Obama DNI choice believes Syrians have Saddam’s WMD?

posted at 12:35 pm on June 5, 2010 by Ed Morrissey

Well, maybe he did at one point, so expect this to become a big deal in James Clapper’s confirmation hearings to replace Dennis Blair as the Director of National Intelligence.  Washington Times reporter Eli Lake did a little research on Barack Obama’s choice for the thankless position (Clapper would be the fourth DNI in five years) and discovered a nugget that comes straight out of the so-called neocon argument for war against Saddam Hussein:

President Obama’s choice to be the next director of national intelligence supported the view that Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq sent weapons and documents to Syria in the weeks before the 2003 U.S. invasion.

A senior U.S. intelligence official said retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James R. Clapper, a former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency and current undersecretary of defense for intelligence, will be the next DNI. A formal announcemente is expected as early as Saturday. …

Gen. Clapper headed the National Geo-spatial Intelligence Agency between September 2001 to June 2006. The NGA is responsible for creating maps and terrestrial imagery and also assesses what is called “measurement and signature intelligence,” or MASINT, the intelligence function of analyzing such things as radar signals and the composition of air particles, soil samples and other physical characteristics of the earth.

On Iraq, Gen. Clapper said in an interview with The Washington Times in 2004 that “I think probably in the few months running up prior to the onset of combat that … there was probably an intensive effort to disperse into private homes, move documentation and materials out of the country. I think there are any number of things that they would have done.”

The comments came amid the debate over Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs, which some U.S. officials had said were moved out of Iraq prior to the invasion of Iraq with the assistance of Russian military intelligence forces.

From this description, it seems as though Clapper parsed his words carefully.  He never mentions WMD, at least not in the portion quoted by Lake.  However, there was no real reason to cart anything else out of Iraq just prior to the invasion.  Saddam Hussein certainly had plenty of conventional weapons, and no one had suggested that Saddam needed to disarm himself of those.  In fact, it would make no sense at all for Saddam to have moved conventional weapons out of Iraq just as the US poised to invade.

Clapper has some other problems as well.  Leadership in Congressional intel committees wanted a civilian in the post, and someone more closely tied to Obama himself.  The obvious choice would have been Leon Panetta, the CIA Director, but Panetta just won a big turf war with the departing Blair, which would have made that move a demotion in practical terms.  Likewise, Clapper has spent the last couple of years arguing that the Pentagon should have final authority over its intel budgets, not the DNI, which makes the position even weaker.

If anything, Clapper’s nomination to the post highlights both the lack of competence at the White House and the structural problems created by the reorganization of the intel communities five years ago.  Why would Obama choose someone who has spent the last couple of years attempting to make the position weaker?  And why are we still looking to find the next unlucky candidate to get all the blame and little authority, rather than undoing the 9/11 Commission “reform” and fixing the very obvious problems in organization, lines of authority, and turf battles in the American intelligence community?  Blair’s resignation gives us an opportunity to fix those problems, but Obama seems intent on making them even worse.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

If not there then where?

CWforFreedom on June 5, 2010 at 12:37 PM

Id not where, it is when.

upinak on June 5, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Like the Verona cables during the Cold War, the truth and ultimate vindication will be with the hawks.

RobCon on June 5, 2010 at 12:38 PM

Sweet Baby Gerkins!

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Can you imagine how the left will react to this?

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Remember how Althouse (Frum, etc.) said that McCain gave up the experience arguemnt when he picked Palin?

This is Obama giving up the Blame Bush argument. That is a biggie!

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:40 PM

Saddam’s Christian Liutenant in command said as much years ago. They gutted some passenger planes and flew them over with Russian cover. But my question is: what the hell is this amateur gonna do about it?

abobo on June 5, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Well, where are the weapons that the UN said he had, and that Saddam himself admitted he had at one point? Things like that do not just vanish.

Terrye on June 5, 2010 at 12:45 PM

He will not be confirmed…

Khun Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM

Can you imagine how the left will react to this?

