Camels of mass destruction
By on Mar 26th, 2006 at 8:45 pm
Camels of mass destruction
were part of Saddam’s plan to defend Iraq against U.S. forces, according to Iraqi documents.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Afghanistan
Bachmann
Beck
Boehner
Business
Cheney
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
Dobbs
Economy
Education
Election
Energy
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Gingrich
Glenn Beck
Global Warming
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Justice
LGBT
Lieberman
Limbaugh
Media
Military
O'Reilly
Obama
Palin
Pelosi
Politics
Race
Radical Right
Religion
Sports
Steele
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Tea Party
Terrorism
Veterans
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Yup, REAL WMDs in Saddam’s arsenal. No ICBMs, Nuclear weapons, or even anthrax. Yessir, really dangerous stuff posing a mortal, grave, and immediate threat ; imagine all those mushroom clouds of camel hair, camel guts, and camel blood.
March 26th, 2006 at 8:52 pmThe rubber glove snaps tight then a sucking sound emerges, “nope, no weapons of mass destruction hidden in here” [room full of laughter from sycophants]
March 26th, 2006 at 9:12 pmInteresting. Freepers translating the documents in hopes that they will prove Iraq was a haven for terrorists under Saddam.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:14 pmPardon me, but all those exploding camel toes really pose a threat?
March 26th, 2006 at 9:16 pmNoonan
One can smell the desperation. Unfortunately, they will become more and more desperate as the clock ticks.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:17 pmOne thing is for certain….bad socialist reporting and outright idiots will NEVER let me down when I visit this site. What you numbnuts don’t know is far more impotant than what you do know, and of course what you understand (which appears to be nothing).
March 26th, 2006 at 9:18 pm“…don’t know is far more impotant than what you do know, and of course what you understand”
Squat lower eunuch, when reading your scripture.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:20 pmSince, your post has no substance, I have trouble believing you know anything either.
“You guys don’t know something we know”
IS NOT GONNA CUT IT HERE.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:34 pmWhat you numbnuts don’t know is far more impotant than what you do know, and of course what you understand (which appears to be nothing).
Comment by donaldleehackle — March 26, 2006
Another troll spun silly by Rumsfeld’s “Known unknowns”. Pit the poor creature.
March 26th, 2006 at 9:43 pm#6 When your party is sent back to the political wilderness in a few months, you can howl at the moon to your heart’s content – and don’t forget to stop by the cornfield and say hello to Ex-Senator Rubberstamp Roberts (when the investigations start, he’ll be a little hard to find, so check the prairie-dog holes).
March 26th, 2006 at 9:49 pm“The papers have been translated by Arabic-speaking members of Free Republic, a conservative internet discussion forum…”
March 26th, 2006 at 10:02 pmuh…this is just incredible…unbelievable…or not…
but WTF ???
imagine all those mushroom clouds of camel hair, camel guts, and camel blood. yuck. Thank god we invaded. I just cannot imagine Saddam using camels to blow up americans. Have some dignity please.
Time Magazine has an interesting piece on Democratic Iraq-War Vets. Navy Resereve officer Carney said, “There were no links to 9/11, but there were plenty of other contacts with teorror groups. I always thought that was a better arguement for war than weapons of mass destruction.”.
These are the people who are going to win back congress for the democrats. The people who will have Subpoena Power against Bush.
And then American can work towards becoming a great country again.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:05 pmSneaky Camels!
March 26th, 2006 at 10:07 pmYou know, there’s lots of em in Iran too!
Guess we’ll have to go in there, battle it out with with camels, and of course it wouldn’t be complete without rebranding those infamous cigarettes with Joe Eagle or some shit.
Flying Camels!
They can be here in 45 minutes!!
Holy Mushroom Clouds Of Camel Dung!!
George Fire up the Billion Dollar Anti-Camel Defence system!
March 26th, 2006 at 10:19 pmThose AY-RABS got Flyin Carpets!!
Better Get Rummy to Order More Useless V-22 Ospreys
Cheney We Will Need Hellaburton As Well.
For Camel Dung Restorative Services. No BID of Course. BTW the Camel Dung is Radioactive so you can charge a WHOLE lot more!!
The key here is that the camels were finally chosen when the ground hogs of mass destuction ploy was determined not to be feasible.
It seems that groundhogs cannot be trained to tunnel straight at the enemy, but tend to meander and hover around a central hole of the hogs choosing.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:41 pmDoesn’t pass the sniff test.
