posted January 11, 2004 05:01 PM            

Mulitple tests conducted in Iraq by Danish and British experts indicate that Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction have finally been discovered, but mainstream news editors either ignored the story Sunday morning or are furiously spinning the news as inconsequential.

More than 12 hours after the Fox News Channel, Reuters and the Associated Press carried reports that preliminary tests showed Iraqi mortar shells discovered near Basra contain a deadly liquid blister agent, the New York Times had yet to report the bombshell find on the main page of its Web site – or anywhere in its Sunday morning print edition.

The Washington Post's Web site also chose not to cover the blockbuster news, which ABC News military analyst Tony Cordesman said Saturday would be "the first real confirmation that Iraq actually had deployed chemical weapons and was prepared to use them" if tests confirmed the find.

Saturday night the Fox News Channel revealed that initial tests had indeed confirmed the blockbuster discovery.

"Danish troops are in charge of that area around the village of Al Quarnah, and they have found what they believe are, according to this official, two hundred shells," reported FNC's Greg Palkot.

Palkot said the Danish official told him: "They've run four different tests on that liquid inside those shells. And all those tests do indicate that there is blister gas – that's a deadly chemical weapon - inside of those shells."

The AP said that a statement released by Danish officials cited British experts, who had also confirmed that the shells contained "blister gas."

Before the war the Bush administration had alleged that Baghdad was stockpiling blister gas in liquid form.

Both reports noted that the find had yet to be confirmed by the U.S. team in Iraq assigned to search for weapons of mass destruction.

But according to the London Sunday Telegraph, Ali Nimir, a former colonel in an Iraqi Republican Guard artillery unit, had also confirmed the find.

"I remember seeing boxes of these kinds of armaments in our base two years ago," Nimir said. "We were told that they were chemical weapons."

"They were removed from our bases and distributed to secret hiding places about a year before the war," he explained. "I never saw them again."

Still, despite the staggering political consequences of the bombshell discovery – news that could mean total vindication for President Bush against Democrat charges that he "lied" about Iraq's WMDs – mainstream reports consistently downplayed the story.

The New York Daily News, for instance, covered the news on page 24 of its Sunday edition, and then only under a headline that obscured the potential impact of the story: "Old Iraqi Gas Shells."

New York's Newsday echoed the same theme with its page 20 headline, "Weapons Found, but Likely Old" – as if the vintage of Saddam's WMDs somehow mitigated genuine proof of their existence after months of media claims to the contrary.

The only news outlet to refer to weapons of mass destruction in its headline was the New York Post, which labeled its page 2 report: "WMD Gas Shells Dug Up in Iraq."

News of the WMD find was not discussed on the Sunday morning news shows.

posted January 11, 2004 09:42 PM            

The reasons for removing Saddam were that he had WMD, had used WMD, supported terrorists, trained terrorists in Iraq, had affiliations with terrorists groups including al Qaida and could hand off chemical and biological weapons to terrorists to be used in attacks against the US. And, those reasons have proven to be true.

That's plenty of reasons beyond the fact he's a murderous tyrant who routinely butchered and oppressed his own people.

posted January 12, 2004 06:12 PM            

It would also be interesting to know where you got the information the US supplied Iraq weapons grade chemical weapons or technical assistance to weaponize VX, Anthrax, blister agents or any other WMD?

I'd really like to know if some credible news source is reporting what you've said or if it's one of those things that "every one knows."

posted January 25, 2004 11:59 AM            

In a direct challenge to the Bush administration, which says its invasion of Iraq was justified by the presence of illicit arms, Kay told Reuters in a telephone interview he had concluded there were no Iraqi stockpiles to be found.

"I don't think they existed," Kay said. "What everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War, and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the nineties," he said.

David Kay, who stepped down as leader of the U.S. hunt for weapons of mass destruction, said on January 23, 2004 that he does not believe there were any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in Iraq. 'I don't think they existed,' Kay told Reuters in a telephone interview. Kay is seen in Washington in this October 3 file photo. Photo by William Philpott/Reuters

The CIA announced earlier that former U.N. weapons inspector Charles Duelfer, who has previously expressed doubts that unconventional weapons would be found, would succeed Kay as Washington's chief arms hunter.

Kay said he believes most of what was going to be found in the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq has been found and that the hunt would become more difficult once America returned control of the country to the Iraqis.

The United States went to war against Baghdad last year citing a threat from Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. To date, no banned arms have been found.

In his annual State of the Union on Tuesday, President Bush insisted that former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had actively pursued dangerous programs right up to the start of the U.S. attack in March.

Citing a report to Congress in October, Bush said Kay had found "dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations."

