Saddam's science advisor surrenders, insists there are no WMD

[Wayne Grabert]

If he is lying at this time, it would only have to be out of spite.

Article. (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/04/12/international1034EDT0522.DTL)
Saddam Hussein's science adviser surrendered to U.S. military authorities Saturday, insisting that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and the U.S.-led invasion was unjustified.

(snip)

After Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the U.N. Security Council in February, al-Saadi suggested that monitored Iraqi conversations Powell played were fabricated, that defector informants were unreliable, and that satellite photographs "proved nothing."

Al-Saadi had also defended the regime's longtime practice of insisting that Iraqi officials be present during meetings between U.N. weapons inspectors and Iraqi scientists, saying that otherwise the scientists' remarks might be distorted. It's a short article. I note that Al-Saadi was loyal to Saddam's regime.

[Aoidoi]

Not that I know much about it, but it occurs to me that he could still be covering his own involvement in a weapons program and hoping that he won't be caught out in a lie.

Or maybe he wasn't included in the clandestine program because of his high profile.

Or he's innocent and the WMD thing was just a red herring.

Hopefully we'll find out the truth at some point, but I'm not holding my breath. When both sides are likely to lie to cover themselves finding the truth is not a simple task.

[Supercharts]

I'm sure if they had captured Sadam he would have denied everything about gassing the Kurds.

[Jedi Knight]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert
If he is lying at this time, it would only have to be out of spite.

Is the liberation of 30 million Iraqis a lie?

JK

[wayrad]

Originally posted by Wayne Grabert
If he is lying at this time, it would only have to be out of spite.

[

Or simply because he hasn't been offered a sufficiently attractive deal yet.

[crackmonkey]

... or perhaps self-preservation. He was, after all, a Lt. General in the military. I'm sure when the presence of WMD is verified (testing on certain substances is being done now), he'll know nothing about it whatsoever.

[wayrad]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
... or perhaps self-preservation. He was, after all, a Lt. General in the military. I'm sure when the presence of WMD is verified (testing on certain substances is being done now), he'll know nothing about it whatsoever.

Could be...but it should be easy to prove whether he was actively involved after things settle down a bit, so it seems like it would be smarter to cut a deal now before someone beats him to it. Or if he's not directly involved, there seems little reason for him not to cut a deal and gain some benefit. I can imagine a few scenarios to explain why he wouldn't, but I'm just speculating there. It'll be interesting to see what happens.

I don't suppose there's any possibility he believes what he's saying? The Iraqi military does seem to have been rather dysfunctional in its organization, but a Lt. Gen. should know _something_. Especially when he's their chief scientist.

On, the whole, I think he's working to a plan, evidenced by his careful arrangements to give himself up, and the initial denials are just part of it.

[Bjorn]

I don't suppose there's any possibility he believes what he's saying? There is even a possibility it is true .... ;)

[wayrad]

Originally posted by Bjorn
There is even a possibility it is true .... ;)

Who knows, it might just be. My personal guess is that there will be far less WMD material than the US expects, but it wouldn't surprise me to be wrong.

[Rusty_the_boy_robot]

Perhaps all the WMDs will be expired left-overs that the Iraqis were to disorganized to properly copy.