There aren’t many camels in Iraq, they would NOT be innocuous. They would blend in in Kuwait, however.
March 26th, 2006 at 10:49 pmWow good thing we took him out before it was too late :)
R2K
March 26th, 2006 at 10:56 pmFor the NY Times article, latest Iraq intel news, the Downing Street memos, the Senate Intel report, the Silbermann-Robb Commission report and other key documents, see:
March 26th, 2006 at 11:59 pm“The Iraq/WMD Intelligence Resource Center.”
Camels. Hopefully not the unfiltered. Those are dangerous.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:41 amWhat’s this? We have a bunch of “patriotic” Republicans, who are capable of translating all of those documents that Saddam turned over right before the invasion? What in the heck have they been doing for the last 3 years? Why haven’t they “volunteered” their services to the government? Surely, they are aware of the shortage of translators? What are they waiting for? They should be ashamed of themselves.
March 27th, 2006 at 12:59 amno doubt they were being fitted with nuclear war humps.
March 27th, 2006 at 1:20 am‘Let me see your papers…JOE CAMEL….and what are you doing walking around the white house!…..Fox Security
March 27th, 2006 at 1:26 amSo the Three Magi Kings were really terrorists trying to sneak camels in Israel?
Adoration of the Magi
March 27th, 2006 at 4:58 am9-11, the Dubai class type deal that the people did not get to outcry over.
I’m reposting Amazon.com customer reviews of the book “Forbidden Truth: US-Taliban secret oil diplomacy, Saudi Arabia and the failed hunt for Bin Laden” to illustrate that Dubya placed profit over people that resulted in deadly results back in 2001 before 9-11. Now that the people recently saw the exposed Dubai deal, and created an uproar imagine if people learned of the Taliban oil deal that had gotten kept secret. If people learned of this and severely criticized the Bush administration back in 2001 9-11 might have gotten prevented. Yes 9-11’s the business deal that got away.
Horrifying! But Sadly Not Surprising…, October 8, 2002
Reviewer: Anthony Ian “anthony_ian” (Chicago, IL United States)
In a nutshell, this book outlines how we’ve looked the other way regarding Islamic terror for decades because it inconvenienced oil deals. No big surprise, although you may still be shocked at the calculated cynicism and the cold-blooded capitalism.
We may have bombed Afghanistan after 9/11, but you’ll be shocked to learn that prior to 9/11 we actually tacitly supported the Taliban–because we wanted a stable regime there to allow for the construction of a lucrative pipeline through the country. We’d eventually sour on the Taliban as their abuses became world news, but we gave them plenty of money year after year.
Other sad tales involve our continuing “friendship” with Saudi Arabia–again, based on oil money–which seems absurd considering their status as the #1 exporter of Islamic terrorism, including the majority of the 9/11 hijackers.
Also interesting is how deeply the White House is staffed with big oil veterans–everybody knows about Bush and Cheney’s oil gigs, but who knew Condoleeza Rice was a decade-long employee of the oil industry?
This book presents a pretty sobering reality about what our priorties have been over the years–most of them have taken a back seat to big oil profits, even post 9/11. Many conservative (meaning: Bush supporters) readers will probably dismiss this book because of its stark, unflattering portrayal of our government and its principals–those of us who are a little more questioning will still be appalled at how callous our policies have become… in the name of oil profits.
impeccable, September 20, 2002
Reviewer: Zachary L. Stauber “Anchorite” (Albuquerque, USA) –
Now here’s a book which is well researched. Mr. Brisard and Mr. Dasquie are intelligence researchers on par with Janes, and have outlined every financial link between Saudi Arabia and its wayward children (Osama bin Laden, et al.) and elements with the current and previous administrations that they could find. It uncovers some pretty important connections between Texas oil men and Saudi bankers (and through the bankers, terrorists) and another between Hamid Karzai (the current President of Afghanistan) and UNOCAL, the main oil developer in Afghanistan before September 11th. In my opinion these are all things which should absolutely have come to light many years ago, and are of utmost importance now, because they show September 11th would not have been possible had the United States adopted a more hands off role in Central Asia, and how elements in the Bush administration are still allied with groups that support terrorism against the United States and why.