"Had we failed to act," Bush said, "the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day."

JURY STILL OUT

And on Wednesday, Vice President Dick Cheney said the United States had not given up on finding unconventional weapons in Iraq. "The jury is still out," he said in a radio interview.

Kay said he left the post due to a "complex set of issues. It related in part to a reduction in the resource and a change in focus of ISG," he said referring to the Iraq Survey Group, which is in charge of the weapons hunt.

ISG analysts were diverted from hunting for weapons of mass destruction to helping in the fight against the insurgency, Kay said.

"When I had started out I had made it a condition that ISG be exclusively focused on WMD, that's no longer so," he said.

"We're not going to find much after June. Once the Iraqis take complete control of the government it is just almost impossible to operate in the way that we operate," Kay said.

"I think we have found probably 85 percent of what we're going to find," he said. "I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production and that's what we're really talking about."

Kay said he was going back to the private sector.

In a statement announcing Kay's departure, CIA Director George Tenet praised Kay for his "extraordinary service under dangerous and difficult circumstances."

Duelfer, 51, a former deputy executive chairman of the U.N. Special Commission that was responsible for dismantling Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, had previously expressed doubts that unconventional weapons would be found.

"I think that Mr. Kay and his team have looked very hard. I think the reason that they haven't found them is they're probably not there," Duelfer told NBC television earlier this month.

But in a statement included in the CIA announcement, Duelfer, who will be based in Iraq and as CIA special adviser to direct the WMD search, said he was keeping an open mind.

posted January 26, 2004 02:18 PM              

heres the link to the transcript of his interview...
http://www.casi.org.uk/info/unscom950822.pdf

posted January 26, 2004 04:09 PM            

There is a report/interview with a front line Iraqi military commander who details the shipment of WMD to the front-line units of the Iraqi military during the buildup prior to the war and well after the date the report you cited says all Iraq's WMD were destroyed. This Iraqi Commander is the source of the British statement that Iraq could fire WMD in 45 minutes.
http://www.mail-archive.com/sam11@erols.com/msg00197.html

Further, the article you cite fails the test of logic. Saddam supposedly passed up about 100 Billion dollars in oil revenue under a UN embargo to maintain the fiction he had WMD. It makes no sense at all. In fact, to avoid the consequences of war with the coalition, all Saddam had to do, at any time before the invasion of Iraq began was to pick up the phone and tell the Sec General of the UN that he had no WMD, they were all destroyed and he would turn over all the documents relating to their destruction and arrange interviews with the scientists who destroyed them, along with permitting UN inspectors to visit the sites where they were destroyed. He didn't do any of that. So, for maintaining a supposed fiction that he still had WMD, he lost about 100 Billion dollars of revenue under the embargo, got his 2 sons killed and got himself deposed and captured in addition to facing charges of mass murder and genocide.

Gen. Hussein Kamel is most certainly lying about the US giving Iraq chemical and biological components. What was given to Iraq was laboratory grade samples of some agents for medical research and that is a policy extended to many nations. At no time did the US give Iraq weaponized chemical and/or biological WMD. If we had, they sure as hell would have had a shelf life of more than 2 weeks.

When I see an obvious lie in someone's statement, I tend to wonder what the extent of their lying is. In this case, his report is refuted by a front line Iraqi commander who saw the shells loaded with WMD on the forward lines of the Iraqi military just prior to the war.

jwhop

posted January 26, 2004 10:49 PM              

[btw, this link might stop working after today, so I advise that you read it while you can].

posted January 27, 2004 09:33 AM              

Iraq Delivers Arms Declaration to U.N.
Associated Press
Last Updated: Dec. 7, 2002 at 7:33:00 p.m.

BAGHDAD, Iraq - Iraq handed over its long-awaited arms declaration to the United Nations on Saturday, denying it has doomsday weapons, and President Saddam Hussein grudgingly apologized to Kuwait for his 1990 invasion. At the same time, at a U.N. compound on Baghdad's outskirts, a government delegation was delivering a massive collection of documents detailing Iraq's chemical, biological and nuclear programs, meeting a demand and a deadline set by U.N. resolution 1441.
The huge Iraqi declaration was an anticlimax, since the Iraqi denial has been repeated endlessly, including by Gen. Amin on Saturday. ``I reiterate here Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction,'' he told reporters.
From 1991 to 1998, U.N. inspectors destroyed many tons of such weapons and dismantled the nuclear effort. But when they left in 1998, amid U.N.-Iraqi disputes over access to sites and U.S. spies within the U.N. operation, they suspected they had not found all Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.If Iraq is eventually found to have cooperated fully with the U.N. effort to deny it chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, the U.N. Security Council would consider lifting the crippling economic sanctions Iraqis have lived under for 12 years.

