WMD claims of Iraqi 'colonel' treated sceptically

[NNN0LHI]

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=471130

Officials within the Iraqi occupation authorities are puzzling over a British newspaper's interview with a man purporting to be an Iraqi colonel who said he believed he was the source of the Government's claim that Saddam Hussein could launch weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes.

The Sunday Telegraph yesterday published an interview, in which the Iraqi said he passed secret information to British intelligence warning that the dictator had deployed WMD to the frontline. However, last night, question-marks were gathering around the story, not least over the man's claims that the Iraqi-made WMD warheads were to be fired on the battlefield by hand-held rocket-propelled grenade launchers, a weapon of very limited range.

The interviewee was identified only as Lt-Col al-Dabbagh, 40, who was the "head of an Iraqi air defence unit in the western desert". He was also interviewed by the American network channel, NBC. The channel reported that the colonel said Iraqi troops were under orders from Saddam to use "primitive short-range biological and chemical warheads fired from rocket-propelled grenade launchers, tactical weapons of mass destruction transported at the dead of night and handled only by Saddam's secret service." In the end, these orders were ignored because they chose not to fight.

However, sections of the transcript of the NBC interview that the network did not broadcast were aired on the ITV News Channel, which has a partnership with NBC. In one, the colonel was asked by NBC's Baghdad correspondent why he was so sure that these were chemical or biological weapons. His reply suggests that he was not, in fact, sure at all.

more

[BJ]

1. When the story broke on TeeVee I was skeptical

The guy's covering his butt. As long as he tells the Bush Troopers what they want to hear he has value to them and stays alive. Maybe he's angling for a condo in Southern California.

[Journeyman]

2. Next thing you know, they'll debunk Santa Claus. . .

lousy liberal media. And this scam had such potential, too. Guess Georgie'll have to find another way to save his roasting chestnuts. Damn. Such potential, done in by the lousy truth.

[lefty_mcduff]

3. Yet another breathless - "see Saddam had WMD!" report...

...only to be utterly discredited, debunked at a later date, after the story has passed down the memory hole. Typical media whore MO - publish the story on page one. Publish the retraction on D18.

Some RW whore was on Faux this morning and claimed he believed this report, and that he was skeptical of any CIA report that differed. Jeebus. The RW thugs admit to believing an iffy Iraqi source over the $billion CIA.

[dennis4868]

7. Hey....

Bush did the same thing!

[wryter2000]

4. I thought it sounded fishy

If it had been true, why would only this one guy say anything about it? Why would nothing at all have been found?

[pinto]

5. Anyone know if al-Dabbagh is a common Arabic surname? n/t

[RPG-7]

6. yeah..

very common in Iraq and Saudi Arabia. I know the family clan was mixed up in some complicated way with the British back in the days when they were trying their hand at "bringing democracy" to Iraq and also with ibn Saud fighting against the Ottoman. I'll have to dig around in my books to remember exactly what they were about, but if I remember correctly it was mostly opportunism.

[pinto]

9. reason I asked

Is that an al-Dabbagh was the former head of the Saudi Reseach & Publishing Company which has a couple of Englsh language papers in London. One, The Arab News, I believe, signed a deal last month with Wall Street Journal to carry their editorial page as an insert...I figured it must be a common or large clan.

[dennis4868]

8. why was....

this statement not on the NBC news?

the colonel was asked by NBC's Baghdad correspondent why he was so sure that these were chemical or biological weapons. His reply suggests that he was not, in fact, sure at all.

NBC=WHORE