Jan. 27, 2008
Interrogator Shares Saddam's Confessions
Tells 60 Minutes Former Iraqi Dictator Didn't Expect U.S. Invasion
-
Play CBS Video
Video
Saddam's Confessions Part 1
In his first television interview, FBI Agent George Piro tells Scott Pelley how he won the confidence of Saddam Hussein and got the truth out of him in a seven-month interrogation.
-
Video
Saddam's Confessions Part 2
In his first television interview, FBI Agent George Piro tells Scott Pelley how he won the confidence of Saddam Hussein and got the truth out of him in a seven-month interrogation.
-
-
Photo
George Piro (CBS)
-
Photo
Saddam Hussein, during his trial in Dec. 2006. (AP Photo/Chris Hondros)
-
-
Interactive
Saddam's Judgment
Background on the former Iraqi leader's alleged crimes, his life and capture, plus video and photos.
"And that was his intention?" Pelley asks.
"Yes," Piro says.
"What weapons of mass destruction did he intend to pursue again once he had the opportunity?" Pelley asks.
"He wanted to pursue all of WMD. So he wanted to reconstitute his entire WMD program," says Piro.
"Chemical, biological, even nuclear," Pelley asks.
"Yes," Piro says.
In the summer of 2004, legal custody of Saddam transferred from the U.S. to Iraq. And Saddam had no illusions about what that meant. "Prosecution and execution," Piro says.
When he appeared in court, Piro wanted to show that Saddam had been well treated, so Piro bought him a new suit and an FBI intelligence analyst cut his hair. On Piro’s last day in Baghdad, he brought two Cuban cigars to the jail and sat with Saddam in his tiny garden.
"He told me that we would see each other again, which I knew wasn't going to happen. And then he said goodbye in the traditional Arab manner. And I was a little surprised. I kind of saw him tear up," Piro remembers.
The traditional Arab manner of saying goodbye - three kisses on the cheeks - surprised Piro. "And it made me feel somewhat awkward. To be saying goodbye to Saddam Hussein in that fashion," he recalls.
More than two years later, Saddam went to the gallows. Piro says that Saddam calculated his performance - his defiance, his refusal to wear a hood, so that the last picture for history would not be those humiliating images of his capture. It was, Saddam understood, the last thing he could control.
Piro says Saddam expected to die and that it didn't bother him.
Why not?
"Well, his answer was is he was 67 at the time. He had lived longer than the average Arab male lived in the Middle East. He had a wonderful life. Got to be the leader of the cradle of civilization. And in his opinion, of course, had a significant impact on that country. The region. The world. So he was not bothered by having to face death," Piro says.
"No remorse? No concern for the kinds of things that he had ordered and done?" Pelley asks.
"No. No remorse," Piro says. "No regret."
Produced By Henry Schuster
© MMVIII, CBS Interactive Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Recent Segments
Scroll Left
Scroll Right
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 22
- next
See all 1054 CommentsImpeach him!
Whoops
Saddam admits to interrogater before he was hanged: "He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro. "He wanted to pursue all of WMD%u2026to reconstitute his entire WMD program." This included chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, Piro says.
Regardless of rumour, innuendo, and hearsay, Iraq officially denied WMD stockpiles. This was confirmed by U.N. inspectors before the invasion and American inspectors after the invasion.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted by seeitright at 03:42 PM : Jan 24, 2008
+ report abuse
So let me see if I understand you here... BECAUSE Saddam was afraid of Iran, whom we also are afraid of in Iraq, that makes Bush LYING to us about Iraq 935 times okay? That''s INSANE!! Have you looked at those LIES?? In EVERY case there was OVER RIDING reason to believe there was NO justification to attack and the Bush Administration simply MADE it UP as they went along. Please tell me you aren''t this hung up on your party.
Ummmm what? Iraq invaded Iran, not the other way around. I would think that an FBI agent assigned to interrogate Saddam Hussein would at least have his facts straight. That statement is very odd.
From Encarta http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761580640/Iran-Iraq_War.html
"Iran-Iraq War, armed conflict that began when Iraq invaded Iran in September 1980 and ended in August 1988 after both sides accepted a cease-fire sponsored by the United Nations (UN)."
[Posted by seeitright at 03:42 PM : Jan 24, 2008]
he''s an idiot ... before the presidency ... during the presidency ... and following the presidency.
I agree, Sadaam lied but how are you going to impeach a guy who is dead?
Watch as this new information simply bounces off the eyes of Bush Derangement Sufferers. There is NOTHING that could come to light that would deflect them from their lovingly nurtured hatred.