so Saddam couldve just picked up the phone huh? i dont think Bush Jr's "last resort peremptory attack" couldve waited much longer..

btw....Kamel was refering to a BINARY FORM OF WEAPONIZED VX GAS. theres nothing biological about vx or its cousin sarin. the synthesis of VX gas is a complex secret.the british invented it first and the u.s. traded nuclear technology for it.The vital precursors are phosphites, phosphorous chlorides, and alkyl-diethanolamines. Sales of these chemicals are restricted under the Chemical Weapons Convention. all the stockpiles of VX gas Kamel referred to were manufactured prior to the 1st Gulf war

heres a link to a fox news article that states iraq had covert American assistance using chemical weapons on iran and the kurds ...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,70073,00.html

I guess it IS one of those things "everyone knows" eh?
(btw everybody, I'm not implying that fox is a credible news source)
of course the assistance had to be covert as the u.s. had declared itself "neutral" in that war (lol)

and yes I admit I did think that whole "if you cross the red line in the sand, we'll use chemical weapons" thing was a pure hoax by the Pentagon.as to this Lt-Col al-Dabbagh, he was the head of an Iraqi air defence unit, why would he be given rpg's tipped with a "secret weapon"? lol !! he cant tell us what was in them?? and he didnt save even one for us?..if they were distributed that widely why werent they used, where are they now (theres a big reward!!)and why did we roll straight into baghdad wearing no protective suits? of course it all makes sense when you read that al-Dabbagh has been spying for the u.s. for years and now he's working for the new iraqi governing council.....

posted January 28, 2004 04:33 PM            

Thank you for providing a link to a news story that sows the seeds for the destruction of your argument that Saddam had no chemical or biological weapons.

"NEW YORK — Iraq, facing "serious consequences" if it does not comply with a U.N. resolution to admit weapons inspectors, has ordered unusually large amounts of a drug often used to counter the effects of nerve gas, Fox News has confirmed."

"Such a large quantity of atropine — 1.25 million doses, to be exact, along with an unspecified number of autoinjectors — could be used by Iraq to protect its soldiers and people from an enemy nerve-gas attack"

"State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said Tuesday that "any Iraqi order of more [atropine] than is necessary would be alarming because it could indicate a plan to use chemical weapons."

"If the Iraqis were going to use nerve agents, they would want to take steps to protect their own soldiers, if not their population," one administration official told the Times. "This is something that U.S. intelligence is mindful of and very concerned about."

"The United States renounced the use of nerve agents and other chemical weapons when it ratified the 1997 Chemical Weapons Convention. Iraq has not done so."

I also remember news stories complete with video detailing the finding of chemical/bio protective suits and atropine injectors on the battlefield as coalition forces advanced towards Baghdad and they weren't US military gear.

Everyone should read this article for themselves and then, ask the question; could any reasonable, unbiased person fail to come to the conclusion that Saddam had chemical/biological weapons immediately prior to the war and made plans to use them?

After a buried but fully functional MIG 29 or MIG 31 was found in the desert in Iraq, I did some calculations on the cube space it occupied. Rounding down, it's 74 feet long, wingspan is 44 feet, height is 20 feet. Extending these lines produces a cube 74X44X20 feet. A 55 gallon drum is 24 inches in diameter and 34 inches tall. That cube would store 5328 (55) gallon drums holding 293,040 gallons of material. That's enough storage in one bunker to store almost all of the unaccounted for chemical and biological agents the UN says Saddam didn't account for as being destroyed. One bunker in a country the size of California is hard to find. I believe it's still there or was shipped to Syria immediately prior to the war and there were news stories of large convoys of heavy trucks crossing the border into Syria just prior to the war.

So, you think that Colonel should have asked Saddam for leave so he could travel to London to visit MI 6 and take them a WMD sample? Merely passing on that information would have cost him his life if discovered. Incredible.

Here's a story out of Britain today. The judges findings are that there was no reason for the British government to discount the Colonels claim that the Iraqi military could fire WMD within 45 minutes. The BBC's allegation that the report was false and the government knew it was false was declared to be unfounded.
Associated Press story

"'Unfounded'
In his report, BBC journalist Andrew Gilligan said a government statement that Iraqi forces could deploy weapons of mass destruction within 45 minutes was based on false intelligence that officials knew was unreliable.