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Same as always. Smoke another joint. Start screaming incoherently.

VegasRick on June 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM

And why are we still looking to find the next unlucky candidate to get all the blame and little authority, rather than undoing the 9/11 Commission “reform” and fixing the very obvious problems in organization, lines of authority, and turf battles in the American intelligence community? Blair’s resignation gives us an opportunity to fix those problems, but Obama seems intent on making them even worse.

Even if they tried to fix those problems, chances are they would just create new ones. That is what got us to this point.

Terrye on June 5, 2010 at 12:46 PM

Off subject but has Hot Air forgotten today is the sixth anniversary of Ronald Reagan’s death? I thought there would be a nice post in honor of President Reagan today.

Lizzy on June 5, 2010 at 12:47 PM

wait I thought Green Zone with Matt Damon was a true story. The WMD’s never existed. It was all a big CIA lie

/sarc.

offroadaz on June 5, 2010 at 12:48 PM

As a former intelligence analyst who studied the problem, I suspect the general was right about WMD and Syria. But that’s an assessment, not a fact. As for Clapper, I recall that when he became director of DIA he had a reputation for reorganizing every command he was assigned to. He decided DIA was too top heavy with management and wanted to create a better “tooth to tail” ratio of management to actual analysts. So he eliminated the lowest levels of management (including my supervisory job), thereby adding immeasurably to the burden of those who had to assume supervision for two to three times as many employees, and then added a couple of more levels of middle management. In other words, he screwed up the concept. I could never understand it. But he was good with multicultural diversity and equal employment, saying DIA should look like America. So we were flooded with women and minority recruits. He also ensured, by policy, that only women and minorities could get a promotion. For all that, he received some kind of EEO award. When I took him to task for his meaningless agency “vision” statement (ever the modern bureaucrat, he had to have one), he told me it’s a good thing he isn’t thin skinned. Anyway, I liked Gen. Clapper. Being the consumate bureaucrat, I’m sure he would do well as DNI.

NNtrancer on June 5, 2010 at 12:52 PM

This sounds like a pretty powerless job with no hiring/firing authority. As long as Ayers, Wright, or Van Jones is not put there, who cares?

Of course, if the DEMS are against him, then I’m for him.

GnuBreed on June 5, 2010 at 12:53 PM

I don’t care which side you’re on, the fact is that the intel we had on Iraq prior to the war was was so bad, it was at Obamian levels.

If he did think so, well… a lot of other people did.

reaganaut on June 5, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Why would Obama choose someone who has spent the last couple of years attempting to make the position weaker?

Because it’s totally in line with his philosophy.

The intelligence, CIA included, as we knew it is finished.

The departments are a bunch of lawyered up nonentities. Be very afraid. Breitbart will keep us informed on this travesty, to the best he can. Our country is no longer being looked out for. The buffoon in chief is a world guy. It’s the world who loves him, and he needs a lot of loving.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2010 at 12:54 PM

However, there was no real reason to cart anything else out of Iraq just prior to the invasion.

Um…. not to be “that guy”, but didn’t Bush’s NSA types admit that massive shipments were made out of Iraq to Syria in early 2003, and didn’t the satellite imagery even SHOW it?

And then, didn’t Israel have some “raids” on certain Syrian “holding facilities” in eastern Syria thought to possess wmds a few years ago?

And, isn’t there sworn testimony of the few units assigned to Anbar in western Iraq (the syrian border) in the early days of the war admitting that such shipments were making it to Syria?

Move along, Ed, nothing to see here. You’re totally right, Ed. I apologize!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

battleoflepanto1571 on June 5, 2010 at 12:54 PM

I forgot Clinton blew up all the wmds along with a slew of camels.

CWforFreedom on June 5, 2010 at 12:55 PM

The Dems and the media (birm) have never put any effort into helping our country even approaching that which they have put into inventing a reality that could be used to bash President George W. Bush, and call into disrepute the motives they now laud as noble in Obama.

