Iraq's WMD Secreted in Syria, Sada Says

[Proletariat]

uhm guys didnt we go through this whole tirade a couple months ago?

 

[PELarson]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: conjur
Nice try

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2006/1/27/112247/570

So the #2 man in Saddam Hussein's Air Force knows for sure that 2 Boeing aircraft had their seats removed and the planes filled with unspecified WMD in yellow barrels in 2002.

Georges Sada is an Assyrian Christian who was born in Iraq. It's true he was once a high-ranking officer in Saddam's Air Force but he retired in 1986.

In 1990, Saddam hired him back (right before the Persian Gulf War) because of his "ability to organize the air force" but Sada was fired less than a year later. Got it? He was not an official in Saddam's military, government or anything else after 1990.

Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing.

Sada was also on conservative talkshow Hannity & Colmes yesterday, also claiming the same unsubstantiated bull about Saddam flying out his WMD as part of the media blitz orchestrated by his publicist.

Sada became a born-again Christian after he was retired from the Air Force in 1986. He has been active with religious groups ever since. He is the president of the National Presbyterian Church in Baghdad and chairman of the Assembly of Iraqi Evangelical Presbyterian Churches.

He's also worked closely with Coventry Cathedral in Britain, particularly their International Center for Reconciliation, part of their international ministry. The ICR is headed up by Andrew White, who spent a lot of time in Israel and is now the Anglican vicar of Baghdad.

According to a cache of the the ICR's website, Georges Sada has been working in Iraq on their behalf for 5 years. And the cache comes from 2004, which puts Georges Sada being active in Iraq back as far as 1999.

Sada was a strong supporter of the 2003 invasion and later became a spokesperson for Prime Minister Iyad Allawi. In July 2004, Sada said this on Allawi's behalf:

"If [a guerrilla] was in opposition against the Americans, that will be justified because it was an occupation force," the spokesman, Georges Sada, said yesterday. "We will give them freedom."

So Sada is an evangelical Christian who also managed to get a top job in the post-Saddam government.

Sada meanwhile is going to meet the Senate Armed Services Committee next week. I'll see if I can't keep track of this to see what he says.

What's hilariously ironic is that Sada saved the lives of some American POW's in 1991 because mistreating them would be in violation of the Geneva Conventions.

As expected, the rightwing blogs are falling over themselves to link to old quotes from people who "suspected" Iraq had shipped its WMD to Syria.

But it's the NY Sun who accurately guesses why Sada's revelation is now surfacing:

The discovery of the weapons in Syria could alter the American political debate on the Iraq war. And even the accusations that they are there could step up international pressure on the government in Damascus. That government, led by Bashar Assad, is already facing a U.N. investigation over its alleged role in the assassination of a former prime minister of Lebanon. The Bush administration has criticized Syria for its support of terrorism and its failure to cooperate with the U.N. investigation.

The State Department is allowing the "Syrian National Council" to meet in DC again, which is the Syrian version of Chalabi's old outfit the Iraqi National Congress, which received some 33 million dollars from the American taxpayers.

Want to see what the Syrian National Council's agenda is?

"We are not looking for reform in Syria. We want a complete change in the regime in Syria," Mohammed Aljbaili said at a press conference June 6. He described the Syrian regime under President Bashar Assad as "one of the most totalitarian rules in the world."

The Washington-based council will coordinate with opposition groups inside and outside Syria to promote democratic change in the country, according to a statement issued by the council's executive committee. In addition to Aljbaili, the other members of the executive committee are Najib Alghadban, Hussam Aldairi, Mohammed Alkhawam and Abd Almuhaymen Alsibai.

"A democratic government in Syria is likely to preserve the national interest of Syria better than any other regime," said Alghadban.

Imagine just for one minute if a group of American "dissidents" were meeting in Damascus to openly advocate the overthrow of the American government. Just imagine that for one second.

And the drum beat of war goes on...

Typical liberal, discrediting the person, not the information at hand.

Unlike when the Republicans try to discredit the person.:disgust:

 

[Buck Armstrong]

Oh yeah? Which part is nonsense? Nothing in my post claims that Saddam told us ANYTHING (can you not read?)

UNSC weapons inspectors saw and documented them, so there was no room for Iraq to not admit to them. Then, in the lead-up to the war, Iraq presented the UN with a list of all their weapons, but some of the ones the UN HAD DEFINTIELY SEEN AND IDENTIFIED were missing from said list. The UN and Dumbya, as you appropriately call him, asked, "Where are the missing weapons? The ones we saw with our own eyes?" and Iraq answered to the effect, "Thats our list, its complete, and we'll say no more about it". The discrepancy was never addressed, and so Dumbya went ahead and invaded. Maybe they were destroyed, and as you imply in the one part of your post that makes any sense, Saddam had his own reasons not to say so, or maybe they were moved. But one of the two had to happen, they don't just vanish into thin air.

