Saddam agents on Syria border helped move banned materials
By Rowan Scarborough
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Saddam Hussein periodically removed guards on the Syrian border and replaced them with his own intelligence agents who supervised the movement of banned materials between the two countries, U.S. investigators have discovered.
The recent discovery by the Bush administration's Iraq Survey Group (ISG) is fueling speculation, but is not proof, that the Iraqi dictator moved prohibited weapons of mass destruction (WMD) into Syria before the March 2003 invasion by a U.S.-led coalition.
Two defense sources told The Washington Times that the ISG has interviewed Iraqis who told of Saddam's system of dispatching his trusted Iraqi Intelligence Service (IIS) to the border, where they would send border inspectors away.
The shift was followed by the movement of trucks in and out of Syria suspected of carrying materials banned by U.N. sanctions. Once the shipments were made, the agents would leave and the regular border guards would resume their posts.
"If you leave it to border guards, then the border guards could stop the trucks and extract their 10 percent, just like the mob would do," said a Pentagon official who asked not to be named. "Saddam's family was controlling the black market, and it was a good opportunity for them to make money."
Sources said Saddam and his family grew rich from this black market and personally dispatched his dreaded intelligence service to the border to make sure the shipments got through.
The ISG is a 1,400-member team organized by the Pentagon and CIA to hunt for Saddam's suspected stockpiles of WMD, such as chemical and biological agents. So far, the search has failed to find such stockpiles, which were the main reason for President Bush ordering the invasion of Iraq to remove Saddam.
But there is evidence of unusually heavy truck traffic into Syria in the days before the attack, and with it, speculation that some of the trucks contained the banned weapons.
"Of course, it's always suspicious," the Pentagon official said.
The source said the ISG has confirmed the practice of IIS agents going to the border. Investigators also have heard from Iraqi sources that this maneuver was done days before the war at a time of brisk cross-border movements.
That particular part of the disclosures has not been positively confirmed, the officials said, although it dovetails with Saddam's system of switching guards at a time when contraband was shipped.
The United States spotted the heavy truck traffic via satellite imagery before the war. But spy cameras cannot look through truck canopies, and the ISG has not been able to determine whether any weapons were sent to Syria for hiding.
In an interview in October, retired Lt. Gen. James R. Clapper Jr., who heads the U.S. agency that processes and analyzes satellite imagery, said he thinks that Saddam's underlings hid banned weapons of mass destruction before the war.
"I think personally that those below the senior leadership saw what was coming, and I think they went to some extraordinary lengths to dispose of the evidence," said Gen. Clapper, who heads the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency. "I'll call it an 'educated hunch.' "
He added, "I think probably in the few months running up prior to the onset of combat that I think 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."
Of activity on the Syrian border, Gen. Clapper said, "There is no question that there was a lot of traffic, increase in traffic up to the immediate onset of combat and certainly during Iraqi Freedom. ... The obvious conclusion one draws is the sudden upturn, uptick in traffic which may have been people leaving the scene, fleeing Iraq and unquestionably, I'm sure, material as well."
He also said, "Based on what we saw prior to the onset of hostilities, we certainly felt there were indications of WMD activity. ... Actually knowing what is going on inside a building is quite a different thing than, say, this facility may well be a place where there may be WMD."
The Iraq Survey Group, which periodically briefs senior officials and Congress, is due to deliver its next report in September. In addition to interviewing hundreds of Iraqis, the ISG has collected and cataloged millions of pages of documents, not all of which have been fully examined.
Although Syria and Iraq competed for influence in the region, they shared the same Ba'athist socialist ideology and maintained close ties at certain government levels. The United States accused Syria during the war of harboring some of Saddam's inner circle.
Yes, if they are sponcering terrorists who threaten the U.S. and it's allies.
What part of this don't you get? Maybe when you have YOUR 9/11 it will sink in. Hopefully you won't lose any of YOUR loved ones.
"Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless." ~Ayatollah Khomeini
Yeah, Syria is threatening the US, and Iran is threatening the US, and the insurgency, foreign fighters, Saddamists, Baathists of Iraq don't like America much, and of course lets not forget North Korea, and India and China, the biggest threat of all to US supremacy/safety, and then there's nuked up Pakistan, hotbed of fundamentalism, ruled by a dictator, and lets not forget Saudi Arabia, breeder of US disenchantment, and of course South America can't have forgotten the appauling Reaganite period and the death, rape and torture of 100s of 1000s of people, and to top that, now Russia's getting agitated and seems to have fallen out with the US. That's a lot of conflicts and wars and killing and destruction and a lot of dead people so you MIGHT feel safer.