Do you often imagine people are persecuting you?
This completely justifies our invasion of Iraq.
You lose the argument for all time, liberal moonbats!
This will be the main point in how history is written about the War.
Re: "Saddam Hussein initially didn''t think the U.S. would invade Iraq to destroy weapons of mass destruction, so he kept the fact that he had none a secret to prevent an Iranian invasion he believed could happen. The Iraqi dictator revealed this thinking to George Piro, the FBI agent assigned to interrogate him after his capture."
This was pretty obvious to anyone that was paying attention, but since so many FBI agents are chronic liars, murderers, and terrorists, we would be foolish to accept anything else that Mr. Piro is claiming as being truthful.
Continued- For one thing, Saddam made sure that every Iraqi household had a weapon, and he released everyone that was being held in Iraqi prisons before the invasion, so it looks like he DID know what was coming.
Re: "But Piro isn%u2019t convinced that the insurgency was Saddam''s plan."
Liar? Moron? Both?
This completely justifies our invasion of Iraq.
You lose the Iraq War argument for all time, liberal moonbats!
This will be the main point in how history is written about the War.
Our intelligence reports weren''t false, they were accurate with respect to the circumstances (i.e. Saddam acting in every way, shape, and form as if he had WMDs).
Do you have any idea what an inane line of reasoning you''re trying to advance? You have essentially said "Our intelligence reports weren''t false, they were just fooled by Saddam''s crafty lying." Uh, what''s the point of an intelligence department if you don''t want facts, but are happy to believe the way every two-bit dictator acts? You could save a few billion dollars there.
And what if Saddam did have WMDs and acted as though he didn''t have them to avoid invasion? Would you have then said "Our intelligence wasn''t wrong, it was accurate with respect to the circumstances (Saddam acting in every way as if he didn''t have WMDs)."? Would be a bummer if he then used them. But nobody''s fault, because how can an intelligence department be expected to dig up real facts, right?
And, by the way, our intelligence reports weren''t false. The fact that Saddam didn''t have WMDs was widely known in the CIA. Heck, we had information from Naji Sabri, Saddam''s former foreign minister. Some it was suppressed until after the war, but it''s all public record now (see http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/).
Oops. I guess we weren''t as stupid as you thought. But I guess it''s a lot less stressful no to use that cauliflower-shaped organ at the top of your spine.
Matthew
The US thought he had WMDs because he wanted them to think that! It was all his fault Iraq got invaded, wasn''t it! And with President Hussein conveniently murdered, who''s to say otherwise.
I was never really sure he got the stuff over into Syria as many thought.
It makes more sense that Saddam was lying, just like Chalabi and the Iraqi exiles telling the CIA and MI-5 the WMD was there and their family members were even working on it.
What was Bush supposed to do with all these dangerous lies being floated? The CIA, MI-5 and the Mossad all told him to attack.
But this is an interesting wrinkle.
This completely justifies our invasion of Iraq.
You lose the Iraq War argument for all time, liberal moonbats!
This will be the main point in how history is written about the War.
I think the purpose of the article isn''t to say that our intelligence agencies did a stellar job but to show that Bush did not lie, because there was a factual basis for their beliefs rather than some purposefully manufactured reason to invade Iraq. No one is denying that the administration had the wrong result, but to say that they flat out lied is a much more serious allegation.
As to the 935 comments, this really is the practice of inflammation on the part of the media. Yes, there 935 statement made regarding Iraq to the media...by the ENTIRE administration - not just Bush. I''m sure if we took the time to analyze all the statements made by past presidents'' administrations we would have just as many if not more lies. Two come to mind: Slick Willy and Nixon.
I don''t hate liberals, honestly. But sometimes it''s just impossible to take them seriously when they refuse to think.
Re: "He also intended and had the wherewithal to restart the weapons program. "Saddam] still had the engineers. The folks that he needed to reconstitute his program are still there," says Piro."
What was he supposed to do? Execute them?
What was agent Clepto''s take on this?
