PDA

View Full Version : WMD Found in Iraq


Tom
06-22-2006, 12:12 PM
How will the libs spin this?

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38213

JustRalph
06-22-2006, 12:59 PM
They already have. It is not the stuff (by the DOD own admission) that was used to justify the war, (and the Dems are running with that spin) but I don't think those in range of Mustard Gas or Sarin shells would quibble too much. Especially Israel. I don't think the expiration date on the shells would matter too much to me. Anybody who buries fighter jets must have some other stuff hidden somewhere.


So much for those inspectors doing such a good job, huh?

Tom
06-22-2006, 01:50 PM
One thing, it proves for sure SH lied about them and was violating the Gulf War truce agreement.
The libs keep forgeting that as soon as we pulled SH out of his spider hole, Lybia gave up actual nuclear weapons.
Curious, if Kerry want us us out so quick, to call it a "do over" is he in favor of returning them to Khadafy?

skate
06-22-2006, 05:18 PM
oh god this is so funny, but oh so serious. now i know the feeling, when someone says, i don't know if i should laiugh or cry, gads.


ya, they gonna feed us with things like "well this here stuff wasn't no good anywho", LOL LOL.

love to see this (gas) put right inside the DC area, on the 4th of July. talk about running, these guys (congress) would be acting like a horny ant colony on viagra.

Free Bird
06-22-2006, 05:54 PM
must be a full moon....

hcap
06-22-2006, 06:28 PM
Ok guys I'll bite.

Since the WorldNetDaily article is from April 26, 2004, over 2 years ago, how come the WH or the DD or that master of last throes dickh**d cheney, has not latched on to Mr Kenneth R. Timmerman and kissed him up and down, right to left? All over his big fat tucas. Mister Kenneth R. Timmerman has single handedly proved their case.

Where is our war preznit? Shouldn't he be calling a joint session of congress to disclose these new found goods? Can't you just see all the lowly dems and libs shakin' in their shoes. What must they be thinkin' at such a festivity??
"Gawd 50 more years of repubs. We're doomed, doomed I say"

I can just see it now bush adressing the General Assembly at the UN. "Old Europe" cowtowing in awe at the preznits' forsight. Ticker tape parades down past the American Enterprise guys and Faux newz anchor persons orgiastically spouting to all youse guyz out in wingnutland
"We waz right all along"

Oh say did any of yuses happen to catch little Ricky Santorum, whose Senate career is in its final throes, got his hands on a classified document from the National Ground Intelligence Center. He pulled key points out of the document and had them declassified, and then made a big whoop-dee-doo announcement that he had in his hand proof that there were WMDs in Iraq.

"What a coincidence that one week after Karl Rove urged Republicans not to make excuses for going to war against Iraq and to put critical Democrats on the defensive, Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 18 points behind in his re-election efforts, and representative Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) suddenly came up with some report that 500 chemical weapons have been found in Iraq. Almost the entire hour of Hannity & Colmes last night (6/21/06) was devoted to this “discovery” despite the fact that FOX News’ own Jim Angle had already reported that the Bush administration said the weapons were not in usable condition and were not the WMD’s for which we went to war."


BTW guys since I did not read all of the WorldNutDaily article, can anyone tell me if it covered say Syria?
Or what about the Iraqi general who also had the goods?
So why dont the big honchos latch on to any of these unverified WMD right wing merrygo rounds?? And make any of it official??

Secretariat
06-22-2006, 06:41 PM
Ok guys I'll bite.

Since the WorldNetDaily article is from April 26, 2004, over 2 years ago, how come the WH or the DD or that master of last throes dickh**d cheney, has not latched on to Mr Kenneth R. Timmerman and kissed him up and down, right to left? All over his big fat tucas. Mister Kenneth R. Timmerman has single handedly proved their case.

Where is our war preznit? Shouldn't he be calling a joint session of congress to disclose these new found goods? Can't you just see all the lowly dems and libs shakin' in their shoes. What must they be thinkin' at such a festivity??
"Gawd 50 more years of repubs. We're doomed, doomed I say"

I can just see it now bush adressing the General Assembly at the UN. "Old Europe" cowtowing in awe at the preznits' forsight. Ticker tape parades down past the American Enterprise guys and Faux newz anchor persons orgiastically spouting to all youse guyz out in wingnutland
"We waz right all along"

Oh say did any of yuses happen to catch little Ricky Santorum, whose Senate career is in its final throes, got his hands on a classified document from the National Ground Intelligence Center. He pulled key points out of the document and had them declassified, and then made a big whoop-dee-doo announcement that he had in his hand proof that there were WMDs in Iraq.

"What a coincidence that one week after Karl Rove urged Republicans not to make excuses for going to war against Iraq and to put critical Democrats on the defensive, Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 18 points behind in his re-election efforts, and representative Peter Hoekstra (R-MI) suddenly came up with some report that 500 chemical weapons have been found in Iraq. Almost the entire hour of Hannity & Colmes last night (6/21/06) was devoted to this “discovery” despite the fact that FOX News’ own Jim Angle had already reported that the Bush administration said the weapons were not in usable condition and were not the WMD’s for which we went to war."


BTW guys since I did not read all of the WorldNutDaily article, can anyone tell me if it covered say Syria?
Or what about the Iraqi general who also had the goods?
So why dont the big honchos latch on to any of these unverified WMD right wing merrygo rounds?? And make any of it official??

Hcap, these guys are desperate quoting worldnet from 2004.... :lol: :lol: :lol:

Maybe we could start a thread WMD found in North Korea.....

