narrow issue of the alleged attempts by Iraq to acquire uranium from the small African country of Niger. Ignored in the debate have been Saddam Hussein's public statements on the subject. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) in Washington, D.C. has documented several of these statements in three separate dispatches between November 2001 and June 2003. All of these dispatches are widely circulated and can easily be accessed through memri.org

MEMRI's special dispatch of November 8, 2001 carried news from the Iraqi daily Babil about Saddam's meeting with the heads of the Iraqi Nuclear Energy Authority (NEA) and the defense establishment. It quotes Babil:

President and leader Saddam Hussein met with Dr. Fadhel al-Janabi, chairman of Iraq's Nuclear Energy Authority, and a select group of outstanding researchers and engineers from among the warriors of the NEA and the military industry. . . . His excellency told those present and the Iraqi people: "When the human mind has a . . . great objective, it will not be sidetracked from its goal."

Reporting on another such meeting, apparently held on January 11, 2002, the Iraqi news agency wrote: "President Saddam Hussein commended Iraqi NEA warriors on their achievement which fill the hearts of the Iraqis with faith and pride." The use of the term "warriors" to characterize those who worked at NEA may suggest they were not engaged in peaceful pursuits. At the meeting, al-Janabi told Saddam: "As time goes on, your sons, the mujahedeen [warriors] become more determined and energetic, not only to overcome difficulties, but also to invent new and advanced ways to accomplish their work."

These, and subsequent meetings, were reported primarily in the daily Babil which was owned by Saddam's son Uday. Given the strict control over the press during the Saddam regime, no news item, whether fact or fiction, and, especially, no item about Saddam himself, would be reported in the press without the approval of the regime.

ON May 7, 2002 the Iraqi government daily Al-Thawra carried a report on another meeting between Saddam and the head of NEA. At the meeting, Dr. al-Janabi submitted to Saddam a report on "the achievements created by the brains in the Atomic Energy Authority for servicing the objectives of the Great Iraq."

A few days later, Babil reported on still another meeting of Saddam, al-Janabi, and "a select group of researchers and engineers" from the NEA and the military industry. According to the report, al-Janabi assured Saddam of the group's commitment to make "quick progress and comprehensive development in ten years." He added that the achievements of the organization would serve as "a symbol for the nation and humanity as a whole." This meeting was followed by another one in which al-Janabi was quoted promising Saddam "a commitment to work day and night to add new advanced technical components" toward constructing "a towering Iraq."

In a statement made at the end of July, 2002, Saddam offered effusive praise for the nuclear team. He underscored their scientific achievements which had revealed "the metal of Iraqi man and his steadfastness to seize upon the opportunity for progress and development." In January 2003, Saddam belittled the work of the international inspectors then in Iraq. In a speech to the leaders of the Baath party on the occasion of the 82nd anniversary of the establishment of the Iraqi army, Saddam accused the inspectors of engaging in a fishing expedition because, he said, they knew that Iraq had no nuclear, biological or chemical weapons. But he added ominously: "The potential of the Iraqis will be as great as Allah wishes, and this, the inspectors cannot assess. Can anyone know the great potential that Allah would want for a people who rely on Him and believe in Him?"

UPON THE FALL of the Saddam regime, two Iraqi scientists who had been employed by Iraq's NEA were interviewed by Al-Jazeera on April 27. They stated that immediately after the war, the facilities in the nuclear station in Al-Tuwaitha had been looted, including 200 barrels of yellow cake and uranium oxide. The looters emptied the barrels either in waterways or in their neighborhoods in order to use the barrels for domestic purposes. One of the scientists found one of the barrels being used to store tomatoes. Others were used to store water. On July 17, the Iraqi weekly Al-Khaled reported that a survey carried out by experts had detected contamination of land, water and agricultural produce in five areas surrounding the Al-Tuwaitha nuclear station.

Any rational debate about existence of Iraq's nuclear program should consider several questions: Since Iraq was under U.N. sanctions and was enjoined from developing WMD, what was the purpose of its NEA, especially given the military industry presence in meetings? What were the so-called "warriors"--really researchers and engineers--of the NEA engaged in that would deserve the personal attention and praise of Saddam? What was the goal to which they dedicated themselves? Why were the meetings between Saddam and the nuclear scientists given such prominence in the Iraqi-controlled media? Was Saddam only bluffing? And, perhaps most significantly, how is it that no one in the international community raised a cry about the very existence of NEA?

The answers to most of these questions must be known to Dr. al-Janabi and his scientists--as well as to General 'Amer, Saddam's scientific adviser. 'Amer, you'll remember, was the first among the 55 most wanted Iraqis to surrender to the allied forces.

Nimrod Rapaheli is a senior analyst at the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) in Washington, D.C.



To: calgal who wrote (434237)7/27/2003 1:25:13 AM
From: Kevin Rose  Respond to of 769670
 
Well, this just goes to show that you can tell a story many different ways to justify your point.

The issue is that the CIA director specifically asked the White House to remove the reference from a prior speech; in fact, they insisted. The White House relented. That shows that they believed the CIA when they said the claim was dubious. However, it 'slipped' back into the State of the Union, by mistake?? Doesn't anyone proofread the damn thing before it goes out?!

That point alone is worth rolling a few heads. Someone wanted the quote in there. Why? Because they believed that the country would not be convinced of the danger unless there was a nuclear threat - period. So, they rolled one in. Who made the decision to slip the discredited intelligence back in? Someone with high enough authority to let the President make the statement in front of literally billions of people.

You think that some speechwriter hack has that kinda pull?

On the 'correctness' of the quote (the BS about the fact that the British said so, so it was factually correct). This is the worst spin I've seen yet. The quote was that the British had learned of the uranium; that implies *clearly* that the US believed the claim. Else, why would they bring it into (well, even *BACK* into) the speech? Clearly, the speechwriters believed that the claim was true, else they wouldn't let it into the speech. If not, they could put all sorts of lies into the speech about whatever they want, as long as they cited someone else as the source?! I think not.

These 16 words are not the big issue. The issue is HOW they got it, WHY they were forced back in, WHO made the call, and WHERE in the world was Bush in this whole thing, and WHAT the heck were they smoking when they thought it wasn't gonna bite them back in the ass?