Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UN Weapons Inspector Bill Tierney weighs in [drops bomb, on Hannity & Colmes]!
Fox News Channel ^ | 1/27/03 | Hannity & Colmes

Posted on 01/27/2003 7:05:13 PM PST by 4Liberty

Edited on 04/22/2004 12:35:25 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

Former UN weapons inspector Bill Tierney was interviewed by Mr. Colmes a few minutes ago. Colmes shows him a clip of IAEA Director General Mohamed ElBaradei stating that, to date, information obtained shows no evidence of nuclear weapons development in Iraq: "To conclude, we have to date found no evidence that Iraq has revived its nuclear weapon program since the elimination of the program in the 1990s." Colmes cuts back to Tierney and says: "Do you agree with that assessment?" Tierney says: "No." Colmes: "Well, do you know something that he doesn't?" Tierney then says, "YES." Everyone on the HC set went nuts, - asking "What do you know?! Will you tell us what information you have!?" Tierney said "Yes" that he would tell them; and that he would "make the information known at the proper time." Hannity jumps in and says, "Well, we expect to have you back on Hannity & Colmes VERY soon!"


(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nukes; warlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last
wow. Wonder what's up?.......
1 posted on 01/27/2003 7:05:13 PM PST by 4Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Talk about a cliffhanger!

But I wonder what he knows being a former weapons inspector. This should be interesting.

2 posted on 01/27/2003 7:06:27 PM PST by wimpycat (Hands off my Moral Compass!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
i wonder if a smoking-nuclearbomb is enough for the liberals?...never mind-dumb question
3 posted on 01/27/2003 7:07:13 PM PST by InvisibleChurch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Tune in next week. Same Fox time. Same Fox channel.
4 posted on 01/27/2003 7:07:36 PM PST by Bogey78O (It's not a Zero it's an "O")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
But a nuclear bomb is useless without a missile. Just like chemical warheads.

/sarcasm
5 posted on 01/27/2003 7:08:24 PM PST by Bogey78O (It's not a Zero it's an "O")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Commie Colmes wouldn't admit that Iraq had nukes if he watched the fireball over Tel-Aviv with his own eyes.
6 posted on 01/27/2003 7:08:42 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump
7 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:06 PM PST by Delmarksman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Thanks for the post! This is getting more interesting and love closing the door on France, Germany, Russia, and China on their more time for inspectors like a couple of months or more!

What are those four countries hiding? In fact why are the RATs behaving like they are attacking the President about taking out Saddam? Is there something to connect the clintons and Iraq?

This inquiring mind wants to know just what is driving those four countries and the RATS!
8 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:11 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Tell em to keep up the pressure on Fox. Thanks for the post!

The Democrats' Case Against Saddam Hussein (Dems nailed, yet again)

Headline Rundown and links on Iraq - Things the democrats have conviently forgot...

Saddam Abused His Last Chance, Clinton -clear and present danger to safety of people everywhere 1998

Gore repeats that Saddam MUST GO - June 2000

What the democrats want you to forget

Iraq is a Regional Threat, capable of as much as 200 tons of VX nerve agent (1999 Clinton report)

Czech military reports say iraq has smallpox virus in weapons stockpile (and camelpox)

2/7/1998 : Arab media: Clinton will strike due to sex scandal (&links to tons of arab news on clinton)

Iraqi chemical weapons buildup reported (Sept 2001 Report)

Clinton, Gore rally domestic support for strike at Iraq, "unholy axis" (1998 Must read)