Unlike your post, Its not speculation, its FACT (which you're apparently not too familiar with). Go look it up.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jlmadyson

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i have tried to accept that there were no WMD in Iraq even though our Intel had reported to the contrary, but something always bothered me about this conclusion, a nagging itch at the back of my mind. and that was the overwhelming belief by the world?s best intelligence agencies also that Saddam did indeed have stockpiles of WMD in the six months leading up to the war. the French, the British, the Germans, The Israeli?s, the United Nations (UNSCOM and IAEA), not to mention the CIA, DIA, and most politicians here in this country believed it too.

so no WMD were found and now Bush has even conceded the Intel reports were wrong, but what say you about this?

Certainly interesting, a lot of speculation has been made that this is exactly what happened to the WMDs. While not so certain about this, and doubts remain, it is still possible that this did occur although it would be nice to have some corroborating intel to support this claim.

yeh, i am not 100% sold on this, but i still find it hard to buy that our Intel could be so faulty.

Wake up and smell the sh1t then. It obviously is. If there was even a hint that this was true, you would bet Bush would be making this a big deal. But then again, how much oil does Syria havfe?

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj
That's cool and all, but with all the resources of the US government turned towards finding these WMD that were supposed to exist..how come there is no evidence other than hearsay from an unsubstantiated source?

I won't even set the bar that high . . . where's the evidence of WMD related program activities?

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
uhm guys didnt we go through this whole tirade a couple months ago?

Pretty much. But you know what they say about BS and repeating it enough. Say it often enough and eventually you'll have enough people believing in your special brand of BS.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Perknose

Originally posted by: CaptnKirk
Paranoids selling fear at a fire sale is what I'm seeing from these clowns.

And mosh sucks from this dirty, used straw because he wants to. Your source is full of it, mosh. Try another circus.

that's harsh.

i only brought up this topic for debate because i found it interesting. no need to crush me with your elitism is there?

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Sudheer Anne
Mosh cannot see his own bias in all of this. He desperately wants to believe that Iraq did have massive stockpiles of WMD's because without them everything else falls apart.

We have no direct evidence or factual data to support the notion that Iraq had WMD's. Until such evidence is produced, it's best we not speculate on anything.

i'm not a he.

and if you will read the thread you will see that i have never said i was 100% behind the source.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: jlmadyson

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i have tried to accept that there were no WMD in Iraq even though our Intel had reported to the contrary, but something always bothered me about this conclusion, a nagging itch at the back of my mind. and that was the overwhelming belief by the world?s best intelligence agencies also that Saddam did indeed have stockpiles of WMD in the six months leading up to the war. the French, the British, the Germans, The Israeli?s, the United Nations (UNSCOM and IAEA), not to mention the CIA, DIA, and most politicians here in this country believed it too.

so no WMD were found and now Bush has even conceded the Intel reports were wrong, but what say you about this?

Certainly interesting, a lot of speculation has been made that this is exactly what happened to the WMDs. While not so certain about this, and doubts remain, it is still possible that this did occur although it would be nice to have some corroborating intel to support this claim.

yeh, i am not 100% sold on this, but i still find it hard to buy that our Intel could be so faulty.
and moving the WMD as such would make sense.

Some people just love the sound of a banging drum I guess.

 

[Carazariah]

Suffice it to say Sada wasn't the only one to say this:

http://www.debka.com/article.php?aid=780

Again I have no idea the credibility of Sada or Debka's sources but the idea isn't new.

C

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade
nice try what? your blogger site wants to discredit this guy?

Nice job attack the source, not the information. :roll:

as if conjur wouldn't have done the same :laugh:

conjur's source says and he bolded it: "Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing."

Sada says in the NYSun: ""I know them very well. They are very good friends of mine. We trust each other. We are friends as pilots," Mr. Sada said of the two pilots. He declined to disclose their names, saying they are concerned for their safety. But he said they are now employed by other airlines outside Iraq."

see how conjur's blog site is trying to slant things? obviously Sada is not going to name the pilots involved for safety reasons. he has expressed a fear for his life and his family's lives too due to release of this information.

Be sure and repost once this has some legs. Until them, it's a non-story.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Notice that Steeplerot stopped posting about the invasion of Iran that was scheduled by Hersh.

Nice thing about negative theories; Once they are outed; one can find justifications for them never coming to fruit.

 

[LunarRay]

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I think Saddam hid them on the dark side of the moon.

I too agree with Moonbeam that Saddam had a secert space program and used it to store WMDs on the on dark side of the moon.

Now, I've just got to get some newspaper to quote me on this and some stupid right-winger will post about it online...