If you read it in the traditional media, or hear it from a Democrat, it is probably a lie.

drunyan8315 on June 5, 2010 at 12:58 PM

Obama seems intent on making them even worse.

This could rightly be said about EVERY decision made by the current CiC. If a decision needs to made, count on The Won to make the choice that will be most harmful to the United States of America.

oldleprechaun on June 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM

If he did think so, well… a lot of other people did.

reaganaut on June 5, 2010 at 12:53 PM

Maybe he actually “knows” it is there. Nancy Pelosi thinks it is there, too. Why would she go there to schmooz their fearless leader a while back? Nancy knows a lot more than she lets on.

BetseyRoss on June 5, 2010 at 12:59 PM

I always thought Syria would be a nice place for the Palestinians to relocate.

John the Libertarian on June 5, 2010 at 1:00 PM

“but Panetta just won a big turf war with the departing Blair, which would have made that move a demotion in practical terms.”

So basically playing “politics” trumps the security of the nation.

O/T, why do 44% still support this clown?

DSchoen on June 5, 2010 at 1:02 PM

RobCon, I think you meant Venona files, but you’re right.
Now then, the evidence was in seven years ago and it was suppressed for some reason and by whom I don’t know. The information came from sources in the middle east and not from U.S. sources. All I know is that there were several Democrats on the WMD bandwagon including Hillary and dumb-ass John Kerry. Satellite imagery showed several truck loads being moved and I don’t think they were shipping dates but getting boots on the ground over there to take a look is a hazardous operation at best. Then, when they couldn’t find them, the game changed and the press went on a feeding frenzy which is normal but still stupid. Remember Chemical Ali and the Kurds? Is there any reason to think there could not have been an escalation? I’ll leave to to you.

LarryG on June 5, 2010 at 1:07 PM

There is evidence, satillite photos of trucks being loaded at known WMD Iraqi depots, then the trucks being seen in Syria. Also Turkish, Israli, and defecting Iraqi intelligence stating that WMD were indeed moved to Syria.
http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514/
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2005/12/iraqs_wmd_moved_to_syria.html
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=5360

But this event didn’t feed the MSM narrative of “blood for oil”/Haliburton, so down the memoryhole it went.

Rebar on June 5, 2010 at 1:11 PM

OT: now they want to dumb down the spelling bee

ConservativePartyNow on June 5, 2010 at 1:14 PM

However, there was no real reason to cart anything else out of Iraq just prior to the invasion.

Um…. not to be “that guy”, but didn’t Bush’s NSA types admit that massive shipments were made out of Iraq to Syria in early 2003, and didn’t the satellite imagery even SHOW it?

And then, didn’t Israel have some “raids” on certain Syrian “holding facilities” in eastern Syria thought to possess wmds a few years ago?

And, isn’t there sworn testimony of the few units assigned to Anbar in western Iraq (the syrian border) in the early days of the war admitting that such shipments were making it to Syria?

battleoflepanto1571 on June 5, 2010 at 12:54 PM

Bingo. This is common knowledge in the military. I don’t get why Ed scoffs at this.

But then again, I never got why AP pretended there was no NAFTA Superhighway either, when those of us who LIVE here know for a fact there was!

Some things are really not conspiracy theories at all, they are really unpleasant FACTS.

Redhead Infidel on June 5, 2010 at 1:16 PM

Can you imagine how the left will react to this?

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM

That’s easy. They’ll ignore this story and keep saying Bush lied.

DrAllecon on June 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM

Things get curiouser and curiouser. Did we just fall down a rabbit hole?

Disturb the Universe on June 5, 2010 at 1:20 PM

LarryG on June 5, 2010 at 1:07 PM

Yes, something changed drastically. Scott Ritter. I think Ritter was blackmailed into changing his story.

Connie on June 5, 2010 at 1:26 PM

Saddam, Uday, and Qusay could not be reached for comment.

Fortunately, however, Helen Thomas is available to state their position.

