For a great read you should check out the long debate going on between two men who have more then a passing knowledge on pre-war Iraq, Scott Malensek and James…check it out here.
well, they had it wrong about the plane at Salman Pak, it was a Boeing 707 not a 747
so how much more could they have wrong
someone in the U.S.
17 years ago
the Prague photo of Saddam’s intel officer is right, and whether it was a 707 or a 747 it was still a 700 series jet. So what? What is your point?
drzz, neocon blogger
17 years ago
I wrote Boeing 747 because the Saddam’s chief of Protocole, in his book “In Saddam’s shadow”, talked about a camp south of Baghdad with “Al-Qaeda members training with real Boeing 747”.
I preferred to stick to the witness than to note only the plane that the allied forces recovered in Salman Pak.
The rest is easily provable.
Check here for more infos. There is a translator program added on the upper right. The original thing was all written in French. But the sources are in english :
well, they had it wrong about the plane at Salman Pak, it was a Boeing 707 not a 747
so how much more could they have wrong
the Prague photo of Saddam’s intel officer is right, and whether it was a 707 or a 747 it was still a 700 series jet. So what? What is your point?
I wrote Boeing 747 because the Saddam’s chief of Protocole, in his book “In Saddam’s shadow”, talked about a camp south of Baghdad with “Al-Qaeda members training with real Boeing 747”.
I preferred to stick to the witness than to note only the plane that the allied forces recovered in Salman Pak.
The rest is easily provable.
Check here for more infos. There is a translator program added on the upper right. The original thing was all written in French. But the sources are in english :
http://leblogdrzz.over-blog.com/article-10526967.html