You libs never stop spinning webs of lies. Disgusting
A true statement. So we have a choice of believing that our intel agencies were deficient or believing that the Bush admin had ulterior motives to start a war. IMO, any ulterior motives espoused by the Bush haters (ex. wanting oil industry buddies to profit) are just rationalizations for their opinions. Haven''t we already had proof that our intel agencies were hoodwinked? "Curveball"? Have any of those same agencies come out and ever denounced the admin''s use of data? Some grumblings, yes, but nothing on the order of "THEY''RE LYING". For me, it still comes down to a moment when the president has to decide to take action or not based on the intel data at hand. Without the benefit of hindsight, the president can only have rough level of confidence in that data. What would you do if posed with the scenario: "Intel is 50% confident that Irag has WMD and will use them on the continental US"? What it the confidence level was 10% or 90%. Each of us would probably have a different "breaking point". The point being, however, that the confidence level was not (and could never be) 100%. The president is paid to make those tough decisions. I believe that he made the same one I would have made at that time given that information. That''s not saying it was the "right" choice knowing what we know now, but it is unfair to judge that decision except in the context of the day on which it was made.
Study: Bushies Lied 935 Times to Sell Iraq Invasion - 13 hours ago
Bush and his top officials waged a campaign of misinformation about the ... made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11
This is a stupid story and is for stupid people, like most Republicans that still believe Bush.
Interrogator: Invasion Surprised Saddam
Tells 60 Minutes Former Dictator Bragged About Eluding Capture
Check out all the first time spook apologist posters here, trying to prop up the idiotic ramblings of this FBI goon!
When will these conservative delusions and rationalizations end? They were wrong Bush was wrong. His motives are questionable but it is clear that GWB was not acting in the best interests of the USA or upholding his oath of office.
The fact that Saddam WANTED WMDs is evidence AGAINST the justification for the invasion--he did not have them, was not a threat. Most leaders would like a powerful weapon to defend their country and their position--that does not justify an attack, does not justify putting our soldiers in harms way, no matter how many loony tune right wing moonbat nutcases try to fantasize that there is any support for their delusions of a justified invasion and occupation
funded by soros
Bush and his administration "waged a carefully orchestrated campaign of misinformation about the threat posed by Saddam Hussein''s Iraq," said the damning report entitled "False Pretenses."
According to the Center for Public Integrity, eight administration officials "made at least 935 false statements" about Iraq''s possession of weapons of mass destruction, or links to Al-Qaeda, on 532 separate occasions.
"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003."
Typical liberal, attacking the FBI agent.
If I insult you, am I responsible for your violence?
It''s a question being debated in the Netherlands this week as Dutch embassies around the world beef up their security ahead of the release of a film on the internet which allegedly insults the Koran. It''s reported to show the Koran being torn up and otherwise desecrated.
http://martinstanford.typepad.com/foreign_matters/2008/01/dutch-braced-fo.html
Dutch Politician: Islamic Culture Is ''Retarded''
Dutch Politician Plans to Air Film Criticizing the Koran
A Dutch politician known for his views against Islam plans to air a film he produced that is critical of the Koran, which he likens to Adolf Hitler''s hateful writings.
Parliamentarian Geert Wilders spoke to FOX News about the documentary, insisting the Muslim holy book is dangerous and should be banned.
"I believe the Koran is, indeed, ''Mein Kampf.'' They are the same package," Wilders said. "I believe that our culture is far better than the retarded Islamic culture."
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,325305,00.html
andor3,
Re: "The fact that Saddam WANTED WMDs is evidence AGAINST the justification for the invasion--he did not have them, was not a threat."
Excellent point, although I would not even accept as fact that Saddam even wanted them. This is mere hear-say conjecture presented by this FBI goon.
On the bright side, the fact that the Regime is presenting this absurd story, seems to indicate their increasing worry about facing a war crimes tribunal/gallows/firing squad.
You think this is a friggin football game?! Do you know how many people have been killed, maimed, injured, orphaned, widowed in this "game"? Do you think people who hold power should not be held accountable for their ignorance of facts and advice, especially when that leads to such terrible consequences?
Bush and his top officials waged a campaign of misinformation about the ... made at least 935 false statements in the two years following September 11
How U.S. Fell Under the Spell of ''Curveball''U.S. and German officials feared that Ahmad Chalabi had coached Curveball after the defector said his brother had worked as a bodyguard for the ...
Another Bush
Piro, a Lebanese-American and one of the few FBI agents who spoke Arabic
Another Bush Administration surrogate where;s the audiotape or video of these so-called debriefings of Saddam.
Most Bush apologists believe anything the Bush Administrations puts out.
When%u2019s Bush going to tell you idiots to jump off the Golden Gate Bridge?
Will tape it for youtube. HA HA
funded by soros
It''s only stupid to you, but it''s clear that it passed muster with 60 Minutes.
The fact is it absolves Bush of the liberals "lies" bs.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
...
- 22
- next
See all 1054 Comments