Taxi Driver to blame for Iraq War

RATM

This just beggars belief. The claim that Iraq could launch WMD in less than 45 minutes came from a taxi driver.
Good job Military 'Intelligence' No.6 :rolleyes:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/dec/08/45-minutes-wmd-taxi-driver

5-minute WMD claim 'came from an Iraqi taxi driver'
Tory MP and defence specialist Adam Holloway says MI6 got information from a taxi driver who had heard Iraqi military commanders talking about weapons


An Iraqi taxi driver was the source of the discredited claim that Saddam Hussein could unleash weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes, a Tory MP claimed today.

Adam Holloway, a defence specialist, said MI6 obtained the information indirectly from a taxi driver who had overheard two Iraqi military commanders talking about Saddam's weapons.

The 45-minute claim was a key feature of the dossier about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction that was released by Tony Blair in September 2002. Blair published the information to bolster public support for war.

After the war the dossier became hugely controversial when it became clear that some of the information it contained was not true. An inquiry headed by Lord Butler into the use of intelligence in the run-up to the war revealed that MI6 had subsequently accepted that some of its Iraqi sources were unreliable, but his report did not identify who they were.

Today, in an interview with the Daily Mail, Holloway said the key piece of information about 45 minutes came from an Iraqi officer who was using a taxi driver as his own sub-source.

"[MI6] were running a senior Iraqi army officer who had a source of his own, a cab driver on the Iraqi-Jordanian border," said Holloway, a former Grenadier Guardsman and television journalist.

"He apparently overheard two Iraqi army officers two years before who had spoken about weapons with the range to hit targets elsewhere in the Middle East."

Roadend

What's wrong with that, any taxi drivers I've got seem to think they know everything aswell

Karoma

I bet that taxi driver is now bitching about those American immigants...

mikemac

Taxi drivers know everything about everything!

hooradiation

I'm going to blame the Iraq War myself.

Stark

Not a huge surprise considering artists' renditions of the WMDs were used as justification for going to war.

RATM

hooradiation wrote: »

I'm going to blame the Iraq War myself.

I need to work on my ninja editing skills :pac:

Blazer

bloody taxi drivers...between bitching about immigrants, closing dell and now starting wars is there anything the cúnts haven't done?
I hope they bomb his ass:D

--Kaiser--

Iraq contains the worlds second largest proven oil reserves.
I'd blame that.

Whosbetter?

Puts a new spin on the term 'Roving Reporter'.

Fratton Fred

it's the Grauniad, they get everything wrong.

They probably meant to say Tank Driver.

AnonoBoy

"Ye know what's wrong with dis bleedin' country do ya boss? It's these feckin' weapons of mass destruction, d'yaknowhaImean? Had dis lad in the back of de car there last week, that Saddam Husseiny fellah, and he's tellin' me, and this is no word of a lie, he's tellin' me that he could launch one of dem weapons of mass destruction in forty-five minutes if he wanted. Forty-Five minutes? I says. Yeah, he says, Forty-five bleedin' minutes. Whadda bout dat? Isn't that amazing? Here ya go chief, number 10 downing street. Mind how ya go now...."

K-Ren

I've had enough.....of WMDs

Caco

Today, in an interview with the Daily Mail

:rolleyes:

eman66

And there was me thinking they made the whole thing up.

Buceph

When I'm rich, to make myself more rich, I'm going to set up a fleet of professionally qualified taxi drivers. They'll have law degrees, or psychology degrees or be a doctor, so they'll be qualified to tell you what they think.

Bandit12

This would actually be funny if it was'nt so serious.

Dublin_Gunner

Kinda counter productive for the taxi driver though eh? Oil prices went up...

Bet he wished he never opened his mouth now!

citizen_p

info is info.....just because he was a taxi driver dosnt mean somthing isnt true (it wasnt but there has been info gotten from alot of smaller forces.)

Capt'n Midnight

"He apparently overheard two Iraqi army officers two years before who had spoken about weapons with the range to hit targets elsewhere in the Middle East."

"elsewhere" in the midle east

if you stand at the boarder you can chuck a rock "elsewhere"

but seriously what did they say that excluded aeroplanes - which everyone in the middle east has. Or excluded SCUDS which everyone knows Iraq had in the iran-iraq war

I assume the Iraqi's still had these http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GC-45_howitzer
range of nearly 40Km ( 25 miles )

dasdog

I thought George Bush (wanting to please his poppa) and Tony Blair (willing to concede to anything Dubya requested) were to blame for the ridiculous invasion?

Dublin_Gunner

dasdog wrote: »

I thought George Bush (wanting to please his poppa) and Tony Blair (willing to concede to anything Dubya requested) were to blame for the ridiculous invasion?

What?? Don't be so ridiculous. You should be thrown into some remote prison with a bag over your head.

Fratton Fred

dasdog wrote: »

I thought George Bush (wanting to please his poppa) and Tony Blair (willing to concede to anything Dubya requested) were to blame for the ridiculous invasion?