Christien on June 5, 2010 at 1:29 PM

And the Canadians now have the tons of yellow cake uranium that Saddam had, but according to the Libtards:

1. Was left over from his first attempt to build a reactor that the Israelis took care of…guess he kept it because yellow was his favorite color.

2. It was no big deal anyway…all sorts of countries have African uranium sitting around.

3. The totally impartial, competent IAEA knew all about it…so…well, they knew about it, no secret-so there! So…if it didn’t alarm the IAEA then it shouldn’t concern us.

Dr. ZhivBlago on June 5, 2010 at 1:34 PM

Ed:

Blair’s resignation gives us an opportunity to fix those problems, but Obama seems intent on making them even worse.

That’s because the 9-11 report has become a sacred cow to Democrats, one they can’t abandon. The report is seriously flawed in both it’s analysis and (especially) its recommendations, but the Democrats used it as a weapon to batter the Bush Administration (even though the problems leading to 9/11 largely developed under Clinton) and the Bush Administration inexplicably didn’t push back, instead accepting the report’s recommendations almost uncritically. For Obama to effectively repudiate it now would not only lead to attacks from the Republicans (turnabout being fair play) but also Democrats who’ve invested their reputations in the report.

Obama doesn’t have the political strength to do that. (Nor, I think, does he really care.)

irishspy on June 5, 2010 at 1:41 PM

“Blair’s resignation gives us an opportunity to fix those problems, but Obama seems intent on making them even worse.”

Yes, ObamAyres does seem intent on making things worse — but this choice might have unintended consequences for his agenda. Clapper sounds like a guy who actually could fix “the very obvious problems in organization, lines of authority, and turf battles in the American intelligence community”. Especially if he reads science fiction as well as military history and is a sneaky bastard besides.

starboardhelm on June 5, 2010 at 1:42 PM

does this guy golf?

jus checkin…

ted c on June 5, 2010 at 1:49 PM

One of the maddening things about having the U.S. to do that fan dance at the U.N. is that it took away any element of surprise about an invasion of Iraq.
Saddam had plenty of time to cover his WMD tracks- it was the equivilent of criminals flushing their drugs down the toilet when the cops announce they’re at the door.

jjshaka on June 5, 2010 at 1:49 PM

I recall thinking this at the time and being absolutely screeched at by leftists – the same kind of blind raging moral superiority “argument” they make on SB 1070.

motionview on June 5, 2010 at 1:51 PM

If this guy is even half competent it would be close to a first for the Obama white house.

duff65 on June 5, 2010 at 2:12 PM

Saddam’s Christian Liutenant in command said as much years ago. They gutted some passenger planes and flew them over with Russian cover. But my question is: what the hell is this amateur gonna do about it?

abobo on June 5, 2010 at 12:42 PM

Georges Sada

Disturb the Universe on June 5, 2010 at 2:17 PM

However, there was no real reason to cart anything else out of Iraq just prior to the invasion.

Sorry, Ed, I have to disagree with this. Saddam wanted to make Bush look like a fool in the eyes of the world. What better way to do it than this?

Del Dolemonte on June 5, 2010 at 2:24 PM

However, there was no real reason to cart anything else out of Iraq just prior to the invasion.

Um…. not to be “that guy”, but didn’t Bush’s NSA types admit that massive shipments were made out of Iraq to Syria in early 2003, and didn’t the satellite imagery even SHOW it?

And then, didn’t Israel have some “raids” on certain Syrian “holding facilities” in eastern Syria thought to possess wmds a few years ago?

And, isn’t there sworn testimony of the few units assigned to Anbar in western Iraq (the syrian border) in the early days of the war admitting that such shipments were making it to Syria? battleoflepanto1571 on June 5, 2010 at 12:54 PM

Bingo. This is common knowledge in the military. I don’t get why Ed scoffs at this.

But then again, I never got why AP pretended there was no NAFTA Superhighway either, when those of us who LIVE here know for a fact there was!