Secretariat
06-22-2006, 06:57 PM
How will neocons spin this?

http://vyan.blogspot.com/2006/06/vanity-fair-war-they-wanted.html

JohnNUtah
06-22-2006, 07:09 PM
I want my slice of Saddam well done.

so.cal.fan
06-22-2006, 08:26 PM
The emergence of the Islamic sect of Wahhabis in Saudi Arabia marked the onset of the third and still ongoing Jihad as was started by the Ayatollah Khomenini in Iran and bin Laden's Taliban. As a consequence of it it's anti-Western stance, the Wahhabis took down the pro-Western Shah of Iran and Sadat in Egept and attacked Hussein in Jordan, Mubarak in Egept and Musharraf in Pakistan. The overall plan is to infiltrate and take over governments in Egypt, Turkey, Pakistan, Indonesia, The United Arab Emirates, Sudan, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Malaysia, and then , with Pakistan's nuclear capacity, take down Isreal. In this process, the US would also be attacked (World Trade Center, Twin Towers, plus others in planning stages). Growing Arabic populations would deter Europe from U.S. alliances and lead to Arabic dominance in the United Nations.
It was against this background that the U.S. strategy was to prevent militant Islamic-Arabic takeover of 75% of the world's oil supplies and its huge financial power base. (L.Abraham, 2004), plus the acquisistion of nuclear materials by Al Qaeda, ie, bin Laden, via Pakistani nuclear scientists, Russian sources, etc. (Berger, 2004). A Western power base in Iraq would split the Arabian continent in two and deter Arabic takeover and coalescence. Thus, Afghanstan and Iraq were strategic targets for multiple reasons to preclude a clash of civilazations of Islamic militancy with the Western world, which could go on for centuries, as it has in the past. Only the U.S. has the power to prevent such an ongoing cataclysm, as the United Nations was ineffectural and its Security Council impaired by food-for-oil kickbacks of billions of dollars to various members siphoned off by bogus sales, ect.(Food for Oil, 9/19/04).
Thus with this world contextualization, the war in Irq would therefore appear to have been a long-term strategic move to preclude a far worse multinational and perhaps centuries-long series of progressively severe cataclysms )e.g. the triage decision of a pre-emptic strike. (Hawkins 2006)

Free Bird
06-22-2006, 08:36 PM
I want my slice of Saddam well done.We should have barbequed his ass and got out of Dodge ASAP.

Tom
06-22-2006, 10:51 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

Secretariat
06-22-2006, 11:18 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

Tom, give it up already. GW's own appointed man Charles Duelfer has already put it to rest as did Republican David Kay before him, and Hans Blix before that. It was cooked intelligence. Even the administration has backed down from that claim - only worlnet and Ricky Santorum are still selling that bologna.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134625,00.html

Report: No Iraq WMDs Made After '91
Thursday, October 07, 2004

WASHINGTON — The chief U.S. arms inspector in Iraq has found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction (search) production by Saddam Hussein's (search) regime after 1991.

....

Let's get back to reality. Not manipulated history.

lsbets
06-22-2006, 11:24 PM
So Sec are you saying the 500 chemical rounds were not found in Iraq? I'm having a hard time interpreting you telling Tom to get back to reality when he is talking about the 500 rounds that have been found. It seems like you are saying those rounds weren't found.

Light
06-22-2006, 11:36 PM
CIA’s final report: No WMD found in Iraq

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7634313

In his final word, the CIA’s top weapons inspector in Iraq said Monday that the hunt for weapons of mass destruction has “gone as far as feasible” and has found nothing

lsbets
06-22-2006, 11:41 PM
As I have posted before, with the links to the news stories, two convoys in 2004 were attacked with chemical munitions - in Iraq. To say no chemical weapons were found is a total falsehood. To say no large stockpiles have been found is a true statement.

Secretariat
06-22-2006, 11:45 PM
So Sec are you saying the 500 chemical rounds were not found in Iraq? I'm having a hard time interpreting you telling Tom to get back to reality when he is talking about the 500 rounds that have been found. It seems like you are saying those rounds weren't found.

I'm simply agreeing with GW Bush's appointed man Charles duelfer whe he says:

"In his report, Duelfer concluded that Saddam's Iraq had no stockpiles of the banned weapons, but he said he found signs of idle programs that Saddam could have revived once international attention waned.

"It appears that he did not vigorously pursue those programs after the inspectors left," a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity, ahead of the report's Wednesday afternoon release by the CIA.

...

Those deleted chemicals were NOT part of a WMD program, and while Duelfer tries to save the administration some face by saying that Saddam "could" have revived some of these programs, he explicitly states that there were NO STOCKPILES OF THE BANNED WEAPONS. Period. My God, this is a FOX News article.

Give it up already, and lets get back to reality. Even GW made light of it by looking under his desk.

...

Replaying this silly WMD argument that posed a "grave" threat to our nation is ludicrous in the face of North Korea preparing to launch a missle that could feasibly hit Los Angeles. Duelfer has put it to rest. Even the President doesn't reiterate those claims. Only the far right on this board and Rick Santorum and Worldnet cling to this lunacy.

Light
06-22-2006, 11:47 PM
LS

As the link I posted says"U.S. forces found ample supplies of conventional weapons such as these, but no weapons of mass destruction.

The point is Bush invaded on grounds of WMD's,not conventional weapons and no WMD's were found.Period. If you want to debate that,take it up with the CIA cause they agree with us "Bad guys"

Tom
06-22-2006, 11:51 PM
Report: No Iraq WMDs Made After '91
Thursday, October 07, 2004

WASHINGTON — The chief U.S. arms inspector in Iraq has found no evidence of weapons of mass destruction (search) production by Saddam Hussein's (search) regime after 1991.

....

Let's get back to reality. Not manipulated history.

You need a road map to reality - and check the date of your link - you too, Light.