9 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:11 PM PST by chance33_98 (Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
What Bill Tierney says or does is interesting. But not as interesting as listening to or watching Colin Powell. Powell knows something too. It's obvious.
10 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:14 PM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Maybe they'll drop it on Hollywood.
11 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:24 PM PST by Edmund Burke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
This guy's been saying this on Hannity's radio show for weeks, nothing new.
12 posted on 01/27/2003 7:09:27 PM PST by j_tull (Osama Mama MUST be defeated!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Predicting his information will include the names of the compromised inspectors.
13 posted on 01/27/2003 7:10:32 PM PST by gov_bean_ counter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
My guess is that some of the UN inspectors were compromised (paid off with "hush money" deposited in Swiss bank accounts).
14 posted on 01/27/2003 7:11:34 PM PST by SamAdams76 ('Dangerous or not, a real sunrise is mighty welcome')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Why are all these people withholding damning information about Iraq? What are they and we waiting for? I don't believe that the American people are lessening their support for war with Iraq it is just their impatience and fear about when and how this all will happen. GET EM NOW!
15 posted on 01/27/2003 7:11:53 PM PST by For the Unborn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chance33_98
Is Tierney's comment a hint concerning contents of W's speech??
16 posted on 01/27/2003 7:12:38 PM PST by 4Liberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
Then they will say "Well, there was only the one nuke...it's not as though the US hasn't used nukes or killed people with bombs...it wouldn't be right to cause the deaths of MORE innocent people who have SUFFERED ENOUGH alrady. Let's denounce our imperialistic ways, beat our swords into ploughshares, and redistribute all our income; then we will all live in peace together, with free college and free healthcare and free housing. Free Mumia!"
17 posted on 01/27/2003 7:12:45 PM PST by hellinahandcart
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
from NewsMax.com

Friday Dec. 6, 2002; 11:05 a.m. EST

Saddam Has Nukes, Ex-Weapons Inspector Says

A former U.N. weapons inspector who was renowned for his ability to ferret out Iraqi weapons violations during the late 1990's charged point blank on Thursday that Saddam Hussein now has nuclear weapons.

"I have no doubt that he has nukes," Bill Tierney told nationally syndicated radio host Sean Hannity.

"He's going to use non-persistent chemicals against his own people to put down an insurrection," the ace inspector predicted, before adding chillingly, "He'll use bio and nukes against us."

Stunned by the revelation, the radio host pressed for confirmation:

HANNITY: You have no doubt that he has nukes? Or he's close (to getting them)?

TIERNEY: I have no doubt that he has nukes.

HANNITY: You think he has nuclear weapons.

TIERNEY: Yes.

HANNITY: Why are you the only (former weapons inspector) saying that?

TIERNEY: Well, there's a few more. One reason why is, during the 90's in the intelligence community, there was just a pathological risk aversion. The reason being was that our president at the time, Bill Clinton, fundamentally changed the purpose of the United States military from fighting and winning wars to crisis management and keeping his poll numbers up.

Now, if you're not out to win, there's no need to take risks. And so what you found is people being very guarded about everything, every kind of assessment you could make. (End of Excerpt)

Before he ran afoul of the system Tierney had built a powerful reputation for credibility, prompting the U.N. to personally recruit him in 1996 for the task of inspecting some of Saddam's most sensitive suspected weapons facilities.

But he was forced to resign two years later amidst charges he was spying for the U.S. Tierney now says he was locked out for doing what he figured was his job - giving the Pentagon targets for military action.

"What I did was identified those people who have sold their souls to keep Saddam in power. I made it my goal to find every place where they are," Tierney told the London's Daily Mirror in October.

Still, his aggressive pursuit of Saddam's weapons violations won him more than a few fans at U.S. Central Command, where Tierney's boss, Army Brig. Gen. Keith Alexander, wrote in one of his job evaluations: "His ability to consistently seek and identify priority target intelligence information is uncanny and is the characteristic that separates him from his contemporaries."

Tierney told Hannity that a 1997 inspection he attempted to conduct at Saddam's Jabal Makhul presidential palace lead him to suspect that the Iraqi dictator already had the bomb.

"Certain things convinced me that they had proscribed items at this presidential site. That led to the inspection in September 1997 where we were locked out. There was something about that. The just came up and said, 'There will be no inspection. Good Day.' And they walked off."