A seminal piece of research on that tragic day in September, July 26, 2002
Reviewer: A reader
Finally translated, this best-selling French book will provide Americans with an in-depth analysis of how our “friends” in Saudi Arabia have been the primary financiers of Islamic terrorism, reveals the last testimony of the FBI’s top counter terrorism agent, and exposes the secret negotiations between the U.S. government and the Taliban and the Pakastanis in the months that led up to attacks on 9/11. Forbidden Truth represents three years of research by respected French intelligence experts, and it will fundamentally alter the public’s perception of 9/11. I’ll be blunt: this book is a political hand grenade that will make you inexplicably angry at the hypocrisy of our government and how the current administration entered into bellicose and dangerous negotiations with a rogue regime despite their continued harboring of an international terrorist.
Forbidden Truth methodically documents the names, dates and places of all the U.S. diplomats and those involved in pursuing high-risk Caspian Sea Pipeline negotiations with representatives of the Taliban regime and Pakistani government. These secret negotiations began on February 5, 2001 and collapsed on August 2, 2001 with the U.S. threatening the Taliban with a “military option.” Meanwhile, despite FBI field agents like Rowley, Williams and others who were diligently “connecting the dots” on the 9/11 plot, both of the FBI’s special units, the Radical Fundamentalist Unit and the UBL Unit in the FBI’s Washington D.C. Head Quarters had become virtual “black holes” for investigations regarding Islamic terrorism. Unlike the preceding years, all FBI FISA warrant requests regarding investigations of terrorist suspects like the case of Moussaoui, the infamous “20th hijacker”, were categorically denied by the DOJ during this crucial period. This was neither by accident nor the result of the so-called “intelligence bureaucracy”; it was the result of a tragic intelligence policy at the behest of the Bush administration.
This book opens with an interview of John P. O’Neill, the former FBI deputy Director of counter terrorism who complained bitterly that the FBI had become “even more politically engaged” after George W. Bush’s inauguration, and the frustrations that he expressed in late July 2001 helps explain these seemingly disparate events. Based on the collaborating evidence and testimony provided by FBI agents and other intelligence sources it appears that the Bush administration implemented a high-level intelligence blocks with respect to investigations of Islamic terrorism in early 2001. Why did this administration block FBI Agents such as O’Neill and others from pursuing bin Laden? Answer: Saudi Arabia, their Taliban friends, and U.S. corporate oil interests. According to the authors, John O’Neill had become so frustrated under the Bush administration and the State Department’s unprecedented blocks of his investigations regarding Osama bin Laden that he resigned from the FBI in August 2001. He became the chief of security of the WTC, and in an ironic and tragic turn of fate he died at the WTC on 9/11. Forbidden Truth is dedicated to this patriot, and serves as his last testimony.
Americans will soon realize that 9/11 was not an intelligence failure per se as claimed by this administration and subsequently reported by the media, but rather represents a foreign policy failure of truly epic proportions. This book exposes why the Bush administration strongly opposes the creation of a National Commission. Nonetheless, this administration will not be able to refute the damning research revealed in this book, nor will they be able withstand the inevitable scrutiny of history. Read this book only if you want to learn about the inability of both the Clinton and current Bush administrations to call Saudi Arabia to task for their continued funding of militant Islamic terrorism, the ugly truth about last year’s secret and bellicose negotiations over pipelines, the State Department’s flawed foreign policy towards the Taliban, and the fatal intelligence decisions regarding FBI investigations that ultimately facilitated the horrific tragedy that occurred on September 11, 2001.
“The Forbidden Truth” tells you what really happened, July 11, 2002
Reviewer: John J Emerson (Portland, OR United States)
First of all, this is the GOOD French book on 9/11. (The OTHER French book on 9/11 you hear people talking about is the same old conspiracy theory stuff. Dasquie and Brisard are well-respected professionals and completely mainstream.
When 9/11 took place the American response was dominated by rage and disbelief: how could anyone ever do something like that to us? Suggestions that we figure out why it happened were automatically slapped down, as if even asking the question would give legitimacy to the attackers.
It’s quite normal to have inquiries whenever a disaster takes place, so someone must have had something to hide. This book tells you who they were and what it was.
The United States was negotiating with the Taliban right into September of 2001. What was at issue was an oil pipeline across Afghanistan, and the options we offered them were two: cooperate with us on the pipeline, or war. When negotiations broke down, Osama Bin Laden (a U.S. ally only a decade earlier in the anti-Soviet war, and a major force in Afghanistan)struck first. Once we were at war with the Taliban, they became unspeakably evil; but as long as it seemed that they might be willing to play ball, we had no problem with them.