Some things are really not conspiracy theories at all, they are really unpleasant FACTS.Redhead Infidel on June 5, 2010 at 1:16 PM

I don’t get your point BOP and RI. I read Ed as saying of course it was WMD that Saddam shipped to Syria pre-war. And rather than the Bush administration admitting it, (per BOP) they should have been emphasizing it as a fact which supported the decision to go to war rather than detracting from it as BOP seems to be suggesting.

If Hussein had not been removed, Iraq today would be developing nuclear weapons. The communications performance of the Bush administration in justifying that very necessary war was pathetic.

Basilsbest on June 5, 2010 at 2:31 PM

That’s because the 9-11 report has become a sacred cow to Democrats, one they can’t abandon. The report is seriously flawed in both it’s analysis and (especially) its recommendations, but the Democrats used it as a weapon to batter the Bush Administration (even though the problems leading to 9/11 largely developed under Clinton) and the Bush Administration inexplicably didn’t push back, instead accepting the report’s recommendations almost uncritically.

irishspy on June 5, 2010 at 1:41 PM

Spot on.

The 9/11 “Commission” was a joke, because its real purpose was to allow the Democrats to deflect the blame for the attacks from the guy whose fault it really was, namely Bill Clinton.

Hence, the Democrats snuck onto the “Commission” a “Commissioner” whose actions as a member of Clinton’s Justice Dept. helped to contribute to the intel breakdown leading to the attacks. That was solely so she could not be questioned under oath about her actions. When one of the witnesses correctly noted this in his testimony before the panel, he was loudly shouted down by all of the Clinton Kneepads in the visitors gallery.

Likewise, the “Commission” also placed a very good friend onf Hillary’s on the panel, namely Democrat Lawyer Richard Ben-Veniste, who years later would succeed in censoring the TV movie “Road to 9/11″ to protect Hillary’s husband.

And during the “Commission” hearings, Chimpy Bush was widely condemned by the Left for bringing Cheney along with him when he provided his testimony. At the same time, the Left remained utterly silent when Clinton refused to testify to the same “Commission” unless he had his consigliere Bruce Lindsey joined at the naval with him.

And then there is Sandy Berger…

Del Dolemonte on June 5, 2010 at 2:33 PM

I’m with this guy, and those who agree…that Saddam’s Bio/Chem stockpile was sent out to Syria weeks before the invasion. It should be simple common sense.

Saddam’s govt. produced that 11th hour “report” of thousands of pages and CD-ROM’s of supposed proof of their WMD dismantle. We know Saddam used WMD before, ask the Kurds. And we’ve never found the supposed “spot in the desert” where Saddam claimed to have dumped all his Bio/Chem stock.

JetBoy on June 5, 2010 at 2:50 PM

Where are they?

After looking at the reports and satellite imagery via Google Earth the ‘where’ question boils down to a very few places and this is my basic list. Just using open source materials one can start to find the ‘where’ and I’ve gotten some pointers to new GE imagery so may be able to give a good look at the final place, in my copious spare time.

Imagery does not tell the whole story, but it can sure lead you to some conclusions about the facility types and utilization going on inside Syria. Syria is a non-signatory to the Chemical Weapons Convention and is suspected of skirting both the NPT and Bioweapons Convention… and they do have the facility types for the former and the latter may have gotten a boost when Syria wanted to start a pharma industry and then decided not to after the equipment was delivered.

Would Saddam send the stuff to Syria?

We certainly haven’t found it.

The Iraqis haven’t found it.

And at least one official from the Old Iraqi AF remembers shuttling stuff to Syria right before OIF started… plus a lovely Russian special weapons team was sighted right before OIF along with Russian cargo aircraft leaving Iraq.

There have also been a couple of complaints from Africa about Syria storing stuff there.

You’ve gots your choices, but one would think that thousands of gallons of chemicals and entire factories full of equipment might have turned up somewhere by now.

ajacksonian on June 5, 2010 at 2:59 PM

You’ve gots your choices, but one would think that thousands of gallons of chemicals and entire factories full of equipment might have turned up somewhere by now.

ajacksonian on June 5, 2010 at 2:59 PM

yeah it did…

Monday, April 26, 2004 Posted: 3:54 PM EDT (1954 GMT)

Jordanian officials seized tons of chemicals in what they say was an Al Qaeda chemical attack plot.