Tierney said the rebuff was "completely different" from other inspections of sensitive sites, where some sort of compromise was always worked out.

Another sign of sinister activity: As Tierney and his team were being turned away, a U.N. helicopter attempting to overfly Jabal Makhul nearly crashed when an Iraqi official on board lunged at the controls.

"That was a distraction to keep that helicopter from going over to the other side of the mountain to see what they were doing" at the facility, said Tierney.

He described Jabal Makhul as a "gigantic" complex of warehouses and underground tunnels, before noting that last year the London Times reported Saddam was storing nuclear weapons in bunkers in and around the Hamrin Mountains.

"There is only one heavily guarded place in the Hamrin Mountains," Tierney told Hannity. "And that's where we were, Jabal Makhul."

Still, despite efforts by Iraqi officials to keep inspectors away from Jabal Makhul, U.N. officials continued to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt, he complained.

"If you had ambiguous reporting; it could mean he has the nukes, it could mean that he doesn't." he said. "Normally the call would be, 'Oh well, that doesn't confirm so therefore he's still developing. He doesn't have it,'" Tierney said he was told.

The ex-inspector predicted that Saddam would likely use his nukes, "maybe (in) Israel, maybe here."

Calling the current inspections "a complete total waste of time," Tierney warned, "You have a leader of a country who's bent on stealing, killing and destroying. And it is time to resolve the issue and solve it. Crisis management is over."

"There's way too much at stake," he added. "We could lose millions more of our citizens unless we wake up and take care of this."
18 posted on 01/27/2003 7:13:20 PM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Is Tierney's comment a hint concerning contents of W's speech??

The only content he needs is what Clinton already said - which the dems/liberals backed in 1998. Use of force was justified then, more so now. Make em eat their own words.

19 posted on 01/27/2003 7:14:43 PM PST by chance33_98 (Freedom is not Free)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
What are those four countries hiding?

1) Their dirty fingerprints all over Iraq's WMD program.
2) They're merely attempting to protect their economic interests.

In fact why are the RATs behaving like they are attacking the President about taking out Saddam?

Because the Rats know that their only chance of winning in '04 is if A) our war effort is a failure (which is most unlikely), or B) our war effort never gets off the ground, and then they can blame Bush for doing nothing to fight terrorism when the Presidental debates roll around.

Is there something to connect the clintons and Iraq?

OKC. Clinton knew that Iraq was involved, but chose to cover it up so he could conveniently blame the "right wing militia" movement.

20 posted on 01/27/2003 7:16:14 PM PST by Mr. Mojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: j_tull
"This guy's been saying this on Hannity's radio show for weeks, nothing new."

He must be waiting for his book to come out.

21 posted on 01/27/2003 7:17:28 PM PST by blam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Phi, did you happen to read a thread about this guy on here this very day?

I am positive I did and now I can't find it.

22 posted on 01/27/2003 7:19:10 PM PST by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Promises of future evidence are easily made.
23 posted on 01/27/2003 7:19:27 PM PST by per loin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
bttt
24 posted on 01/27/2003 7:20:39 PM PST by ellery
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
I thought I recognized the name too from something I read but I cannot remember what it was. I keep thinking I saw him on TV as well.

Other than that I cannot feature why we would have recognized the name!
25 posted on 01/27/2003 7:21:36 PM PST by PhiKapMom (Bush/Cheney 2004)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: PhiKapMom
Is there something to connect the clintons and Iraq?

I thought it might be too far fetched with all the stuff that has been said about Clinton, but I'm starting wonder about this too. I'm beginning to think that maybe the Germans were somehow involved in the WTC attack too. I think perhaps there has been spun a black and evil web of malice and deceit by our so-called friends. Why else all the secrecy by Bush? If they know something then why won't they just tell us? Why else are the democrats, the Germans so recalcitrant? They must be guilty of something really bad, much worse than selling materials to Saddam. They have survived that scandal before.