Why don't you just face it - the world is never going to be perfect and there is no such thing as a totally safe world and starting wars isn't going to make people see America in a better light. And biological and nuclear weapons have been invented and there's no going back. And that's just tough-sh!t on all of us.
On a brighter note - isn't it nice to see how well the Germans and French are getting on with Bush.
So you are saying just bite the bullit and live with it huh? Like the iraqis did with Saddam or that the Isrealis need to live with Hizbolah?
Come on this isn't Spain.
"Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless." ~Ayatollah Khomeini
I'm saying these countries don't like the US and that's too bad. If they don't want to help the US, or if they are antagonistic towards the US, then that's tough, that's the way the world is but it's not justification for war. But I'll ask again - do you think the story justifies a US attack against Syria? Because Iraq was attacked on just this kind of intelligence.
USA1 said this in post #5 : So you are saying just bite the bullit and live with it huh? Like the iraqis did with Saddam or that the Isrealis need to live with Hizbolah?
Come on this isn't Spain.
Check your Yahoo
D
I need to read up on this topic before going up agsinst my darlin H@ts.
aka deltacent aka deltater
Life may not be the party I had hoped for.......
But while I'm here I might just as well listen to the music and dance..
Ok you mentioned H@ts that Russia was not on our side so to keep you up to date.
Russia being one of the big countries I imagine. When are you ever going to to learn to do some research? Oh well I will do it for you Sweetie.
Lleaders agree on efforts to keep nukes from terroristsThe Associated Press
Updated: 3:40 p.m. ET Feb. 24, 2005BRATISLAVA, Slovakia - President Bush and Russian President Vladimir Putin agreed Thursday on new efforts to keep nuclear arms out of dangerous hands, but their sharp differences over Russian backsliding on democracy spilled into an open and sometimes-prickly exchange.
Seeking common ground with a former Cold War rival that is now a key anti-terror partner, Bush said the two leaders stressed agreements over differences.
But U.S. concerns about a series of actions by Putin that are seen as solidifying central power and quashing dissent dominated the leaders’ side-by-side appearance.
Bush said he talked with Putin at length of his “concerns about Russia’s commitment in fulfilling these universal principles” common to all democracies — such as the rule of law, protection of minorities and viable political debate.
“All I can tell you is he said, ‘Yes meant yes,’ when we talked about values that we share,” Bush said.
Putin said, “Russia has made its choice in favor of democracy.”
“This is our final choice and we have no way back. There can be no return to what we used to have,” Putin said. He added: “We are not going to make up, to invent any kind of special Russian democracy.”
Despite those assurances, Putin compared his move to end direct popular election of regional governors to the American Electoral College process of electing presidents. “It’s not considered undemocratic, is it?” Putin said.
And he suggested that Russians who oppose his actions, such as a campaign against the Yukos oil company and shut down of independent media outlets, can sway public opinion because they “are richer than those who are in favor.” “We often do not pay the attention to that,” he said.
Challenges for Bush, too
Bush was challenged as well, fielding questions from Russian journalists doubting American democracy.
“I’m perfectly comfortable in telling you, our country is one that safeguards human rights and human dignity, and we resolve our disputes in a peaceful way,” Bush said sharply.
Russian officials dislike what they see as U.S. meddling in their internal affairs and in former Soviet republics where Moscow’s influence is waning as some new leaders look westward.
But just as Bush wants to protect a vital partnership on security issues, Putin walks a careful line because of his desire not to harm Russia’s chances of membership in the World Trade Organization.
Turning to global concerns, Bush and Putin said they were in unison on the importance of stopping suspected nuclear weapons programs in North Korea and Iran. They remained in disagreement over Russian arms sales to Syria, which the United States wants halted, said a senior administration official.
“We agreed that Iran should not have a nuclear weapon. I appreciate Vladimir’s understanding on that,” Bush said. “We agreed that North Korea should not have a nuclear weapon.”
Said Putin, “We share a common opinion in this regard and we are taking a similar approach: We should put an end to the proliferation of missile and missile technology. The proliferation of such weapons is not in the interest specific of countries or in the international community in general.”
