On A Mission From God

I have a friend, an ex-Democrat turned neocon, who embodies the paranoid style of politics central to such a swing in ideology. He has now on two occasions pushed this "big story" about tapes unveiled by a former UN weapons inspector (I thought these guys hated the UN!) named William Tierney. Tierney released some of these tapes, which he says prove that Saddam not only had WMD, but he was culpable in virtually every terrorist attack committed on this country, from the World Trade Center to the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. The House Intelligence Committee has said that these tapes are authentic; most have yet to be translated (good work, guys).

Now desperate to salvage his central thesis for war, my friend has put this guy on an altar, vowing that "the Democrats will rue the day they ever made "Where's the WMD" a household phrase."

This is the guy he's putting all this faith in:

William Tierney, the former United Nations weapons inspector who unveiled the so-called "Saddam Tapes" at a conference in Arlington, Virginia, Saturday, told National Review Online that God directed him to weapons sites in Iraq and that his belief in the importance of one particular site was strengthened when a friend told him that she had a vision of the site in a dream.

[snip]

Afterward, in a talk with NRO, Tierney addressed comments he made in February 2003 on "Coast to Coast AM," a radio program devoted to paranormal phenomena. On the program, hosted by George Noory, (who took over from predecessor Art Bell), Tierney discussed a possible nuclear-related facility in Iraq. A description of Tierney's remarks on the "Coast to Coast AM" website says:

Tierney's methods of ascertaining this location were rather unconventional. "I would ask God and just get a sense if something was valid or not, and then know if I needed to pursue it," he said. His assessments through prayer were then confirmed to him by a friend's clairvoyant dream, where he was able to find the location on a map. "Everything she said lined up. This place meets the criteria," Tierney said of the power generator plant near the Tigris River that he believes is actually a cover for a secret uranium facility.

Talk about chasing rainbows. This is the guy they're going with? A guy who says that God told him where WMD sites were? A guy who takes the completely debunked theories of Laurie Mylroie as gospel? A guy who's literally quoted as saying "In all thy UNSCOM inspections, He shall direct thy paths to the weapons of mass destruction"? A guy who's biggest exposure for this theory until recently was what was once the Art Bell show?

A guy who speculates on Iraqi involvement the 93 WTC bombing and the 95 OKC bombing based on tapes he's never heard? (And by the way, Byron York didn't even make it all that clear in the article that Tierney was speculating on unheard evidence. Tierney CORRECTED him on that)

A guy who makes statements like this as his proof?

"All I said is that there are more tapes out there, and I would not be surprised if there is discussion of these things. If there is, then we take it from there. If there isn't, then there isn't."

A guy who first says that Steven Hatfill is innocent in the anthrax case, then a little later asserts he is a proxy for Iraq?

A CNN producer asked him a question, "Do I infer correctly that you believe that the anthrax letters were an attack on the U.S. by Iraq, with Steven Hatfill being used as a proxy by Iraq?" Tierney gave a one-word answer: "Yes." Nevertheless, it should be said that in his speech, Tierney said that Hatfill was innocent, while after the speech he said that Hatfill was being used as a proxy in the attack. The best that can be said is that it is not entirely clear just what Tierney's theory is.

Excuse me while I attempt to make the Guinness Book of World Records for the longest continuous snarky laugh.

This is what we've come to on the Right in their desperate dig for the truth: they'll put an obvious crackpot out there as "irrefutable evidence." It'd be funnier if these guys weren't, you know, in charge of things.