AMMAN, Jordan (CNN) — Jordanian authorities said Monday they have broken up an alleged al Qaeda plot that would have unleashed a deadly cloud of chemicals in the heart of Jordan’s capital, Amman.

The plot would have been more deadly than anything al Qaeda has done before, including the September 11 attacks, according to the Jordanian government.

In a series of raids, the Jordanians said, they seized 20 tons of chemicals and numerous explosives. Also seized were three trucks equipped with specially modified plows, apparently designed to crash through security barricades.

The first alleged target was the Jordanian intelligence headquarters. The alleged blast was intended to be a big one.

its from cnn, it won’t post with their link…

right4life on June 5, 2010 at 3:08 PM

Well everybody makes mistakes. Didn’t most Americans vote for Obama?

Herb on June 5, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Like all other Arab nations, Syria does not want any Palestinians. But they did let Iraq offload their WMD supplies there before the invasion.

Dhuka on June 5, 2010 at 3:47 PM

A while back Jon Stewart interviewed the former head of the Iraqi air force and he claimed that Saddam had him personally oversee the evacuation of all WMD’s out of Iraq before the war. The audience was dead silent. When Stewart asked why this story was not being told, the man was confident that in time it would. I believe his name is General Gorges Sada (I am sure I butchered the spelling.)

Grafted on June 5, 2010 at 3:59 PM

Syria and Iran were Saddam’s enemies. Why would he cart anything to them? If he carted anything out, those would have been components to build anything bad, and likely sent to the Sudan.

The entire topic is mute. I’m just glad the brute is dead.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2010 at 4:08 PM

Well everybody makes mistakes. Didn’t most Americans vote for Obama?

Herb on June 5, 2010 at 3:40 PM

Actually, 33% of Americans didn’t vote at all in 2008.

Del Dolemonte on June 5, 2010 at 4:21 PM

Syria and Iran were Saddam’s enemies. Why would he cart anything to them? If he carted anything out, those would have been components to build anything bad, and likely sent to the Sudan.

The entire topic is mute. I’m just glad the brute is dead.

Schadenfreude on June 5, 2010 at 4:08 PM

The enemy of my enemy is my friend.

Remember, in Gulf War 1, Saddam sent much of his Air Force to Iran. His enemy.

Del Dolemonte on June 5, 2010 at 4:24 PM

Iraq Air Force General Georges Sada made the same claim, saying two Iraq AF pilots made 56 sorties to Syria in two Boeing 747 freighters carrying WMD in “yellow barrels with skull and crossbones on each barrel.”

http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd-secreted-in-syria-sada-says/26514/

He said that there was also a ground convoy carrying WMDs to Syria.

Tantor on June 5, 2010 at 4:25 PM

Can you imagine how the left will react to this?

Mr. Joe on June 5, 2010 at 12:39 PM

Fail to acknowledge.

maverick muse on June 5, 2010 at 4:39 PM

“The buffoon in chief is a world guy. It’s the world who loves him, and he needs a lot of loving.”

After the world stops lovin’ him what is he gonna do.
Play more golf or fly off to some distant place in search of new worshipers?Really, other than a replacement for Jimmah what is he going to do,he must be depressed as Hell.
Col. David Hackworth was correct about the Pentagon, it is filled with candy ass self loving “Perfumed Princes” senariority does not equal competence.

Col.John Wm. Reed on June 5, 2010 at 4:53 PM

well now. Who on earth breathed oxygen into that admin? We’ve known this all along.

johnnyU on June 5, 2010 at 5:17 PM

Um…. not to be “that guy”, but didn’t Bush’s NSA types admit that massive shipments were made out of Iraq to Syria in early 2003, and didn’t the satellite imagery even SHOW it?

battleoflepanto1571 on June 5, 2010 at 12:54 PM

That’s my understanding of what went down. Everyone thought Saddam had WMD’s, Clinton and Albright, not just Bush. There was a program on History Channel last week regarding the FBI agent that interrogated Saddam and Saddam admitted he had no WMD’s but still had the infrastructure to revamp and get his WMD program up and running again.