"Whether or not at some time in the future the report on which the 45-minute claim was based was shown to be unreliable, the allegations reported by Mr. Gilligan on 29 May 2003 that the government probably knew that the 45-minutes claim was wrong before the government decided to put it in the dossier was an allegation that was unfounded," Hutton said."
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/28/135817.shtml

SEC of State Powell laid out the US position on Iraq's WMD to the UN. Perhaps anyone who has doubts Iraq had WMD should read it.

Of course, I know it's common knowledge amongst the anti war crowd there were no WMD in Iraq. One of those things they just know, no facts needed.

Powell's speech to the UN regarding Iraq's WMD part 1
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/2/5/121425.shtml

Powell's speech to the UN regarding Iraq's WMD part 2
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2003/2/5/142600.shtml

You've made a couple of allegations of criminality on the part of the US government.
One that the US supplied chemical and/or biological weapons to Iraq to use on the Iranians. And two, that the US was complicit in that they provided assistance to Iraq.
The impression you hope to leave is that we supplied Iraq weaponized chemicals and biologicals and that we then assisted Iraq knowing they intended to use WMD against Iranian troops.
For your information, the assistance we provided Iraq concerned Iranian troop movements.

I'd like for you to get all your allegations against the US out in the open so please feel free to list any other allegations you wish to make.

Given the wealth and scope of the information about Iraq's WMD, the actions of Saddam Hussein, the phone intercepts, reports of a front-line commander, chemical/biological suits and atropine injectors found on the Iraqi battlefield, it's illogical for anyone to draw the conclusion Saddam didn't have WMD immediately prior to the war. There is not an intellegence agency among the developed nations that didn't believe it too, along with the UN.

jwhop

posted January 29, 2004 05:26 AM            

I am not part of the "pro-war" crowd.

In the beginning of this situation, I was (and still am) not a big fan of war, but I was completely on the side of the president. I felt that we had every right to protect this nation against attack, and I felt that the president was justified in every way. If the facts were the facts, I would probably still feel that way. Rush and Sean would have been proud of me! I parrotted the same material that jwhop parrots now ... and on the surface those arguments are practically airtight. Practically, but completely.

I have a bad habit of questioning what I hear from our beloved politicians and the all-knowing media, which inevitably leads me on a journey towards truth, and to the destruction of my world view. I hate it when that happens! My world view is constantly being destroyed! And just when I was enjoying being a good Republican!

There is no doubt that Iraq had WMDs. But where are they now? Yes, they could be buried, or in Syria, or who knows where. Well, someone knows, that is for certain.

After Iraq's failure to comply with resolution 1441, the US said that they knew about the WMDs, but could not reveal the source. I watched Powell's presentation to the UN, and he was certainly putting on a show. The US had all sorts of information on the goings-on in Iraq.

Why could we (the US) not have simply told the inspectors where to inspect? They were looking in all the wrong places, evidently.

And everyone must be completely in the dark about America's technological capabilities. I do not care if there are only ten gallons of biological agent buried a hundred feet deep ... the US has the technology to find it. And it would be a piece of cake if any of their ground intelligence were correct. (thanks a lot for destroying our intelligence, Mr. Clinton!)

What really bothers me, however, is very simple.

Look at Israel. This has got to be one of the most security laden countries in the world, yet terrorism is a daily occurance.

Now, look at America. The Islamic terrorists have vowed to destroy anything possible, at whatever cost. America is not exactly security laden. Our borders are wide open, and God knows who is running around in this country, able to do ... practically anything. If there is really this serious, terrible Holy War being waged against us, then where are the acts of terror? It is said that there are enemy "sleeper cells" throughout the country. Well, they must really be SLEEPING! Do they not know that there is a Holy War on?

If Israel cannot stop terrorist attacks, then the US surely cannot. Our internal security forces pale in comparison to Israel's, and I do not believe for one second that the US has thwarted any would-be attack from the inside. It does not make sense.

Common sense makes mince meat out of this entire situation, from the Right, and the Left. There are far too many things that just do not make sense, at least if you believe the official story.

I have no documents, news links, articles, or any other tangible proofs for anything. I only have questions for which there are no logical answers. I welcome any logical answer.