I disagree with both of you.
No one has yet entertained the possibility that IF Iraq had WMD that they'd have used them instead of exporting them and then refusing to allow inspectors to check for them. The logic in this seems to funnel down to Iraq not wanting anyone to know she didn't have them. It was a bluff, a hoax and I think we knew this. Why else would we march divisions of troops directly into harms way if we thought Iraq had WMD and would use them.. remember the basis for the invasion... HAS and WILL USE... We must have known otherwise or our leaders were ready to send thousands if not tens of thousands to meet their maker....
Nah.. the invasion of Iraq was based on another agenda not directly related to any of this. And that is really the only thing that makes sense if you drop the side choosing and just look at one simple reality... marching into the valley of death... no way.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: arsbanned

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade
nice try what? your blogger site wants to discredit this guy?

Nice job attack the source, not the information. :roll:

as if conjur wouldn't have done the same :laugh:

conjur's source says and he bolded it: "Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing."

Sada says in the NYSun: ""I know them very well. They are very good friends of mine. We trust each other. We are friends as pilots," Mr. Sada said of the two pilots. He declined to disclose their names, saying they are concerned for their safety. But he said they are now employed by other airlines outside Iraq."

see how conjur's blog site is trying to slant things? obviously Sada is not going to name the pilots involved for safety reasons. he has expressed a fear for his life and his family's lives too due to release of this information.

Be sure and repost once this has some legs. Until them, it's a non-story.

i wouldn't call it a non-story as it stands right now, but i will be sure to update this thread if more info becomes available relevant to the topic.

 

[Proletariat]

Lets be a bit nicer to Moshquerade here folks.

She doesn't come here often and you guys are all railing on her.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Lets be a bit nicer to Moshquerade here folks.

She doesn't come here often and you guys are all railing on her.

thanks

 

[Proletariat]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Lets be a bit nicer to Moshquerade here folks.

She doesn't come here often and you guys are all railing on her.

thanks

np I'm really not trying to suck up to you or anything, but many people are assuming you have read a bunch of previous threads and arguments here which is really unfair.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Proletariat

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Proletariat
Lets be a bit nicer to Moshquerade here folks.

She doesn't come here often and you guys are all railing on her.

thanks

np I'm really not trying to suck up to you or anything, but many people are assuming you have read a bunch of previous threads and arguments here which is really unfair.

oh, i know you aren't sucking up. there is NO sucking up in P&N. :laugh:

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
I disagree with both of you.
No one has yet entertained the possibility that IF Iraq had WMD that they'd have used them instead of exporting them and then refusing to allow inspectors to check for them. The logic in this seems to funnel down to Iraq not wanting anyone to know she didn't have them. It was a bluff, a hoax and I think we knew this. Why else would we march divisions of troops directly into harms way if we thought Iraq had WMD and would use them.. remember the basis for the invasion... HAS and WILL USE... We must have known otherwise or our leaders were ready to send thousands if not tens of thousands to meet their maker....
Nah.. the invasion of Iraq was based on another agenda not directly related to any of this. And that is really the only thing that makes sense if you drop the side choosing and just look at one simple reality... marching into the valley of death... no way.

Indeed. Seems to be the most logical conclusion. No matter how you look at it, it would seem Saddam let the world believe he had WMDs so as to appear strong. But it sure seems to have backfired on him.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: arsbanned

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade
nice try what? your blogger site wants to discredit this guy?

Nice job attack the source, not the information. :roll:

as if conjur wouldn't have done the same :laugh:

conjur's source says and he bolded it: "Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing."

Sada says in the NYSun: ""I know them very well. They are very good friends of mine. We trust each other. We are friends as pilots," Mr. Sada said of the two pilots. He declined to disclose their names, saying they are concerned for their safety. But he said they are now employed by other airlines outside Iraq."

see how conjur's blog site is trying to slant things? obviously Sada is not going to name the pilots involved for safety reasons. he has expressed a fear for his life and his family's lives too due to release of this information.

Be sure and repost once this has some legs. Until them, it's a non-story.

i wouldn't call it a non-story as it stands right now, but i will be sure to update this thread if more info becomes available relevant to the topic.

Sure it is. This theory is so weak. You really think the satellites wouldn't have picked up huge convoys of trucks moving into Syria? You don't think that of all the thousands of soldiers that it would have taken for this to happen, that not one of them came forward? You think of all the people who are detained, not a single one of them broke down under interrogation (and you would bet that they would have been heavily 'interrogated') and gave even a hint of this?

Now the question is, why do you feel the need to grasp at even the weakest of straws?

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: arsbanned

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade
nice try what? your blogger site wants to discredit this guy?

Nice job attack the source, not the information. :roll:

as if conjur wouldn't have done the same :laugh:

conjur's source says and he bolded it: "Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing."