Also, according to Saddam he intentionally played his shell game with the UN inspectors to make it seem as though he still had WMD’s as he wanted Iran to beleive he still had them. Regardless if Saddam bluffed, shipped all the WMD’s to Syria (which is what I believe happened) he still had the infrastructure to reconstitute his WMD program and his bluff to fool Iran backfired because Bush called his bluff.

It is only the left that likes to use the fact no WMD’s were found to demonize Bush as lying to go to war, you know the left’s favorite memes of “Bush lied and people died” or “no war for oil.”

Liberty or Death on June 5, 2010 at 5:22 PM

an opportunity to fix … problems, but Obama seems intent on making them even worse.

Isn’t that kinda the whole purpose of his agenda?

Bruno Strozek on June 5, 2010 at 5:34 PM

Israel said that years ago. They showed them trucking it into Syria via satellite on Israeli websites. I watched them.

wi farmgirl on June 5, 2010 at 6:13 PM

All along there has been tantilizing evidence and even testimony re: the removal of WMDs to Syria. Not the least of which was the Russian convoy of trucks which were known to have left for Syria and satellite images of the move.

The left doesn’t give a sh!!

Waterboarding of known masterminds of mass murder bad but killing of suspects and surrounding civillians bad. Minor environmental issue brings out Green Peace and every leftist group, massive oil leak, not so much. No more blood for oil signs….gone. No more out of Iraq marches. No more protests over KIA service members. Nope.depends on the ownership of the oxen

R Square on June 5, 2010 at 7:11 PM

Does this mean the thousands of Kurds who were gassed by Saddam can get up now?

profitsbeard on June 5, 2010 at 7:17 PM

If you read it in the traditional media, or hear it from a Democrat, it is probably a lie.

drunyan8315 on June 5, 2010 at 12:58 PM

It is because Liberalism is a religion.

It worships the ability to control other people, and thus chooses it own morality to get there. The means justifying the ends like lying and hypocrisy are perfectly acceptable tactics. I’ve talked to too many Liberals to not know this is one of their beliefs. Any irrational tactic designed to control others and limit their freedoms (such as Global Warming restrictions) are probably part of this philosophy.
Liberalism is why some Jews have suicidal policies towards Israel, because their loyalties are to their real religion of Liberalism, over that of Judaism.

I could go on and on, but the take home message is that Liberalism is a religion.

scotash on June 5, 2010 at 7:36 PM

Clapper’s NGA observed and reported long convoys of 18-wheelers exiting from central Iraq to Syria (believed to be en route the Syrian-controlled Bekaa Valley) prior to March 2003. At the time, NGA reports presumed WMD dispersal. Note: The NGA produces and reports on actual “pictures.” Imagery. Indisputable. Yet the pre-positioned Anti-Bush/Wrong War clamor had already become entrenched in the MSM. The “Bush lied…” and “No WMD” memes were already intractable. Sadam’s WMD arsenal was real. Clapper knows it. And any objective observer knows it too.

BJ Phisch on June 5, 2010 at 9:53 PM

I remember being terribly frustrated during years ago that Bush NEVER, EVER, fought back with the intelligence that was PUBLIC FREAKING KNOWLEDGE early on that there were convoys of trucks leaving Iraq military complexes into Syria. I remember seeing it on the news and reading about it, all this before the invasion.