Please save the comfortable world view that I held when all of this started!!! Please!!!

posted January 29, 2004 11:17 AM              

you asked for a credible news source concerning the question of u.s.
involvement in iraqs wmd programs.
i only gave you a link to the UNSCOM interview with the person(hussein
kamel) who is being referred to in both the fox article and your colin powells presentation to the u.n. as their "source".....!!! lol!!!

you dont find it odd that bush or powell never called him an "obvious liar"???...
or does Bush jr. decide which statements of Kamel are "obvious lies" and which arent?
maybe Kamel (saddams son in law and trusted advisor) was assasinated for lying and covering up so well? maybe its easier for a kamel to pass thru the eye of a needle after all....
when colin powell never points out that Kamel also says all those old
weapons were destroyed, is that a lie by omission?
none of these questions are allegations of lying, they just dangle there heavily

maybe if John Kerry restores the presidential records act and freedom of
information act we MIGHT learn a little more?

former Texas congressman Henry Gonzalez
Gonzalez was credited with crafting tough savings and loan bailout legislation and helping expose the industry's 1980s excesses. During his stint as banking chairman, Gonzalez opened investigations that led to the resignation of the government's chief thrift regulator and the
conviction of S&L owner Charles Keating.
The Bush administration," Gonzalez charged in a July 27 speech, "sent U.S.technology to the Iraqi military and to many Iraqi military factories, despite overwhelming evidence showing that Iraq intended to use the technology in its clandestine nuclear, chemical, biological, and long-range
missile programs." He quoted U.S. intelligence documents which show the
administration knew that the Cleveland, Ohio, Matrix Churchill Corporation and the Atlanta branch of the Italian Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) were the cornerstones of a secret Iraqi arms technology procurement network in the U.S.

i'm just trying to step back and look at the big picture
just because a few pieces of the puzzle are irretrievably lost doesnt mean i cant see a picture forming...
Bush sr. head of the CIA then vice prez , then prezident
16+ years of being "out of the loop"?? c'mon!!
then his kids
Neal Bush(dont forget the billion dollar s&L kid who now gives speeches to the saudis on how to run a PR campaign to help their image in the u.s.)
jeb, just cuz he's kept his nose the cleanest(pun intended) doesnt mean i would vote for him,
george junior(i guess the whole bloodlines "outta da loop" starting way
back with Prescott Bush)

here is, i think, a fair overview of what is known about u.s. iraq relations under bush sr.
http://nsarchive.chadwyck.com/igessayx.htm

and of course references to Italian Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL) link heavily with henry kissinger and the bcci scandal at the same time
http://www.fas.org/irp/congress/1992_rpt/bcci/

heres a few more reams of interesting documents
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB107/index.htm

and since you seem to be quoting Howard Teicher(concerning u.s. satellite imagery) so will I now...

Howard Teicher, dated 1/31/95,
"Under CIA DIrector Casey and Deputy Director Gates, the CIA made sure that
non-U.S.manufacturers manufactured and sold to Iraq the weapons needed by Iraq.In certain instances where a key component in a weapon was not readily available, the highest levels of the United States government decided to make the component available, directly or indirectly, to Iraq
When I joined the NSC staff in early 1982, CIA Director Casey was adamant that CLUSTER BOMBS were a perfect "force multiplier"
that would allow the Iraqis to defend against the "human waves" of Iranian
attackers."

fox news
Wednesday, November 13, 2002
By Liza Porteus
Baghdad, with some covert American assistance, used chemical weapons several times during the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War, and against rebellious Kurds after the cease-fire ending hostilities with Teheran.On August 25, 1988, witnesses said Iraqi warplanes dropped three clusters each of four bombs on the Kurdish village of Birjinni. Observers recalled seeing black,
then yellowish smoke, followed by a not-unpleasant odor similar to fertilizer, and also a smell like rotten garlic, according to Physicians for Human Rights.

doesnt anyone else agree something smells rotten?
when this all started i too admitted that we must remove all these wmd's, then confront the other nations we KNEW were a threat(Saudi Arabia,Pakistan,Libya,Iran)
now I'm afraid we will be unable to make a case for taking further actions if required.now it will take another major attack to have any support fromwithin the u.s. or from anyone else.

when i said i DID think the "red line" thing was a pure hoax ,i meant i didnt think they even had someone on the "inside", i THOUGHT they just made it all up...that was just my initial reaction...my opinion
al-Dabbagh says the fedayeen had a bunch of "secret weapons" the u.s. has captured many fedayeen cells.last week they were caught in the act of digging up a huge weapons cache....no "secret weapons" were found only conventional rpg's.I'm beginning to suspect the "secret weapons" he is
referring to were covertly supplied by haliburton or bechtel and contain only spring launched, brightly colored toy snakes.

btw,al-Dabbagh says the u.s. was "lucky" that iraq forces didnt engage us, because of this "secret weapon". Jwhop.. can you find me any credible source with even a ballpark figure on how many iraqi soldiers we killed in the "major combat operations" alone? you probly dont care but i do....

posted January 30, 2004 09:25 PM              

I think you may be suggesting that this is a ploy by the central government, on the "The world is a big bad place, and you should trust us!" model. I'm not sure I believe that myself, but on the other hand, the government has been crying wolf for a few years now.