So WMD made BEFORE are not dangerous? What nonsense!
They kill the same. And their existense proves SH was lying about destroying them. What else did he lie about?

And how about the allegations that Russia, France, and China helped removed large stores from Syria?

Tom
06-22-2006, 11:52 PM
LS

As the link I posted says"U.S. forces found ample supplies of conventional weapons such as these, but no weapons of mass destruction.

The point is Bush invaded on grounds of WMD's,not conventional weapons and no WMD's were found.Period. If you want to debate that,take it up with the CIA cause they agree with us "Bad guys"

The link you posted is old.
And funny how you libs suddenly credit the CIa with infalable information when all you have done is call them liars for years.

Hehehe - you guys are a gas!

lsbets
06-23-2006, 12:09 AM
LS

As the link I posted says"U.S. forces found ample supplies of conventional weapons such as these, but no weapons of mass destruction.

The point is Bush invaded on grounds of WMD's,not conventional weapons and no WMD's were found.Period. If you want to debate that,take it up with the CIA cause they agree with us "Bad guys"

That is simply untrue. The chemical rounds used in the two IED attacks fall under the umbrella of WMD. In the actual text of your article, rather than a sidebar next to a photo, it says US forces may continue to find small quantities of degraded chemical munitions. That is exactly what those 500 rounds are. Now, since you say take it up with the CIA, it appears that the addendum to the report actually supports the truth (what I said) and not the fantasy world that you like to live in.

Now Sec, there are several facts regarding Iraq and WMDs, and there are many unknowns. The facts are:

1) Prior to the 1991 Gulf War Iraq had large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and had a very active nuclear program.

2) Iraq had used chemical weapons both against a foreign enemy (Iran) and against its own people (the Kurds).

3) As a result of the Gulf War, Iraq was required to destroy and acount for the destruction of their existing WMDs and their WMD programs.

4) At least 500 chemical rounds were not destroyed, because they have been found by US forces in Iraq.

5) No large stockpiles of WMDs have been found in Iraq.

6) Iraq never accounted for its WMDs.

The key question remains - what happenned to those WMDs. There are only a few possibilities:

1) Hussein destroyed them, but did not account for doing so and continued to perpetuate the illusion that he had them to appear more powerful than he was to both the outside world and his own people.

2) We destroyed all of them except for the 500 rounds during the 1998 bombing campaign and through the efforts of UNSCOM inspectors prior to that.

3) The weapons were moved out of the country.

4) The weapons were hidden in the country.

We can all guess what happenned to them, but that is exactly what it is - a guess. There should be much more concern about what actually happenned. An enormous amount of documents relating to WMDs and Iraq remains classified, of which only two pages were released yesterday. They all need to be released, regardless of what they say, so that there can be a real accounting of what happenned to Iraq's WMDs. For someone like you Sec, who claims to be concerned about national security, I would think you would care about the answer to that question a lot more than disparaging people who seek the truth. But, that's your track record. Why are you so scared of finding out what really happenned to Iraq's WMDs?

Tom
06-23-2006, 12:35 AM
“My next guest says we found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, according to a military intelligence report that he managed to have declassified and made public. Coalition forces recovered approximately 500 artillery shells filled with degraded mustard gas or sarin nerve gas. The weapons predate the 1991 Gulf War and are hazardous and potentially lethal.

A defense department official tells us the weapons are left over from the Iran/Iraq war, which ended nearly 20 years ago and are not evidence of the weapons of mass destruction sought at the outset of the Iraqi war in 2003. Congressman Peter Hoekstra, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee joins us tonight from Capitol Hill. Congressman, thank you very much for being here………



………DOBBS: This is not, you have said, it is not a silver bullet, a smoking gun. Tell us what it is.

HOEKSTRA: Lou, what it is, it is one more piece in a very complicated puzzle dealing with Saddam Hussein in Iraq. We all know that in the 1980s, Saddam Hussein had WMDs. He used it. We know that in the 1990s, he claimed to have destroyed all of the WMD. Now that we have found these artillery shells and rocket shells still filled with sarin or mustard gas, we know he was lying in the 1990s.

Then if we take a look at what the Iraqi survey group found after the war, we found evidence of ongoing research and development programs and we found that he had the capability to produce anthrax within four weeks after the war or four weeks after sanctions were lifted and produce other weapons within six months through his dual use facilities. So we're getting a more complete picture of Saddam Hussein.”



http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/22/ldt.01.html

rastajenk
06-23-2006, 02:45 AM
Excellent summary by socalfan. To say that there were no weapons, or that there was no Al Qaeda link to Iraq, or that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 is extremely short-sighted. It's convenient to reduce the whole scene to Bush Lied People Died, but future generations will be grateful that this one produced individuals willing to take a stand before the situation turned even worse. Sure, it seems messy and unproductive now, but it's a necessary step forward to prevent the human race from taking huge steps backwards.

hcap
06-23-2006, 05:48 AM
I said Where is our war preznit? Shouldn't he be calling a joint session of congress to disclose these new found goods? Can't you just see all the lowly dems and libs shakin' in their shoes. What must they be thinkin' at such a festivity??
"Gawd 50 more years of repubs. We're doomed, doomed I say"

I can just see it now bush adressing the General Assembly at the UN. "Old Europe" cowtowing in awe at the preznits' forsight. Ticker tape parades down past the American Enterprise guys and Faux newz anchor persons orgiastically spouting to all youse guyz out in wingnutland "We waz right all along"Why doesn't the White House the DD, the CIA, FBI and particularly karl rove jump on any of these "finds"? Why send little Ricky out to twist in thew wind, while the honchos like rove and rumsfeld parse their words like scared rabbits chewing delicately on carrots?