Sada says in the NYSun: ""I know them very well. They are very good friends of mine. We trust each other. We are friends as pilots," Mr. Sada said of the two pilots. He declined to disclose their names, saying they are concerned for their safety. But he said they are now employed by other airlines outside Iraq."

see how conjur's blog site is trying to slant things? obviously Sada is not going to name the pilots involved for safety reasons. he has expressed a fear for his life and his family's lives too due to release of this information.

Be sure and repost once this has some legs. Until them, it's a non-story.

i wouldn't call it a non-story as it stands right now, but i will be sure to update this thread if more info becomes available relevant to the topic.

Sure it is. This theory is so weak. You really think the satellites wouldn't have picked up huge convoys of trucks moving into Syria? You don't think that of all the thousands of soldiers that it would have taken for this to happen, that not one of them came forward? You think of all the people who are detained, not a single one of them broke down under interrogation (and you would bet that they would have been heavily 'interrogated') and gave even a hint of this?

Now the question is, why do you feel the need to grasp at even the weakest of straws?

how weak is the story if it compelled you to respond?

it is an established fact that Saddam Hussein's regime did indeed possess ample stores of WMDs in the 1990s. and it is well known that he refused, repeatedly, to document the disposal of those weapons, or to otherwise account for them.

it was thus logical to decide that if Saddam was known to have the weapons, and if he refused to account for them, he likely still possessed them or had access to them.

am i wrong to think this?

if not, then it is also not wrong to think these weapons had to be moved somewhere.

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
how weak is the story if it compelled you to respond?

it is an established fact that Saddam Hussein's regime did indeed possess ample stores of WMDs in the 1990s.

Check your calendar. That was like 2 wars ago.

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: moshquerade
how weak is the story if it compelled you to respond?

it is an established fact that Saddam Hussein's regime did indeed possess ample stores of WMDs in the 1990s.

Check your calendar. That was like 2 wars ago.

your point? the current administration -- along with the Clinton administration and the intelligence services of just about every nation on Earth -- believed that Iraq still had chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons (or easily assembled components thereof) as recently as this decade.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Looney

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: arsbanned

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: Tab

Originally posted by: moshquerade
nice try what? your blogger site wants to discredit this guy?

Nice job attack the source, not the information. :roll:

as if conjur wouldn't have done the same :laugh:

conjur's source says and he bolded it: "Sada is basing his statement on un-named pilots who allegedly flew these two airplanes in 2002. And you can be sure he will never name them. It's the allegation that's the thing."

Sada says in the NYSun: ""I know them very well. They are very good friends of mine. We trust each other. We are friends as pilots," Mr. Sada said of the two pilots. He declined to disclose their names, saying they are concerned for their safety. But he said they are now employed by other airlines outside Iraq."

see how conjur's blog site is trying to slant things? obviously Sada is not going to name the pilots involved for safety reasons. he has expressed a fear for his life and his family's lives too due to release of this information.

Be sure and repost once this has some legs. Until them, it's a non-story.

i wouldn't call it a non-story as it stands right now, but i will be sure to update this thread if more info becomes available relevant to the topic.

Sure it is. This theory is so weak. You really think the satellites wouldn't have picked up huge convoys of trucks moving into Syria? You don't think that of all the thousands of soldiers that it would have taken for this to happen, that not one of them came forward? You think of all the people who are detained, not a single one of them broke down under interrogation (and you would bet that they would have been heavily 'interrogated') and gave even a hint of this?

Now the question is, why do you feel the need to grasp at even the weakest of straws?

how weak is the story if it compelled you to respond?

it is an established fact that Saddam Hussein's regime did indeed possess ample stores of WMDs in the 1990s. and it is well known that he refused, repeatedly, to document the disposal of those weapons, or to otherwise account for them.

it was thus logical to decide that if Saddam was known to have the weapons, and if he refused to account for them, he likely still possessed them or had access to them.

am i wrong to think this?

if not, then it is also not wrong to think these weapons had to be moved somewhere.

Why go with a theory that is so far fetched and unsubstantiated? Do you realize how difficult it would be to move tons of chemical weapons without the satellites picking up? Or that all the people who would actually be involved in that, and not a single person was able to substantiate it, under coercion or not?

There's a lot of other theories that are much simpler and more likely: he lost all his stockpiles during the first Gulf war from all the air and missile attacks... or that he lied about the amount of WMD he had to make himself appear stronger than he actually was. So you go with a theory from som

 

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: moshquerade
how weak is the story if it compelled you to respond?

it is an established fact that Saddam Hussein's regime did indeed possess ample stores of WMDs in the 1990s.

Check your calendar. That was like 2 wars ago.

your point? the current administration -- along with the Clinton administration and the intelligence services of just about every nation on Earth -- believed that Iraq still had chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons (or easily assembled components thereof) as recently as this decade.

I believe Kenedey was killed by a lone gunman and Saddam destroyed his WMD's.

When you have some real proof to the contrary, let us know. Until then it's just talk, and talk is cheap.