26 posted on 01/27/2003 7:25:34 PM PST by virgil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: 4Liberty
Hey Saddam!


27 posted on 01/27/2003 7:26:14 PM PST by BenLurkin (Socialism is immoral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Bogey78O
OMG, The suspense is killing us! This is what you call A slow but painful death!! C'MON W reveal, reveal, reveal, so that we can get a good nights rest!! :) LET'S ROLL!!
28 posted on 01/27/2003 7:26:18 PM PST by RoseofTexas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

Another interesting twist:
(clip)
He works in Tampa for a firm that does background checks on companies and individuals and has worked as a civilian - ironically, for the PENTAGON - HELPING TO INTERROGATE AL-QAIDA AND TALIBAN SUSPECTS AT CAMP X-RAY in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

http://www.tampatrib.com/Features/MGAK7145D9D.html
29 posted on 01/27/2003 7:28:22 PM PST by Gorilla44
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: virgil
I believe the primary reason for the secrecy is exactly as stated: Bush has informers within Iraq who are playing a very dangerous game, and he needs to protect them. (Trust me, we'll need all the friends we can get once we're down there).

If he lets slip even the tiniest hint that someone's involved, that someone will have a nice chat with Saddam and an appointment with their torture team. I don't think I need to tell you what happens next.

D
30 posted on 01/27/2003 7:38:36 PM PST by daviddennis (Visit amazing.com for protest accounts, video & more!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
I personally admire anyone who has the guts to "play the game".
31 posted on 01/27/2003 7:51:05 PM PST by basil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
I believe the primary reason for the secrecy is exactly as stated: Bush has informers within Iraq who are playing a very dangerous game, and he needs to protect them. (Trust me, we'll need all the friends we can get once we're down there)

It is well to remember that. There is no armchair espionage in Iraq, and anyone helping us is deserving of not only protection, but respect.

32 posted on 01/27/2003 7:54:09 PM PST by niteowl77
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
Interesting thought. There are articles about CIA operatives working in Iraq now, doing liaison with the Kurds in the north. Who knows, there may be good guys near this particular palace, monitoring traffic and just waiting to light it up for the bombers. Or looking for a useful idiot or two to kidnap and interrogate.

My other thought is that W is trying to sucker-punch the Rats - by not divulging anything until they all say something really stupid (like after the SOTU speech) and then hitting them with the smoking mushroom cloud.
33 posted on 01/27/2003 7:54:52 PM PST by RandyRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
i wonder if a smoking-nuclearbomb is enough for the liberals?...never mind-dumb question.

Carter wanted to weld the missle hatches closed on our nuclear submarines. Clinton wanted to change our nuclear response protocol from "launch upon confirmed launch" to "launch upon impact". Gore/Hitlery!/Daschle/Edwards/Pelosi et. al. would probably advocate the following protocol: "grovel upon first threat, pay them all off, then surrender".

34 posted on 01/27/2003 7:57:59 PM PST by Mad_Tom_Rackham
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: isthisnickcool
What Bill Tierney says or does is interesting. But not as interesting as listening to or watching Colin Powell. Powell knows something too. It's obvious.

You called it dead on.... couldn't agree more!   FReegards!
35 posted on 01/27/2003 8:01:38 PM PST by GirlShortstop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
Bill Clinton, fundamentally changed the purpose of the United States military from fighting and winning wars to crisis management and keeping his poll numbers up.

I agree with the above statement, but Clinton was not the first "modern" president to use the U.S. military for crisis management and personal ambition, Lyndon Johnson was.

Now, if you're not out to win, there's no need to take risks.

Exactly. Johnson didn't care about victory in V'Nam, only that Saigon did not fall to the Commies before his re-election in 1968. Clinton did not want Bin Laden, he wanted the Nobel Peace Prize for "Peace" (?) in the Middle East and a "Third Term" with Al Gore as the pseudo Prez. Just as Johnson could not get what he wanted by incremental escalation in V'Nam, Clinton's predictable "incrementalism" only gave Muslims the encouragement to invade the U.S.