The Kurds may disagree with you there, I don't think they have seen any Mustard Gas since Saddam went.

dasdog

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Kurds may disagree with you there, I don't think they have seen any Mustard Gas since Saddam went.

I actually don't know the last time Saddamn gassed the Kurds...was it around the time of 9/11 when the decision was made to invade or in the 90's? The Kurds had some prior experience of their rebelliousness being quelled by gas. It first happened around the time they were making up the idea of the Iraq as a country. Mr Blair's subordinate equivelants of the time had a hand in the decision making. Happend in the 80's too it seems. I wonder where the weapons came from?

Sleipnir

Fratton Fred wrote: »

The Kurds may disagree with you there, I don't think they have seen any Mustard Gas since Saddam went.

Yeah! and who in their right mind would give Saddam the means to produce chemical weapons?
Oh yeah, America!
A Ronald Reagan administration policy removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism enabling Thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, to be exported to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac Inc and Phillips\Conoco Philips.

And right up to 1998, America was blaming the Iranians for the attack but suddenly and inexplicably changed their minds and pointed the finger at Saddam.
This was, in part, used as the justification for invading Iraq i.e. they had "proof that he had already used WMDs. Probably.

Fratton Fred

dasdog wrote: »

I actually don't know the last time Saddamn gassed the Kurds...was it around the time of 9/11 when the decision was made to invade or in the 90's? The Kurds had some prior experience of their rebelliousness being quelled by gas. It first happened around the time they were making up the idea of the Iraq as a country. Mr Blair's subordinate equivelants of the time had a hand in the decision making. Happend in the 80's too it seems. I wonder where the weapons came from?

1988 Saddam gassed the Kurds in Halabja, after Iraq was kicked out of Kuwait, he crakced down on Kurds and Shi Ites killing tens of thousands.

Other than that, I'm not sure about any gas attacks on Kurds.

dasdog

Yep - early 90's post first Iraq war when they attempted an uprising. Circa ten years later a decision is made to invade again. They were also bombed with chemical weapons by the British military when they tried to uprise in the 1920's when Iraq was being devised (a country, like Afghanistan, whose borders were drawn on maps by politicians from the West and which should never have existed as an all encompassing state in the first place).

Fratton Fred

dasdog wrote: »

Yep - early 90's post first Iraq war when they attempted an uprising. Circa ten years later a decision is made to invade again. They were also bombed with chemical weapons by the British military when they tried to uprise in the 1920's when Iraq was being devised (a country, like Afghanistan, whose borders were drawn on maps by politicians from the West and which should never have existed as an all encompassing state in the first place).

Britain didn't use chemical weapons on the Kurds, that is just the usual anti war leftie rumours. Besides, the only gas that was even discussed at the time was "Lachrymatory" gas.

The intent was there, but in the end it was not needed and never used.

dasdog

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Britain didn't use chemical weapons on the Kurds, that is just the usual anti war leftie rumours. Besides, the only gas that was even discussed at the time was "Lachrymatory" gas.

The intent was there, but in the end it was not needed and never used.

Those damn "lefties" and their rumours. Sorry if the source isn't to your liking. I'm not a "leftie" but AFAIK the Guardian is a "leftie" paper (?)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/apr/19/iraq.arts

Excerpt:

Iraq is the product of a lying empire. The British carved it duplicitously from ancient history, thwarted Arab hopes, Ottoman loss, the dunes of Mesopotamia and the mountains of Kurdistan at the end of the first world war. Unsurprisingly, anarchy and insurrection were there from the start.

The British responded with gas attacks by the army in the south, bombing by the fledgling RAF in both north and south.

Fratton Fred

dasdog wrote: »

Those damn "lefties" and their rumours. Sorry if the source isn't to your liking. I'm not a "leftie" but AFAIK the Guardian is a "leftie" paper (?)

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/apr/19/iraq.arts

Excerpt:

Iraq is the product of a lying empire. The British carved it duplicitously from ancient history, thwarted Arab hopes, Ottoman loss, the dunes of Mesopotamia and the mountains of Kurdistan at the end of the first world war. Unsurprisingly, anarchy and insurrection were there from the start.

The British responded with gas attacks by the army in the south, bombing by the fledgling RAF in both north and south.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091022064745.htm

The full quote from Churchill, which the article conveniently edits, is this

"I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare. It is sheer affectation to lacerate a man with the poisonous fragment of a bursting shell and to boggle at making his eyes water by means of lachrymatory gas. I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes. The moral effect should be so good that the loss of life should be reduced to a minimum. It is not necessary to use only the most deadly gasses: gasses can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects on most of those affected."

THis is the memo he wrote to the ministry of war arguing against their decision not to use gas.

Note the use of the word Lachrymatory as well.

In other words, Churchill argued that there was a case for using tear gas (commonl used by many police forces across europe i believe) but in fact, it was never used.

Read the wiki article as well. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alleged_British_use_of_gas_in_Mesopotamia_in_1920