The role of Saudi Arabia in this story is a second major theme. Most of the hijackers were Saudis and the funding came from Saudi Arabia and the neighboring Gulf States. Furthermore, some of Bin Laden’s support, contrary to what we have been told, came from very high levels in Saudi society. Saudi Arabia has long been a major source of funds for Muslim extremists globally, and the see-no-evil complicity in this of the U.S. government and the oil industry cannot be denied. While this book in no way claims that the CIA (much less the Mossad) had a hand in the 9/11 attacks, it makes it clear that excessively indulgent attitudes to the Saudis at very high levels of the US government led to extreme negligence and made the terrorists’ job much easier.
Saudi Arabia is not on the list of ten or more terrorist nations which we plan to attack. After reading this book, you will ask why not.
John Emerson
The ugly world of realpolitik is exposed, July 24, 2002
Reviewer: Malvin (Frederick, MD USA)
Brisard and Dasquie’s “Forbidden Truth” is a very solid piece of research that contains more than a few surprises about the realpolitiks of the Middle East, especially as it pertains to the United States and Saudi Arabia. The book turns a number of received wisdoms on their head and should give everyone concerned about the war on terror a few things to think about.
Of course, the authors show that fossil fuels drives American policy in the region. The Clinton and Bush administrations both negotiated with the Taliban for the construction of a natural gas pipeline to be built in Afghan territory despite clear-cut evidence of the regime’s human rights abuses. However, the book also makes the eye-popping suggestion that U.S. representatives may have recklessly threatened the Taliban prior to the September 11 attack, thereby provoking Al Qaeda into action.
Basically, Brisard and Dasquie explain that Saudi Arabia supports radical Islamic movements (including the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Usama Bin Laden) in order to extend its hegemony over the area. Saudi support of the Taliban, for example, helped keep Afghanistan from falling under Iranian influence. Interestingly, the authors point out that the first arrest warrant ever issued against Usama Bin Laden came not from the U.S. — which wanted to overlook Usama’s behavior in order to keep Saudi oil flowing — but from Libya.
I must admit that all of this came as quite a surprise to me, since Saudi Arabia has always been portrayed as a staunch ally of the U.S. In fact, Brisard and Dasquie recall how U.S. oil companies helped the country develop, but they also show that the Kingdom remains dependent on religion to maintain control over its people. So the country is practically schizophrenic in its need to simultaneously maintain business ties with the U.S. and defend against the spread of Arab nationalism by covertly preaching the gospel of anti-Americanism.
The authors go into considerable detail illuminating the people, organizations and financial relationships that make the Saudi-supported terror network possible. The indictments reach the highest levels of Saudi society. In this light, it appears that Usama Bin Laden and Al Qaeda simply spun out of their master’s control and took the anti-American cause too far.
All this should give us pause to consider why the U.S. allowed the Saudis to play such a dangerous game for so long. Also, one would think that prudence should compel the U.S. to develop an energy policy that does not depend on Middle Eastern oil. But already, Brisard and Dasquie report that talks for the pipeline have resumed since the installation of the Karzai regime in Afghanistan in May 2002.
On a technical note, the book could benefit from additional editorial work to correct a few grammatical errors (presumably due to the translation from French to English?) and several footnote mistakes. Stylistically, the author’s research sometimes makes for dry reading, but that is only because the facts have been meticulously documented and presented. So although “Forbidden Truth” is at times far from entertaining, the reader is nevertheless impressed with the professionalism of the research and its air-tight conclusions. (Indeed, sensing the threat that the book poses to its business empire, the Bin Laden family succeeded in getting the book banned in Switzerland.)
“Forbidden Truth” is recommended for anyone who wants to gain a better understanding of the dynamics underlying the war on terror.
Republicans strong on National Defense? That myth exploded along with the first plane that hit the world trade center on Sept 11, 2001. We cannot trust the Republican Party to defend America.
Join the revolution for progressive legislation
http://www.boycott-republicans.com
March 27th, 2006 at 6:24 am#6 You don’t know what you don’t know.
March 27th, 2006 at 7:20 am#12-CJ; Just how in the hell was Saddam such an “imminent threat” with those camels of mass destruction? Was he going to give them to Osama and send them to the USA with bombs in planes?
March 27th, 2006 at 7:41 amDo they hump you to death?