1975 (the fall of Saigon) and 2001 (Sept. 11th) have a lot more in common than most people think.

36 posted on 01/27/2003 8:07:00 PM PST by elbucko (the second mouse gets the cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Mad_Tom_Rackham
Gore/Hitlery!/Daschle/Edwards/Pelosi et. al. would probably advocate the following protocol: "grovel upon first threat, pay them all off, then surrender".

And we know what comes of that, eh? to wit (to kipple):


IT IS always a temptation to an armed and agile nation,
    To call upon a neighbour and to say:—
“We invaded you last night—we are quite prepared to fight,
    Unless you pay us cash to go away.”

And that is called asking for Dane-geld,
    And the people who ask it explain
That you’ve only to pay ’em the Dane-geld
    And then you’ll get rid of the Dane!

It is always a temptation to a rich and lazy nation,
    To puff and look important and to say:—
“Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you.
    We will therefore pay you cash to go away.”

And that is called paying the Dane-geld;
    But we’ve proved it again and again,
That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld
    You never get rid of the Dane.

It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation,
    For fear they should succumb and go astray,
So when you are requested to pay up or be molested,
    You will find it better policy to says:—

“We never pay any one Dane-geld,
    No matter how trifling the cost,
For the end of that game is oppression and shame,
    And the nation that plays it is lost!” 

Kipling came to mind when I read about what happened to the money we gave the North Koreans...

37 posted on 01/27/2003 8:13:15 PM PST by no-s
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
Another sign of sinister activity: As Tierney and his team were being turned away, a U.N. helicopter attempting to overfly Jabal Makhul nearly crashed when an Iraqi official on board lunged at the controls.

"That was a distraction to keep that helicopter from going over to the other side of the mountain to see what they were doing" at the facility, said Tierney.

I wonder if we have satellite pictures now?

38 posted on 01/27/2003 8:13:33 PM PST by RightField
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep
My other thought is that W is trying to sucker-punch the Rats -

Good point. I certainly hope so.

39 posted on 01/27/2003 8:18:22 PM PST by elbucko (the second mouse gets the cheese.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Edmund Burke
Maybe they'll drop it on Hollywood.

Clooneys house would be a good start
40 posted on 01/27/2003 8:18:42 PM PST by ezoeni
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep; edskid; basil
These people have cojones, that's for sure, and yes, they all deserve our respect and appreciation.

This all being said, does anyone here feel any serious doubt that Saddam:

If you do feel serious doubt, read Saddam's Bombmaker, the absorbing insider account of this nice chap who was dragooned against his better judgement into designing Saddam's atomic bomb program. One of the more amusing facts in the book is that he loves America thanks to his kind treatment while he was educated here. He had to be threatened with the usual torture and murder routine to be forced back to Iraq.

The more I learn about Iraq, the harder it is to accept the European viewpoint that we should have peace through concessions. Strength and bravery are the only languages Saddam understands. All else is weakness.

D

41 posted on 01/27/2003 8:24:12 PM PST by daviddennis (Visit amazing.com for protest accounts, video & more!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

I dunno, I'm not yet convinced. There's something a little odd about playing the "I've got a secret" game on nat'l tv. Just seemed strange that someone supposedly entrusted with such vital secrets would wave them around. Especially considering his story for being fired was because he prayed with someone. And Newsmax as a source is another red flag.

The guy could be totally legit, but I'm gonna hold onto some healthy skepticism for now.
42 posted on 01/27/2003 8:25:41 PM PST by Diddle E. Squat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Newsmax, in this case, is reporting accurately what I heard Bill Tierney say on Hannity's radio show in the last two weeks.

Tierney probably has some restrictions on what he can say publicly - and also the other former UN inspectors like David Kay and Richard Butler.

