Skip to comments.Saddam's foreign minister was CIA source: NBC
Posted on 03/20/2006 6:13:32 PM PST by AZRepublican
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - In the period before the Iraq war, Saddam Hussein's foreign minister Naji Sabri, was a secret paid source of the CIA, "NBC Nightly News" reported on Monday.
Citing unnamed current and former U.S. intelligence officials, NBC said Sabri provided details of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction that turned out to be more accurate than CIA estimates.
Intelligence sources said Sabri was paid more than $100,000 through an intermediary in a September 2002 deal brokered by the French, NBC reported.
Sabri may have thought he was working with the French, but some U.S. intelligence officials believe he knew it was the CIA, NBC said.
The CIA questioned Sabri through a go-between about Saddam's WMD program, the report said.
According to the intelligence sources, Sabri indicated that Saddam had no significant weapons program and that while the deposed Iraqi leader desperately wanted a nuclear bomb it would have taken more time for him to build one than the CIA's several-months-to-a-year estimate, NBC reported.
Both the CIA and Sabri said Saddam had stockpiled chemical weapons, but both were wrong, NBC said.
WMD were the main justification for President George W. Bush's decision to invade Iraq three years ago, but no such weapons have been found.
Citing intelligence sources, NBC said the CIA's brief relations with Sabri ended after he refused to defect to the United States. The agency had been hoping for a public relations coup, the network said.
Sabri was not named among the former senior Iraqi officials on the U.S. most-wanted list of 55 Iraqi fugitives.
NBC said it found Sabri teaching at a university in the Middle East, but was not revealing his location for security reasons.
Sabri declined to be interviewed or to comment as did the CIA, NBC said, adding that the agency also would not say why it did not listen to Sabri's warnings.
A CIA representative had no comment on the report.
What are we to make of this?
Unnamed current and former sorces- but of course. Are there any other kind?
If Sabri were an American, you can damn well bet NBC would give up his location.
What do you think? Bush knew, therefore he lied.
Sounds to me like the Big Media is bracing for the upcoming battle between what is factual and what is not (read: Right and Left, respectively), by affirming the barely-able-to-sustain lies that have been spouted all over the place.
And they know this how??
"Sabri provided details of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction that turned out to be more accurate than CIA estimates."
"Sabri indicated that Saddam had no significant weapons program and that while the deposed Iraqi leader desperately wanted a nuclear bomb it would have taken more time for him to build one than the CIA's several-months-to-a-year estimate, NBC reported."
"Both the CIA and Sabri said Saddam had stockpiled chemical weapons, but both were wrong, NBC said."
"Sabri declined to be interviewed or to comment as did the CIA, NBC said, adding that the agency also would not say why it did not listen to Sabri's warnings."
Uh, the warnings about him stockpiling chemical weapons or the warnings that Saddam desperately wanted a nuclear bomb?
No doubt they have a real forged memo somewhere. Maybe Dan Rather is working for them
Porter Goss probably wants to commit suicide working at that hack organization.
We're amatuers. Better wait on the pro's, like Chrissy Matthews to telll us what this means.
Maybe the newsmedia know the Bush Administration is getting ready for the biggest rope-a-dope in political history.
Maybe some of our former enemies are getting ready to give it up.
Or pull a Custer...
Blan Dather: "Mary, get in here with those files"
I hope for his sake that he's well hidden and highly protected.
Everyone know NBC are the experts on WMD /sarc
Sabri said there were chemical weapons...
I believe him...
But, because of the "let's play footsie with the UN" crowd, Sabri and Saddam had plenty of time to move them..
Bottom line, Bush did not lie...this is what Sabri and the CIA told him..
Wasn't there a general who very recently wrote a book?
Tariq Aziz knows all.
Thanks for saving me a cut-and-paste. My take is that the CIA is playing CYA, as always, with the help of the MSM. They were right -- sort of, by not listening to the "warnings" of whatever -- but Bush was totally, absolutely, incorrigibly wrong.
Saddam did, but he didn't. It's all in focus now. /sarc
Like hell, Bush knew. Karl Rove didn't even think there would be an insurgency after we knocked out Saddam. I know first-hand because I questioned him about it.
LOL, yes they all lied to go into Iraq so everyone could find out they lied.
Makes sense to me!
Then, it goes on to say: " According to the intelligence sources, Sabri indicated that Saddam had no significant weapons program and that while the deposed Iraqi leader desperately wanted a nuclear bomb it would have taken more time for him to build one than the CIA's several-months-to-a-year estimate, NBC reported. "
Maybe he's down playing it a little?, Taking the cash and lacing lies with a sprinkle of truth? But then:
" Citing intelligence sources, NBC said the CIA's brief relations with Sabri ended after he refused to defect to the United States. The agency had been hoping for a public relations coup, the network said. "
A falling out perhaps? But strangest of all:
" Sabri was not named among the former senior Iraqi officials on the U.S. most-wanted list of 55 Iraqi fugitives.
Maybe he is still performing services for the CIA?