The truth is and youse guys know it so well, that the polls would have our war preznit at 60% + if any of this was true. Politically it would be a goldmine.
Why hasn't the administration taken advantage of any of this stuff? Simply because they would be decapitated and be at 20% instead.

Much of the scare tactics that faked us into war centered on the so-called "mushroom cloud" propaganda. The congress would not have gone along if not for the nuclear threat. There is ample evidence that the nuclear threat was hyped big time. Also vast stockpiles, tremendous quantities falsely presented by Colin Powell to the UN probably the next most hyped "threat", since disavowed by Powell strongely, is many orders of magnitude greater than any "unaccounted for" WMDs postulated by youse guys. There is no way the wayward Syrian bound or buried WMDs you guys bring up is anywhere remotely equivilent to what Powell claimed back then.

This argument is limited by what we amateurs in the field of weapons proliferation can understand without relying on experts. Similiar to the discussion concerning human influence on global warming. We were dependent for the most part on what we were told by the administration, the "experts", before and leading up to the war.

However even then there were strong dissenting opinions available to the public about the level of threat presented by Saddam. And unlike global warming, WAR is debateable on moral grounds as well as factual. If in fact it is the last resort, every effort to avoid war should have been made. It was not. The bottom line is we had an avenue of further investigation. The UN inspectors. Who, by the way were saying over and over again NOTHING of any consequence found!! Even following up on sure thing reports by rummy as to where they were. In a number of months would have concluded MIMIMAL threat. Meanwhile bush couldn't wait. And invaded.

Why? not wait 3-6 months? If we had, we would have known then what we know now. No substanstial threat from WMDs. Not that there weren't insignificant quantities, but certainly NOTt enough to go to war.

JustRalph
06-23-2006, 07:59 AM
How will neocons spin this?

http://vyan.blogspot.com/2006/06/vanity-fair-war-they-wanted.html

why spin when you are in control............you fail to see that part of it. You don't have to spin when you control everything.

You never know what might be "found" come election time...........hold your breath boys.........

rastajenk
06-23-2006, 08:56 AM
A good discussion in the comments here (http://www.theadventuresofchester.com/archives/2006/06/the_reasons_wer.html) about why this knowledge hasn't been exploited for political gain. Mainly, there are more important things going on than poll ratings.

Tom
06-23-2006, 09:10 AM
rast,
Libs cannot fathom doing anything that is not politcally motivated.
This is why we do not let them lead anymore.;)

Suff
06-23-2006, 09:30 AM
A good discussion in the comments here (http://www.theadventuresofchester.com/archives/2006/06/the_reasons_wer.html) about why this knowledge hasn't been exploited for political gain. Mainly, there are more important things going on than poll ratings.

That site presents a few hypothesis on the reasons why we may only be hearing now........of these WMD's.

I'll add one additional reason. Politics. Santorum is the Politico making the noise.

Senate Approval ratings

Santorum (R-PA)




Approve 36 (36)
Disapprove 55 (57)
--------------------------------------

Current poll numbers for Pennsylvania Senate seat.


Santorum (R) 34 (36)
Casey (D) 52 (49)

________________________________________________

When your an incumbent, and your disaproval's are near 60, and your Democratic opponent is whopping your ass 52 to 34............

You'll try anything....:rolleyes:

rastajenk
06-23-2006, 09:37 AM
That explains Santorum's position, but it does nothing to explain why the administration has sat on this for several years. Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard has been trying to get this stuff declassified for quite a while; the bureaucratic or strategic reasons for not doing so may not be obvious, but I think it's kind of funny that a poster like Hcap, who is always talking about complexity and nuance and shades of gray and higher levels of intelligence, can't begin to see that there are other levels than just the next 24-hour news cycle.

Suff
06-23-2006, 09:49 AM
That explains Santorum's position, but it does nothing to explain why the administration has sat on this for several years. Stephen Hayes of the Weekly Standard has been trying to get this stuff declassified for quite a while; the bureaucratic or strategic reasons for not doing so may not be obvious, but I think it's kind of funny that a poster like Hcap, who is always talking about complexity and nuance and shades of gray and higher levels of intelligence, can't begin to see that there are other levels than just the next 24-hour news cycle.

Lets assume that IRAQ did in fact have a rudimentary WMD program. Or more likely, a chemical/biological testing program.

I suppose the pragmatic minded , may say, well, it was wise (albeit costly) to dismantle the regime.

The partisans will never buy it, no matter what is proved....So thier out.

The issue that the country face's will be, that the rank and file will more than likely have a less than satisfied feeling.


Suppose you contract me to build your house. Along the way, the house doesnt appear the way I told you it would, and it is costing 4 times as much, and taking 5 times as long?

But in the end I build the house to specifications, and it meets the expectations you had.

That still may not be enough to take away the sour taste of , errors, miscommunication, time period, costs, and credibility.

And that's where most of middle America will be, no matter how real, or unreal these developments are.

rastajenk
06-23-2006, 09:57 AM
I would prefer your housebuilding skills over someone who tells me I don't even need no stinkin' house. :)

hcap
06-23-2006, 11:51 AM
Even Drudge is disavowing.

" But the intelligence officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were too degraded to have posed a threat to US forces in March 2003.

They said all chemical weapons found since 2003 were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and they had no evidence Saddam was producing or stockpiling chemical weapons after that.

"Generally they are in poor condition," one official said.

Before the Gulf War means in case you gentlemen forgot, about the time Saddam was OUR Hitler, and we helped litle adolph out with the chemical precursors to bomb Iran.

The weapons were found "in small numbers over time" since 2003, an official said. They were recovered in one, two or three at a time -- not in large caches, the officials said.

"We would characterize these recovered munitions as being consistent with weapons that have been not maintained, that have not been part of an organized inventory," he said.

OTM Al
06-23-2006, 12:05 PM
I'm not making this point on any sort of political blame/gain type arguement, but these weapons recovered are not really what should be called WMDs anyway, or at least they are the poor man's alternative to WMDs. Gas filled shells do do damage, don't get me wrong, but the damage is hardly more than shells filled with explosives, and the damage they do is wholly subject to the prevailing winds, so much so that improper use can result in creating casualties on the side that fired them. The true WMD is the full scale nuclear weapon or the virulent biologicals which will quicky wipe out large numbers of people. Because of the horrifying effects of gas victims (though getting blown up with a bomb can't really be all that less horrifying can it?), these things often get termed as WMDs in the public mind, but not in the military sense. Because of this, it doesn't surprise me that nothing came out about this before, because this was not the sort of thing being looked for. If the true WMDs do/did exist, I don't know, but I'm sure you all will gladly take your sides in that arguement....

Secretariat
06-23-2006, 12:09 PM
This is amazing to me that posters on this board are still trying to rehash arguments that Duelfer, and Kay (both Republicans) and the administration have already dismissed for partisan purposes.

I can understand this altruistic argument which GW has made statign we need a democracy in the Mid East to solidify a growing threat. I don't agree with it as it costs way too much, both financially and in real lives. But even they have given up on the WMD boguis argument.

"The headlines all say, 'No weapons of mass destruction stockpiled in Baghdad.' We already knew that."

- Dick Cheney

"Iraq did not have the weapons that our intelligence believed were there."

- George W. Bush

...

"We've got North Korea to deal with. Iraq was a WMD mistake as GW says. Move on."
- Secretariat

But it was never really about that was it GW?

http://thinkprogress.org/2005/12/15/wmd-irrelevant/

Caught on Tape: Bush Admits WMD Were Irrelevant
On day that the United States invaded Iraq, President Bush said that we were doing so “reluctantly” but that “our purpose was clear” — to get rid of Saddam’s “weapons of mass murder.” (Note: Bush did not say “purposes.” According to Bush, there was only one purpose.)

Yesterday on Brit Hume, he said he would have invaded even if he knew there were no weapons of mass destruction. Would have been nice if he’d mentioned this earlier.

lsbets
06-23-2006, 12:13 PM
Excuse me Sec, but I don't see where asking the question - what happened to them - is rehashing any settled argument. Its far from settled as there are no answers to that question.

Why are you so against finding out what happenned to the WMDs that Iraq did have at one point, doesn't have now, and no one knows what happenned to? The answer of "Oh there not there, great, we don't need to worry about it anymore" doesn't cut it. All of the docs related to WMDs in Iraq need to be declassified. All of them.

Secretariat
06-23-2006, 12:16 PM
Excuse me Sec, but I don't see where asking the question - what happened to them - is rehashing any settled argument. Its far from settled as there are no answers to that question.

Why are you so against finding out what happenned to the WMDs that Iraq did have at one point, doesn't have now, and no one knows what happenned to? The answer of "Oh there not there, great, we don't need to worry about it anymore" doesn't cut it. All of the docs related to WMDs in Iraq need to be declassified. All of them.

We agree on one thing. All docs realted to WMD's do need to be declassified, including British intelligence reports, and Israeli ones as well. But in the world we live in, that will never happen and you know that. Time to move on to current reality.

hcap
06-23-2006, 12:40 PM
Two gems of wisdom from rastajenkbut I think it's kind of funny that a poster like Hcap, who is always talking about complexity and nuance and shades of gray and higher levels of intelligence, can't begin to see that there are other levels than just the next 24-hour news cycle.

...A good discussion in the comments here about why this knowledge hasn't been exploited for political gain. Mainly, there are more important things going on than poll ratings.Ok,Ok, I give up. So there are more things goin' on than poll ratings. Here's what Pete Hoekstra, who breathlessly touted this "discovery," was asked why he thought the administration hadn't talked about these developments and this is what he said: Asked why the Bush administration, if it had known about the information since April or earlier, didn't advertise it, Hoekstra conjectured that the president has been forward-looking and concentrating on the development of a secure government in Iraq.Soo, according to Congressman Hoekstra, the administration found compelling evidence that shows that Iraq had WMDs after all and that everything the administration said was true. But the preznit didn't have time to talk about it, because he's focused on the future and not the past, and is too busy trying to stabilize the Iraqi Government. Guess I better jest gotta look forward towards the dawning of a bigger brother, a more glorious leader and a better living tru chemistry :jump: :jump:
Koolaid oh wonderful koolaid.

ljb
06-23-2006, 12:51 PM
Gentlemen,
It is understandable that some here would use this old discreditid data to strengthen their beliefs. After all some here still think Bush is a good President. :bang:

lsbets
06-23-2006, 01:01 PM
Gentlemen,
It is understandable that some here would use this old discreditid data to strengthen their beliefs. After all some here still think Bush is a good President. :bang:

What is discredited about it ljb? The rounds were real, and as has been discussed here before - two years ago - two convoys were attacked with rounds like these. How is that discredited?

hcap
06-23-2006, 01:30 PM
David Kay along with every other knowlegeable weapons expert has discredited it

500 canisters of degraded chemical weaponry that, according to David Kay who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004, is about as hazardous as what the average American household has under their sink.

LS, how many were attacked with standard munitions? The few times any chemical weapons were used indicates NO vast stockpiles. And correct me if I am wrong. You faced a much greater threat from bullets, and other ordinary munitions,

If the Iraqis really had anything other than scattered handfuls of chemical shells, you guys would have faced a much more serious threat. You may believe that justifies war. But even 100x the quantity you mention is still no where near the level of stockpiles we were told existed.

Yep, the same old, degraded, weapons we already knew about -and of course, they are not the "mushroom cloud" type we were lied to about either.
There's just no telling what pre-'91 WMD buried over there that could have brought on the apocolypse, if we did not meander down them thar hills in Iraq and have a good old fashioned shootout at the ok corral

lsbets
06-23-2006, 01:35 PM
Discredited what? Have you even bothered to read the declassified memo? I'm sure you would prefer if no rounds were found, but it is an undeniable fact that they were. I refer you back to my post on the previous page, although that poses tough questions, so I doubt you would like to deal with those.

hcap
06-23-2006, 01:44 PM
What were found was not the famed WMDs. The ones we went to war to prevent imminent threats from Saddam.

They were pre-1991 degraded shells. We knew about them. For a while. We easily could have responsible for facilatating their creation back when we supported Saddam. They posed no imminent threat. If you argue we need to declassify all documents, no disageement. But I suspect if that ever does happen it will be more of an embarassment for the bushies. Maybe after they resign or are impeached :lol: :lol:

lsbets
06-23-2006, 01:54 PM
Again - did you read the memo? Because not a thing in the memo has been discredited. I know you would rather change the subject, but the fact remains that nothing in the memo was discredited.

Here is the memo:

http://instapundit.com/images/Iraqdoc.pdf

The memo even says they are pre Gulf War munitions (you know, the ones Saddam was not allowed to have per the terms of the ceasefire and various UN resolutions). Nowhere is it claimed that they resulted from an ongoing chemical weapons program.

Next time, do some basic research like actually reading the document in question before deciding what it says.

P.S. - I do owe you a thanks for that truthout link Hcap. I had never read that site before, and I go there just about everyday now. Watching the unfolding of the obviously made up story they wanted to scoop the world on and their ever changing defense of that story combined with the determined defense of their true believers has been hysterical. That might be the best comedy site on the net!

hcap
06-23-2006, 02:41 PM
I thought ljb was refering to Santorums story not the memo per se.

The memo says nothing usefull and Little Ricky distorted it broadcasting a half truth intended to imply that we found them. Yes the real WMDs Little Ricky ran with the ball because the WH could not be to close.
The memo says nothing of any value And here's why

From David Kay...

And the former chief UN weapons inspector and President Bush's former Iraq Survey Group chief, Dr. David Kay, telling Countdown that Senator Santorum's comments are, quote, 'wrong as to the facts and exaggerated beyond all reason as to the interpretation of the facts.' He continued, 'There is no surprise that very small numbers of chemical cannisters from the Iran-Iraq War have been found. The ISG found them, and in my testimony in 2004 I said that I expected that we would continue to find them for a very long time. These are in very small numbers and are scattered. The nerve agents have long since degraded to the point that they no longer pose any substantial threat. In most cases the mustard agent has substantially degraded, but will burn you if skin comes in contact with it.'"

So tell me how this anything more than political posturing.


I am glad you enjoy truthout. And I have admitted I may have jumped the gun in the Rove indictment story. If I recall I said "wishfull thinking".

Now if you would only admit your wishfull thinking on WMds.

You may also may rerun the perch story to your hearts content. :jump: :jump:

skate
06-23-2006, 02:46 PM
ya, what difference does it make, if they stab you or nuke-bomb you, as long as my bank records are secret, daaa, good one.

Tom
06-23-2006, 06:26 PM
If indeed, Rusia, France, and China were responsble for sneaking WMD out of Syria, it would be an ace in the hole for Bush to play wehn needed, so, say, getting the UN Security Council (guess what - those three are on it!) to aid in the Iran or N Korean problems.

What you libs don't understand is that when you are the party in charge, ie, the one that won the election(s) :lol: there is more to do than throw stoines ahd posture yourself for the next election - it's called governing, but then, that is a word only the older of you have ever experienced! :lol::lol:

Tom
06-23-2006, 06:28 PM
We agree on one thing. All docs realted to WMD's do need to be declassified, including British intelligence reports, and Israeli ones as well. But in the world we live in, that will never happen and you know that. Time to move on to current reality.

Thast is exactly what is happening - that is where the story cam from. Don't forget, there are those hundreds or thousands of hours of tapes we are still listening too as well.

hcap
06-24-2006, 06:30 AM
More on pre 1991 WMDs.

http://www.antiwar.com/orig/debatto.php?articleid=9196

Dave DeBatto is a former U.S. Army counterintelligence special agent and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom.

"I can honestly say that I was having a hard time comprehending what I was seeing. Unless my senses were deceiving me, Weichert and I had actually found the mother load of Operation Iraqi Freedom – actual Iraqi WMD. I walked over to one of the crates and saw a plastic sheath containing what appeared to be a bill of laden. I cut it open with my Leatherman and pulled the documents out.

At this point I want to say that loud and clear that I very much regret not having either shoved that document in my pocket or made a copy of it and sent it home for safe keeping. At the time I actually thought that a report would be written and normal Army and intelligence protocol would be followed, so there would be no need for me to have to prove anything. But I digress…

I opened the folded off-white paper form and noticed several interesting things right away. The bombs had been purchased in the United States in 1988 from what appeared to be a government contractor called The Carlyle Group. I am almost embarrassed now to say that I had not heard of The Carlyle Group at that time so the name meant nothing to me. The only reason I remember it at all is that I was amazed that the bill was in English and I was stunned to see that a bomb that was used by Iraq in delivering chemical WMD – the only WMD found during the entire Iraq war – was in fact supplied to Saddam Hussein by the United States. Un-blanking believable.

The date on the bill was either 1987 or 1988, I don’t recall exactly. I do recall that the bomb was manufactured in Spain and shipped through France. So much for their claims of being holier-than-thou. I checked several more bills and they were all identical. These bombs had all been shipped together. Rahman told us that similar weapons had been used all throughout the Iran-Iraq war during the 1980s as well as against the Kurds. We were staring at what could have possibly been some of the same type of WMD used in one of the most heinous attacks in recorded history – the gassing of Halabja in March of 1988 which killed an estimated 5,000 Kurdish civilians."

lsbets
06-24-2006, 09:14 AM
Hcap, I know you like to believe anything if you think it makes Bush look bad, but follow me here for why I say Mr. Debatto is full of shit:

He says the bill of lading said The Carlyle Group. That would certainly be a coup of information, but there is one problem there. Carlyle is an investment firm. They invest in other companies in certain industries, including defense and aerospace. Bombs certainly could have been sold to Iraq by firms where Carlyle had an ownership interest, but any of the transactions almost certainly would have been done under the name of the actual company that made and sold the good, not under the name of one of the investors.

It appears that you have uneathed another Jason Leopold, who will make stuff up to feed the faithful and hopefully make a profit off it. This one didn't even pass the 10 second sniff test.

Tom
06-24-2006, 10:13 AM
Nice reply, ls.....always nice to see lies exposed, especially when they are designed to undermine our nation. Sad that the liars have so many gullible distributors of thier products.

JustRalph
06-24-2006, 12:34 PM
that guy got that Bill of Lading from Dan Rather..............

Lefty
06-25-2006, 12:21 AM
light, you are wrong, Bush did not take us into Iraq on the grounds of WMD's alone. He gave several reasons., but you libs have to continue the lie.

dav4463
06-25-2006, 12:26 AM
They (liberals) are more interested in selling a Bush Lied People Died T-shirt than recognizing that he didn't lie and admitting it. They have a cool slogan that sounds angry and looks good on a T-shirt while giving them the feeling that they "care".

hcap
06-25-2006, 06:03 AM
I used the story mostly because it seemed Dave DeBatto had the credentials.

"is a former U.S. Army counterintelligence special agent and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Maybe The Carlyle Group at the time was involved. It would have been relatively early in their history of investing and controlling military corps. Maybe your right. Bill of lading questionable? However there is other evidence of western countries including the US supplying WMD material to Saddam. And what was found leftover from the IRAN-IRAQ war easily could have those origins.

Read this entire article before you totally debunk Dave DeBatto.
A compilation of sources. More than what I snipped

http://www.fff.org/comment/com0406g.asp

In an October 1, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Got Germs for Weapons Program from U.S. in ’80s,” Associated Press writer Matt Kelly wrote,

"The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention sent samples directly to several Iraqi sites that U.N. weapons inspectors determined were part of Saddam Hussein’s biological weapons program, CDC and congressional records from the early 1990s show. Iraq had ordered the samples, saying it needed them for legitimate medical research.

The CDC and a biological-sample company, the American Type Culture Collection, sent strains of all the germs Iraq used to make weapons, including anthrax, the bacteria that make botulinum toxin, and the germs that cause gas gangrene, the records show. Iraq also got samples of other deadly pathogens, including West Nile virus.

The transfers came in the 1980s, when the United States backed Iraq in its war against Iran."


In a December 17, 2002, article entitled “Iraq Used Many Suppliers for Nuke Program,” the Associated Press stated,

" Dozens of suppliers, most in Europe, the United States and Japan, provided the components and know-how Saddam Hussein needed to build an atomic bomb, according to Iraq’s 1996 accounting of its nuclear program....

Iraq’s report says the equipment was either sold or made by more than 30 German companies, 10 American companies, 11 British companies and a handful of Swiss, Japanese, Italian, French, Swedish and Brazilian firms. It says more than 30 countries supplied its nuclear program.

It details nuclear efforts from the early 1980s to the Gulf War and contains diagrams, plans and test results in uranium enrichment, detonation, implosion testing and warhead construction....

Most of the sales were legal and often made with the knowledge of governments. In 1985–90, the U.S. Commerce Department, for example, licensed $1.5 billion in sales to Iraq of American technology with potential military uses. Iraq was then getting Western support for its war against Iran, which at the time was regarded as the main threat to stability in the oil-rich Gulf region."

In a March 16, 2003, article entitled “How Iraq Built Its Weapons Program,” in the St. Petersburg Times, staff writer Tom Drury wrote,

Yet here we are, on the eve of what could turn into a $100-billion war to disarm and dismantle the Iraqi dictatorship. U.N. inspectors are working against the clock to figure out if Iraq retains chemical and biological weapons, the systems to deliver them, and the capacity to manufacture them.

And here’s the strange part, easily forgotten in the barrage of recent rhetoric: It was Western governments and businesses that helped build that capacity in the first place. From anthrax to high-speed computers to artillery ammunition cases, the militarily useful products of a long list of Western democracies flowed into Iraq in the decade before its 1990 invasion of Kuwait.

JustRalph
06-26-2006, 12:27 AM
I used the story mostly because it seemed Dave DeBatto had the credentials. "is a former U.S. Army counterintelligence special agent and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom."


That is the problem when you post what some of these guys say. Just because they have some "credentials" they can't have an agenda?

I will tell you what. You wanna play that game, the way you play it?

Fine, start right now and start re-reading every post I ever made in off topic. Pay special attention to terrorism info. It is gonna take you a while. But this time you have to read them with more clarity and make sure you assign more "gravitas" to my opines and declarations. You know why? Because I was assigned to a "counterintelligence unit" for a short time in the 80's and we were dealing with the possibility of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. We did surveillance and communications security, the whole gambit. Phones, mail, everything that was available back then. So make sure everything you read that I have ever posted, on Terrorism, you give much more credence and weight. Why? Because I have some experience in counterintelligence.

yeah, I am sure you are gonna do that, get right on it.