When this goes down, these guys, and perhaps others, will probably be able to flesh out their semi-cryptic views.
43 posted on 01/27/2003 8:32:33 PM PST by RandyRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: InvisibleChurch
My guess....the letters R-I-T-T-E-R will be in there somewhere.
44 posted on 01/27/2003 8:34:01 PM PST by sayfer bullets
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mr. Mojo
Colmes wouldn't admit that Iraq had nukes

NO SMOKING GUN (or even a flaming missile) will ever be enough to convince liberals that this war is inevitably necessary. Their supply of feeble excuses is endless.
Unless, of course, one of their own, like Klintoon, is occupying the White House at the time -- then every position they currently hold will flip 180 degrees.

And of course, if Bush waits, and Iraq lobs a chem/bio/nuke weapon into Israel, etc. the libs will immediately break into wails of "he should have known!!".
In other words, you cannot win with those gutless parasites, so to hell with 'em.

45 posted on 01/27/2003 8:36:22 PM PST by TheGrimReaper (Face it - Dims are commies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Diddle E. Squat
Your skepticism is healthy, but I think Bill Tierney did not unilaterally decide to show up on Hannity and Colmes and drop this (rhetorical) bomb. I think Tierney was put there by somebody. Probably somebody from the White House.

I believe things are being set in motion now, very deliberately. This ongoing war against terror is far more wide-reaching and far more serious than the general rabble understands, in my opinion.

"There are some things the world is better off not knowing."
- Dick Cheney

46 posted on 01/27/2003 8:38:12 PM PST by Lancey Howard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: daviddennis
Good points.

The best case scenario here is that W's poker moves to date flush Saddam out - he either abdicates/exiles or is overthrown by Iraqi people, and democracy blooms in Baghdad. I think many people hope that this is what happens.

The worst case scenario is that we get fire in the oil fields, anthrax on our troops, and in Israel, and a mushroom cloud over Kuwait, and have to deal with it. This is what W and the team fear might happen.

It would not surprise me to see France and Russia make the case to Saddam that he has to open his kimono, and make a deal with Saddam to go into exile. I think this could happen. If so, it puts us in a bind as to how to deal with post-Saddam Iraq.
47 posted on 01/27/2003 8:41:43 PM PST by RandyRep
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: RandyRep
My other thought is that W is trying to sucker-punch the Rats

Based upon years of watching him I think you are close to the mark. This might be a classic "W" rope-a-dope. He gets pummeled and pummeled and then he drops his gloves and knocks out the other side with one punch. Don't get me wrong, this is likely not contrived. Just the way it works out.

48 posted on 01/27/2003 8:43:22 PM PST by isthisnickcool
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: wimpycat
More important than his formewr inspector status is his current work debriefing prisoners at GITMO. He's fluent in arabic don'tcha know.
49 posted on 01/27/2003 8:46:51 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support from someone. Promote Life Support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
Print and place on YOUR CAR on TUESDAY!!!

Join the AXIS OF FREEDOM Rally on TUESDAY –

it’s a CAR/HOUSE/YARD sign Rally

DAY of SUPPORT…Tues, 1/28/03....FLY your flags (U.S., British, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Romanian, Polish, Czech, Spanish, Quatar, Kuwaiti, Israeli, Australian and Japanese one, too if you have them)....and put up your BUSH/CHENEY signs, (and the BIG W's on your SUV's) for the STATE of the UNION next Tuesday, Jan 28th, if you support the President, our MILITARY and the United States of America. PSST....pass it on.

FREE the IRAQI people!!!

UK JAPAN
AUSTRALIA BULGARIA What OTHER country wants the IRAQI citizens FREEDOM?
ROMANIA ISRAEL POLAND
SPAIN CZECH
KUWAIT HUNGARY QATAR

50 posted on 01/27/2003 8:56:35 PM PST by goodnesswins ("You're either with us, or against us!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-98 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson