Iraq: Spying on Inspectors

[EndGame]

• Julian Borger in Washington, Gary Younge in New York and Michael White in London
  Thursday January 30, 2003
  
  
  The US and UK have evidence of an orchestrated Iraqi attempt to spy on UN weapons inspectors using hidden microphones and agents, allowing Baghdad to stay one step ahead of the search for banned weapons, sources said yesterday.
  
  One intelligence source said the Iraqi secret police have infiltrated the inspectors' offices in Baghdad and Mosul, and that intercepted communications prove that the Iraqis often knew in advance exactly where the inspectors planned to mount a search.
  
  "There is very good intelligence that Iraqi intelligence has penetrated the UN compounds. There are Iraqis inside those compounds and there are microphones in there, and so before the inspectors arrive, they move the stuff out of the back door," the source said.
  
  He said that as well as communications intercepts proving Iraqi infiltration of the UN teams, the US also had satellite photographs of suspect sites showing Iraqi activity in advance of the inspectors' visits.
  
  "Much of this stuff is smaller than the size of a sink. That's the problem. You can't see it clearly from the air," he said.
  
  Tony Blair yesterday threw his weight unexpectedly behind President Bush's renewed claim that proven links exist between President Saddam's regime in Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network, including unidentified operatives who are, his official spokesman said, being "sheltered" by the Baghdad regime.
  
  The prime minister's assertive tone in the Commons, despite evident coolness on his own backbenches, was coupled with a warning that, once Iraq has been dealt with, North Korea and other rogue states - as well as private arms firms - which threaten global security will be tackled.
  
  Choosing his words with care Mr Blair admitted that "we do not know of evidence" linking President Saddam to the attacks on September 11, but told the Conservative leader, Iain Duncan Smith: "We do know of links between al-Qaida and Iraq. We can be sure of those links."
  

 

[her209]

Saddam goes: W00 W00

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

The only thing I am personally interested in seeing is evidence that Saddam supports Al Queda in a real and material sense. Not "Well someone heard someone say". I would want to see the evidence verified. Why? See the Mantra in my sig.

If good evidence comes to light that Saddam is doing what so many here hope he is, namely supporting terrorist to attack the US, then I think we will have to go after him, and God help us all.

 

[Chadder007]

Colin Powell is rumored to have spy video of the Iraq'is hauling weapons out of the backs of the places that the Inspectors were heading to. They will present this soon....if there is such video or snapshots.
Also we do have evidence of him producing more nerve agents, this comes from sources in India. One of the factories there had orders put in from Iraq to deliver goods there and they did so. The goods delivered are used for only producing MASS quantities of chlorine .....so much so that they are used to produce toxins. This wasn't like the stuff you put into a pool either.

 

[SlowSS]

Good old Saddam, just can't seems to be able to change old habits.

 

[Tripleshot]

Hmmmm, then one could conclude we have spys on their spys.



When will this B.S. end? :disgust:

 

[etech]

Hayabusarider


Interesting manta but did you know that the importing of the tubes into Iraq was banned by the UN.

news.bbc.co.uk/

"The suspicion was that it wanted these for centrifuges to enrich uranium for a nuclear bomb but Mr ElBaradei's report to the Council said that the IAEA analysis "indicated that the... tubes sought by Iraq... appear to be consistent with reverse engineering of rockets" as Iraq had asserted.

However, Mr ElBaradei added that the importing of such tubes was banned anyway.
"

Try this for a sig.

"Before going into the detail, the general point has to be made that the case against Iraq does not depend on weapons of mass destruction, or a "smoking gun", being found.

What is required under Security Council Resolution 1441 is simply a finding that Iraq has not "fully co-operated" with the weapons inspectors.
"

 

[Kadarin]

Iraq spying on the inspectors? This falls under the "well, duh.." file.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: etech
Hayabusarider Interesting manta but did you know that the importing of the tubes into Iraq was banned by the UN. news.bbc.co.uk/ "The suspicion was that it wanted these for centrifuges to enrich uranium for a nuclear bomb but Mr ElBaradei's report to the Council said that the IAEA analysis "indicated that the... tubes sought by Iraq... appear to be consistent with reverse engineering of rockets" as Iraq had asserted. However, Mr ElBaradei added that the importing of such tubes was banned anyway. " Try this for a sig. "Before going into the detail, the general point has to be made that the case against Iraq does not depend on weapons of mass destruction, or a "smoking gun", being found. What is required under Security Council Resolution 1441 is simply a finding that Iraq has not "fully co-operated" with the weapons inspectors. "

etech, I have never disputed that Saddam is in violation of resolutions, nor do I approve of his making artillery shells. As you know, my threshold for invasion is higher than some here. It is about the attacking of a people who have not, and have not as of yet been shown to be plotting an attack against the US. I am not interested in legalistic justifications. I believe it is wrong to attack the Iraqi people under the current circumstances. Obviously, you disagree. Notwithstanding, the tubes are not suitable for nuclear weapons. They simply are not. So I will be generous and not imply underhanded motives. Let's say simply that a mistake was made. Now one of the principle ways that many people (not all) have gotten others worked up into fear about Saddam is nukes. Many I have spoken to want to attack Iraq not because of resolutions, but because of these very tubes. People are making a judgement based on fear based on erroneous statements based on misinterpretation of facts. I kept hearing about "aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes" When you plan to kill people, you had ought to at least kill them for the right reasons.