:lol:

Tom
06-26-2006, 10:24 AM
Credentials explored

Compare this guy's credntials:
"is a former U.S. Army counterintelligence special agent and a veteran of Operation Iraqi Freedom."

to this guy's"
"is vice president of the Untied States, a former deputy chief of staff and chief of staff to the President of the United STates, a former Seretary of Defense, and a former Congressional representative for Wyoming. One of the arhitects of Operation Iraqi Freedom."

or this guy's:
"President of the United States (twice), Commander and Cheif of the Armed Forces, former Govenor of Texas, memeber of the National Guard."

Seems we have dual standards in accepting credentials. :lol:

Secretariat
06-26-2006, 08:56 PM
Interesting Post article today.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/06/24/AR2006062401081.html?sub=new

Warnings on WMD 'Fabricator' Were Ignored, Ex-CIA Aide Says
By Joby WarrickWashington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, June 25, 2006; Page A01

In late January 2003, as Secretary of State Colin Powell prepared to argue the Bush administration's case against Iraq at the United Nations, veteran CIA officer Tyler Drumheller sat down with a classified draft of Powell's speech to look for errors. He found a whopper: a claim about mobile biological labs built by Iraq for germ warfare.

Drumheller instantly recognized the source, an Iraqi defector suspected of being mentally unstable and a liar. The CIA officer took his pen, he recounted in an interview, and crossed out the whole paragraph.

A few days later, the lines were back in the speech. Powell stood before the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5 and said: "We have first-hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails."

The sentence took Drumheller completely by surprise.

PaceAdvantage
06-27-2006, 04:57 PM
A few days later, the lines were back in the speech. Powell stood before the U.N. Security Council on Feb. 5 and said: "We have first-hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails."

Powell was indeed telling the truth, was he not? They had first-hand descriptions of these factories. Powell never said these descriptions were from a reliable source, now did he?

Secretariat
06-27-2006, 06:53 PM
Powell was indeed telling the truth, was he not? They had first-hand descriptions of these factories. Powell never said these descriptions were from a reliable source, now did he?

I haven't spoke to Powell, but Wilkerson, his right hand man, swears he was was furious over being duped. He has a closer connection to Powell than anyone on this board i'd think.

lsbets
06-27-2006, 08:19 PM
I haven't spoke to Powell, but Wilkerson, his right hand man, swears he was was furious over being duped. He has a closer connection to Powell than anyone on this board i'd think.

COL Wilkerson also said deposing Saddam was the right thing to do. And he said that in the same interview. He was just mad about the bad intel. Funny how you always leave the last part out ............

Secretariat
06-27-2006, 08:29 PM
Wilkerson's many comments speak for themselves

http://www.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/meast/08/19/powell.un/

Former aide: Powell WMD speech 'lowest point in my life'Tuesday, August 23, 2005; Posted: 10:44 a.m. EDT (14:44 GMT)

CNN) -- A former top aide to Colin Powell says his involvement in the former secretary of state's presentation to the United Nations on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was "the lowest point" in his life.

"I wish I had not been involved in it," says Col. Lawrence Wilkerson, a longtime Powell adviser who served as his chief of staff from 2002 through 2005. "I look back on it, and I still say it was the lowest point in my life."
Wilkerson is one of several insiders interviewed for the CNN Presents documentary "Dead Wrong -- Inside an Intelligence Meltdown." The program pieced together the events leading up to the mistaken WMD intelligence that was presented to the public. A presidential commission that investigated the pre-war WMD intelligence found much of it to be "dead wrong."

Powell's speech, delivered on February 5, 2003, made the case for the war by presenting U.S. intelligence that purported to prove that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Wilkerson says the information in Powell's presentation initially came from a document he described as "sort of a Chinese menu" that was provided by the White House.

"(Powell) came through the door ... and he had in his hands a sheaf of papers, and he said, 'This is what I've got to present at the United Nations according to the White House, and you need to look at it,'" Wilkerson says in the program. "It was anything but an intelligence document. It was, as some people characterized it later, sort of a Chinese menu from which you could pick and choose."

Wilkerson and Powell spent four days and nights in a CIA conference room with then-Director George Tenet and other top officials trying to ensure the accuracy of the presentation, Wilkerson says.

"There was no way the Secretary of State was going to read off a script about serious matters of intelligence that could lead to war when the script was basically un-sourced," Wilkerson says.

In one dramatic accusation in his speech, Powell showed slides alleging that Saddam had bioweapons labs mounted on trucks that would be almost impossible to find.

"In fact, Secretary Powell was not told that one of the sources he was given as a source of this information had indeed been flagged by the Defense Intelligence Agency as a liar, a fabricator," says David Kay, who served as the CIA's chief weapons inspector in Iraq after the fall of Saddam. That source, an Iraqi defector who had never been debriefed by the CIA, was known within the intelligence community as "Curveball."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/4481092.stm

Transcript of Wilkerson interview Col Lawrence Wilkerson, the chief of staff to former US Secretary of State Colin Powell, was interviewed by Carolyn Quinn for the BBC's R4 Today programme. Here is a transcript of the interview.

I asked Colonel Wilkerson why he felt the post-war planning had been so inadequate.

The post-invasion planning for Iraq was handled, in my opinion, in this alternative decision-making process which, in this case, constituted the vice-president and the secretary of defence and certain people in the defence department who did the "post invasion planning", which was as inept and incompetent as perhaps any planning anyone has ever done.

There's lots more if you want to read it.

lsbets
06-27-2006, 08:37 PM
The king of cherry picking - Sec! As disingenuous a person as I have ever come across in my life.