Here is what to make of all this - A complete false-premise the MSM / DEM's will not stop using......NOR will the GOP/RNC stand up and fight against.
The WMD equation was merely one of more then a dozen reasons we moved on Iraq (to remove Saddam).
If Sabri was so knowledgeable, why did Sabri get this wrong?????
EXACTLY! Fercryinoutloud! We bitch and moan because the LSM doesn't report the truth. Then they friggin put it in print that the CIA was warned by Saddam's henchmen that they were stockpiling chem weapons and trying to get nukes.....and WE hardly notice it!
Most people read the article, see its slant, and think it must be anti-Bush. The facts of the article are PRO-BUSH, but written in plain sight to hide them?
There is no sedition or treason anymore.
These people at NBC are the lowest scum of the Earth.
WELL where is bagdad bob I am sure he is willing to tell all for those who want something to write...
And wouldn't you know... their great "source" has connections to the French.
No? You mean it isn't so long as said "agent" supports the idiot party line?
The article is poorly written. I think it is saying that :
Saddam had no active program but stockpiles of chemical weapons.
No nukes, but the capability to build one in less than a year? That to me would indicate a nuke program.
George Tenet needs to explain this...
Why is NBC putting our intelligence assets at risk by identifying them. Loose Lips sink ships.
Even after the fact, the man's life may be in danger from his former comrades.
Not to mention how other current intel assets and people we try to recruit in the future will take this revelation--e.g. The US will not or cannot keep its secrets, so my life may be on the line.
Old tricks are the best tricks. Double agents are nothing new. This is counter intelligence effort to discedit the US and it allies. The old Iraqi regime was using him to divert attention and is probably still doing so. They are still putting up a fight so why not work the media angle.
Isn't it more than just a little suspect that this "undisclosed report" comes to light right after the release of the Saddam tapes and documents?
At the time, would his word have been sufficient to counter the intelligence of nearly the entire world, given that he was addressing the UN General Assembly claiming Bush was lying and starting the war for oil?
Still, comparing what Saddam said on the tapes and what this "source" said back then, it appears they do not match. Maybe this "source" knew more than Saddam did himself?
We went to Iraq because Saddam failed to abide by the cease-fire agreement and because of his ties with terrorists. WMD became the issue which helped us decide to go sooner rather than later when Saddam would be more of a threat to our troops. Even the WH has allowed the left to distort this truth.
I say we invade Iraq and make that SOB prove that there are no WMD's.
Why the hell has this been released? Isn't this still classified?
Didn't you get the memo from the Democrats?
Nothing is classified anymore except Val Plame's desk duties at the CIA!
Ahh, yeah, I forgot!
"Not to mention how other current intel assets and people we try to recruit in the future will take this revelation--e.g. The US will not or cannot keep its secrets, so my life may be on the line."
Amazing effort by our media and people inside the intelligence community to damage US intelligence interests.
Why exactly is the CIA viewed as being adversarial to the WH? what is the political background there?
After 9-11, we declared war on three sponsors of global terrorism. After securing Afghanistan and bringing Pakistan on board, we took out the only real standing army in the area that might come to Iran's aid when the campaign against it begins.
Israel should rename a Holy City after Bush.
It sounds like utter BS. Why would the agency encourage a key source to defect. It makes no sense, either in an institutional sense nor in the selfish motivations of the CIA bureaucrats running this agent.
If the guy had defected, it would not have been the CIA that would get the credit.
Sickening. It's just like when 60 minutes gave the exact location of where a Danish cartoonist was in hiding in the US.
I think there are several things that are involved in the CIA hostility to the WH:
1.WH attempt to reform CIA after WMD debacle by appointing an outsider to head the Agency. Some heads have rolled and others have retired.
2.An entrenched group in the Agency who might be called 'the enervators.' They always find ways to fuzz up the intel with conflicting information so that nothing can be done but generate more reports.
3.A true lack of qualified Mid East experts and Humint personnel in the area was exposed by several identified intel errors including WMD which led to 1 above. So there are some who are threatened by this exposure.
4. There are some who feel that if the WH asks questions about intel that this creates pressure on the Agency to meet WH expectations--although investigations by Congress haven't turned up anyone who says they were directly pressured.
Good observations. I think they have a political motive also. They are outright lying about their assessments regarding Iraq.
The Intelligence they provided in the 90's lead to the following US policies and actions:
12 year deployment of roughly 28,000 troops, 30 naval vessels, 200 military aircraft and other equipment at a cost of $14.5 billion per year.
$150 million no bid contract to BioPort, to innoculate all personnel serving in the Gulf against Antrax attacks.
UN economic sanctions against Iraq which caused 200,000 to 600,000 Iraqi deaths.
The airstrikes the Al Shifa plant in Sudan against Iraqi WMD facilities during DESERT FOX..
Ultimately, the resumption of the War in Iraq, after Tenet claimed it was a "Slam Dunk"
Thats the legacy of the CIA WMD Analysts such as Val Plame.