Get it? Hump? Camel?
Snakes on a plane
March 27th, 2006 at 7:56 amI’M SURPRISED WE DIDN’T STEAL THAT IDEA.
THAT’S THE KIND OF OUT-OF-THE-BOX THINKING BUSH LIKES!
March 27th, 2006 at 8:05 amWon’t anyone please think about the camels? To Paraphrase the Simpsons
March 27th, 2006 at 8:41 amMy humps, my humps, my lovely camel lumps…
March 27th, 2006 at 9:13 amIt’s really never been my habit to intrude,
March 27th, 2006 at 9:24 amBut it don’t take a rocket scientist,
To see we’re bein screwed.
So just raise your voices. Don’t be afraid of bein rude.
There must be 50 Ways To Dump The Dubya!
One thing is for certain….bad socialist reporting and outright idiots will NEVER let me down when I visit this site. What you numbnuts don’t know is far more impotant than what you do know, and of course what you understand (which appears to be nothing).
Comment by donaldleehackle
Then provide the evidence. Your “secret” evidence is no more convincing than McCarthys secret evidence. You got some facts then share them and if you are right then we will agree with you… but people here are not sheep and we are not going to bob our heads up and down just because some “I LOVE SAUDIS!” Bush says something is so… you want us to believe? Then PROVE IT. Science has no problem with that…. when science wants reasonable people to believe then they provide proof… its that simple… and you can not even do that.
March 27th, 2006 at 9:37 amSooo It was the Camels that rumsfeld/powel/rice/wolfwitz/perele/cheney/bush/card/bolton was really after damn now we know the real reason CMD’s .Now we know what powel was holding aloft in that little gram bottle ..dried cmd’s dung…
Was bush after the Dung to make his own Hash? He had to keep high ,bush gets twitchy if he doen’t have his Drugs!
Redstate.org has issued this Statement Trolls..Ya need to listen to us on the Left more…
But I freely admit today that I was wrong to do so.
Mar 27th, 2006: 00:51:33
In the light of the newly-released Iraqi documents seized after the invasion of Iraq, it seems that Mr. Bush did indeed mischaracterize pre-war contacts between Saddam Hussein’s regime in Iraq and the al Qaeda organization that attacked the United States on September 11, 2001. I’m not saying that I’ve watched each and every statement made by each and every administration principal since 9/11, but I’ve watched a lot. And I’ve noticed that while they have sometimes suggested that there was a connection between Saddam and al Qaeda, they have been resolutely non-committal about the specifics. But as the documents are translated and sifted through, it is becoming painfully clear that Mr. Bush and those in his employ have mislead us on pre-war intelligence because they have underestimated and downplayed the relationship between al Qaeda and Iraq–and if the Weekly Standard is too partisan an evidence source for your tastes, try this on for size.
March 27th, 2006 at 9:42 amIn other words, borrowing the logic of the left, BushLied â„¢.
It’s my feeling that some of the documents they have been releasing are Chalabis (the handwritten al quaeda letter hyped recently) and some are not (like this one).
I doubt that this had not been translated before – it would seem odd that the CIA would release a specific set of papers with one conviently showing that he had plans for IEDs for the US troops – tying Baathists to the insurgency early on.
I also don’t think they waited this long without translating quite a few of them:) Even if they don’t have ‘enough’ translators – they do have them.
March 27th, 2006 at 9:54 am#30 – You owe me a new keyboard, bobcat.
March 27th, 2006 at 11:47 amLOOK! FREE BEER
March 27th, 2006 at 1:45 pmhttp://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20060313-092637-9290r
March 27th, 2006 at 1:47 pmhttp://www.wpherald.com/storyview.php?StoryID=20060313-092637-9290r
March 27th, 2006 at 1:51 pmFor anyone interested, source doc is ISGP-2003-00028868. I still wonder about it’s source, though.
March 28th, 2006 at 4:12 amThis is so typical of Think Progress. It’s like reading a tabloid at the grocery store. The auther failed to mention that they were going to strap the camels with powerful bombs and detonate them when they got close to the enemy. It’s just not good and fair news if you only tell half of the story. Do you want to fool everyone into taking your side?
March 28th, 2006 at 8:44 amNo Faxing Payday Loan
Stupendous payday loans faxless that was immediate and untroublesome to apply for after you absolutely are in lack of hard cash.
March 27th, 2008 at 3:41 pm