The leaders met for nearly three hours — over an hour alone with only translators — at a medieval castle overlooking the snow-covered capital and the Danube River. “The discussions never got heated,” the official said, speaking on condition of anonymity.
Key agreements
A key product of the talks were agreements designed to counter the spread of both conventional and nuclear weapons.
Bush and Putin agreed to upgrade security at Russia’s nuclear plants and weapons stockpiles; provide new procedures for responding to possible terrorist attacks; and set up a program to keep nuclear fuel from being diverted to use in nuclear weapons.
“We agreed to accelerate our work to protect nuclear weapons and materials both in our two nations and around the world,” Bush said.
•
Another agreement, signed by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov, calls for controlling shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles that, in the hands of criminals or terrorists, pose a threat to both passenger and military aviation.
The Soviet Union and now Russia have widely sold shoulder-fired missiles to customers around the world, including a more potent version that can’t be diverted by decoys. Approximately 1 million of these weapons have been produced worldwide, a White House statement said.
Bush prefaced his meeting with the Russian leader — their first since Bush’s new term began in January — with a speech in a crowded town square hailing the spread of democracy to a former Soviet satellite like Slovakia. Bush thanked Slovaks for their deployment of non-combat troops to Iraq and celebrated the example their 1989 triumph over communism provides there.
“For the Iraqi people, this is their 1989 and they will always remember who stood with them in their quest for freedom,” the president said.
The two leaders arrived to a red carpet ceremony in the courtyard of the red-roofed Bratislava Castle, exchanging handshakes and smiles. About a dozen troops, clad in fur-trimmed red and blue uniforms, stood at attention and elsewhere in the capital security was tight.
During their news conference, Bush appeared relaxed and smiled frequently, but Putin mostly remained expressionless with an occasional slight nod or grin.
Bush’s brief Slovakia visit was the final leg of a five-day tour to heal the trans-Atlantic rift caused by his March 2003 decision to invade Iraq without broad international support. He visited Belgium and Germany before coming here, and met with European leaders at NATO and European Union meetings in Brussels.
I didn't say Russia and the US are about to go to war. It's just diplomatic pushing and shoving between the two countries and Bush saying he doesn't like what Putin is doing in certain respects such as press freedom and nationalising the oil.
I'll ask you Delta the same question I asked USA1 - do you think the story from the Washington Times justifies a US attack on Syria? And like I said before, it was just this sort of information that was used to justify America starting a war in Iraq.
Iran and Syria will bend to our Countries alliances now and there will be an uneasy peace, remember Russia agrees with us on Democracy. hey do indeed have their selfish motives also, like the deals they have going with Iran and Syria. Oh Syria is being cooperative, Israel is being cooperative.
The Iraqi people are being cooperative. Before you knowi t we will have tea and crumpets together celebrating Bloody Prince Charlie and his horsey ,I mean Horse loving Camilla Hee Hee
The bloody press is forever the instigator, never the peace maker. I will not let myself be influenced by Print and only listen to Cable News
Bush made a triumphant political move with his visits to Russia's main man and even Shirac was quite amiable.
We also got to see on the news the people in the street in Russo praising The US, As they now have become little "Capitalists" themselves.
Yes Bush has to come back and face the big Social security question, and I do not agree with his plans,
Nice to hear from you h@ts I am going to post on the Marine now
D
aka deltacent aka deltater
Life may not be the party I had hoped for.......
But while I'm here I might just as well listen to the music and dance..
When you consider that Syria is currently supporting terrorism in Israel and Iraq, I'd say that the option is on the table. However, being placed between the hammer and anvil by Syria and Iran would not make military sense at the moment. Sanctions are the first order of the day, just as we did with Saddam.
The difference with these 2 countries is that their leaders may actually care about their people and countries well being in comparison to going to war.
These counties are rife with paranoia right now and for good reason. They are both spitting in the face of global interests and are still bent on dominating the middle-east region. You cannot and should not trust either of them. Both have WMD and considering the paranoia, may just use it.
So, attacking Iran is not in the best interest of anyone. Whether it is justifiable based on their hell bent ambition to have a nuke is another story. Let's all wait like the Europists until they actually have one. That's what it seems like the rest of the world wants.
"Those who know nothing of Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. Those who say this are witless." ~Ayatollah Khomeini
02-23-2005 07:25 PM