Bush was an arrogant idiot who didn’t seem to see the importance of fighting back against the waves of B.S. coming from the left and that a good P.R. campaign during war time is just as important as making sure the troops on the front-lines have guns and ammo. It was one of the things I was most dissatisfied with about him. (that and his massive expansion of domestic spending and government expansion. Remove being pro-life, hawkish on defense, and not wanting to tax the rich into the poorhouse and he was actually pretty liberal.)

flyfishingdad on June 6, 2010 at 2:27 AM

I remember being terribly frustrated during years ago that Bush NEVER, EVER, fought back with the intelligence that was PUBLIC FREAKING KNOWLEDGE early on that there were convoys of trucks leaving Iraq military complexes into Syria. I remember seeing it on the news and reading about it, all this before the invasion.

Bush was an arrogant idiot who didn’t seem to see the importance of fighting back against the waves of B.S. coming from the left and that a good P.R. campaign during war time is just as important as making sure the troops on the front-lines have guns and ammo. . .

flyfishingdad on June 6, 2010 at 2:27 AM

I too was frustrated to the point of pounding the table at President Bush’s seemingly inexplicable refusal to fight back against the propaganda war of the Left. I suspect there were two reasons: (1) The middle levels at CIA and State were liberals who were determined to undermine the Bush administration (witness all the leaks to the NYT), so attempts to prove that the WMD were moved would have been refuted, whether true or not; (2) President Bush is an uncommonly decent man who believed that it was beneath the dignity of the Presidency to engage in internecine battles in the press. That was a mistake, but it does not make him “an idiot.”

George W. Bush’s approach was to do what he thought was right, and never mind the criticism and lies from the opposition. History, he assumed, would be the judge. And in that, he will probably be proved correct, unless the Left becomes so entrenched in power that they control the history for the next century.

I wonder if this General Clapper has the stones to sit before the Congressional Democrats and admit that President Bush did not lie, that Saddam did have WMD, and he had to be taken out—doubtful, I must admit.

MrLynn on June 6, 2010 at 7:29 AM

I just watched an interesting special on the guy that interrogated Saddam. In the end, Saddam told him that he had been bluffing all along because he believed Iran would invade if they thought he had no WMD. However, he did maintain his capability to start building them again. This seems plausible to me, and a big strategic mistake on Saddam’s part. Faced with Iran invading if you don’t have them and the US invading if you do, I think the choice is clear.

Kafir on June 6, 2010 at 8:20 AM

I’m with this guy, and those who agree…that Saddam’s Bio/Chem stockpile was sent out to Syria weeks before the invasion. It should be simple common sense.

He had more than weeks. Its measurable in years of how long he had. He kept buying time, just like Iran is currently doing.

johnnyU on June 6, 2010 at 8:35 AM

Ha’aretz has revived the mystery surrounding the inability to find weapons of mass destruction stockpiles in Iraq, the most commonly cited justification for Operation Iraqi Freedom and one of the most embarrassing episodes for the United States. Satellite photos of a suspicious site in Syria are providing new support for the reporting of a Syrian journalist who briefly rocked the world with his reporting that Iraq’s WMD had been sent to three sites in Syria just before the invasion commenced.

The newspaper reveals that a 200 square-kilometer area in northwestern Syria has been photographed by satellites at the request of a Western intelligence agency at least 16 times, the most recent being taken in January. The site is near Masyaf, and it has at least five installations and hidden paths leading underneath the mountains. This supports the reporting of Nizar Nayouf, an award-winning Syrian journalist who said in 2004 that his sources confirmed that Saddam Hussein’s WMDs were in Syria.

One of the three specific sites he mentioned was an underground base underneath Al-Baida, which is one kilometer south of Masyaf. This is a perfect match. The suspicious features in the photos and the fact that a Western intelligence agency is so interested in the site support Nayouf’s reporting, showing that his sources in Syria did indeed have access to specific information about secret activity that is likely WMD-related.

from American Thinker 6 June 2010.

16 times – someone in the West is awfully interested in that site.

journeyintothewhirlwind on June 6, 2010 at 11:43 PM

DNI choice believes Syrians have Saddam’s WMD

Ruh roh. Deep doo-doo ahead.

petefrt on May 28, 2013 at 10:55 AM