 

[EndGame]

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: etech
Hayabusarider Interesting manta but did you know that the importing of the tubes into Iraq was banned by the UN. news.bbc.co.uk/ "The suspicion was that it wanted these for centrifuges to enrich uranium for a nuclear bomb but Mr ElBaradei's report to the Council said that the IAEA analysis "indicated that the... tubes sought by Iraq... appear to be consistent with reverse engineering of rockets" as Iraq had asserted. However, Mr ElBaradei added that the importing of such tubes was banned anyway. " Try this for a sig. "Before going into the detail, the general point has to be made that the case against Iraq does not depend on weapons of mass destruction, or a "smoking gun", being found. What is required under Security Council Resolution 1441 is simply a finding that Iraq has not "fully co-operated" with the weapons inspectors. "

etech, I have never disputed that Saddam is in violation of resolutions, nor do I approve of his making artillery shells. As you know, my threshold for invasion is higher than some here. It is about the attacking of a people who have not, and have not as of yet been shown to be plotting an attack against the US. I am not interested in legalistic justifications. I believe it is wrong to attack the Iraqi people under the current circumstances. Obviously, you disagree. Notwithstanding, the tubes are not suitable for nuclear weapons. They simply are not. So I will be generous and not imply underhanded motives. Let's say simply that a mistake was made. Now one of the principle ways that many people (not all) have gotten others worked up into fear about Saddam is nukes. Many I have spoken to want to attack Iraq not because of resolutions, but because of these very tubes. People are making a judgement based on fear based on erroneous statements based on misinterpretation of facts. I kept hearing about "aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes" When you plan to kill people, you had ought to at least kill them for the right reasons.

NUCLEAR PIECES

• "Our primary indications are that they (the tubes) are intended to be used for conventional rockets but we are still investigating that issue, because with modifications they could in fact be used for enriching uranium," said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

 

[TheWart]

Hmmmm, then one could conclude we have spys on their spys.

Yes, it is called National Security.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: EndGame

Originally posted by: Hayabusarider

Originally posted by: etech Hayabusarider Interesting manta but did you know that the importing of the tubes into Iraq was banned by the UN. news.bbc.co.uk/ "The suspicion was that it wanted these for centrifuges to enrich uranium for a nuclear bomb but Mr ElBaradei's report to the Council said that the IAEA analysis "indicated that the... tubes sought by Iraq... appear to be consistent with reverse engineering of rockets" as Iraq had asserted. However, Mr ElBaradei added that the importing of such tubes was banned anyway. " Try this for a sig. "Before going into the detail, the general point has to be made that the case against Iraq does not depend on weapons of mass destruction, or a "smoking gun", being found. What is required under Security Council Resolution 1441 is simply a finding that Iraq has not "fully co-operated" with the weapons inspectors. "

etech, I have never disputed that Saddam is in violation of resolutions, nor do I approve of his making artillery shells. As you know, my threshold for invasion is higher than some here. It is about the attacking of a people who have not, and have not as of yet been shown to be plotting an attack against the US. I am not interested in legalistic justifications. I believe it is wrong to attack the Iraqi people under the current circumstances. Obviously, you disagree. Notwithstanding, the tubes are not suitable for nuclear weapons. They simply are not. So I will be generous and not imply underhanded motives. Let's say simply that a mistake was made. Now one of the principle ways that many people (not all) have gotten others worked up into fear about Saddam is nukes. Many I have spoken to want to attack Iraq not because of resolutions, but because of these very tubes. People are making a judgement based on fear based on erroneous statements based on misinterpretation of facts. I kept hearing about "aluminum tubes, aluminum tubes" When you plan to kill people, you had ought to at least kill them for the right reasons.

NUCLEAR PIECES

• "Our primary indications are that they (the tubes) are intended to be used for conventional rockets but we are still investigating that issue, because with modifications they could in fact be used for enriching uranium," said Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

With modifications, you could make a battleship out of sufficient quantities of teapots. Point is, that while in theory it is possible, in practice, it is much more difficult than you might imagine. I think etech has the technical savvy to know this. There are other ways to get what I believe he DOES want, that are much easier and efficient. Nevertheless, the statement I saw was that these tubes purpose was for nukes. I did not see much uncertainty. Maybe, might, could does not equal is.

Edit
Look, I really think this guy sucks. If one of his people had the nerve and good luck to plug him, I would be among the first to give the thumbs up. What I see that distresses me so is the fact that people have been frightened, and that fright has turned into hatred. I see in my community people who want to kill Saddam because of 9/11. What had Saddam to do with that? Are we then going to march into Iraq and kill Saddam? No we are going to have to go through a lot of people to get him unless he buggers off. Does he deserve death? As much as anyone else. But the aftermath is one dead dictator and a lot of dead others. Objectively, what have we gained? Satisfaction, but not security. So many cans of worms can come of this, and I have yet to see this addressed in any meaningful way by this administration. I personally need more.