cia admits bush knew saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

retired_bemesel · 09-06-2007, 06:56 PM

It was the same with Korea, same again with Vietnam and was so obvious, even at the time, with Iraq.

Lies used to support going to war.

Happened before and will always happen.

We voters are too apatheitic to do anything about it.

retired_autumn · 09-06-2007, 06:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daaaaave:so wp facility that was destroyed 6 years before the war.

I think the 'I don't want to believe what my lyin' eyes are telling me' rationale was that what the factory produced could have been moved, and hidden, in who knows what quantities, before the place was bombed.

After 9/11, wanna stake your career on that? And even if you did, would your superiors?

retired_princess160 · 09-06-2007, 06:56 PM

Yeah, yeah, try and steer away from it.

retired_ks reddy · 09-06-2007, 06:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daaaaave:
wahey

From 1992 to 1994, Iraq greatly expanded the capability of its Al Hakam facility. Indigenously produced 5 cubic meter fermentors were installed, electrical and water utilities were expanded, and massive new construction to house its desired 50 cubic meter fermentors were completed.

With the economy at rock bottom in late 1995, ISG judges that Baghdad abandoned its existing BW program in the belief that it constituted a potential embarrassment, whose discovery would undercut Baghdad’s ability to reach its overarching goal of obtaining relief from UN sanctions.

In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain advanced BW weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes. Indeed, from the mid-1990s, despite evidence of continuing interest in nuclear and chemical weapons, there appears to be a complete absence of discussion or even interest in BW at the Presidential level.

Shame they still carried on acting up, ain't it?

retired_the gizmo · 09-06-2007, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Daaaaave:
since al hakem linked only to that article and the fantastic works of william safire, I perservered and came up with the actual name, al hakam.

At Al Hakam, production of botulinum toxin for weapons purposes began in April 1989 and anthrax in May 1989. Initially much of the fermentation capacity for anthrax was used for the production of anthrax simulant for weapons field trials. Production of anthrax itself, it is claimed, began in earnest in 1990. In total, about 6,000 litres of concentrated botulinum toxin and 8,425 litres of anthrax were produced at Al Hakam during 1990.

In May/June 1996, a Commission team (UNSCOM 134/BW 31) supervised the destruction of the extensive buildings, equipment and materials. All structures and equipment at Al Hakam, except for a few items, were explosively demolished and the remnants were buried. The equipment at Al Manal and Al Safah, two other known facilities that had been used in the proscribed programme, was transported to Al Hakam and destroyed there. The air handling system for high containment at Al Manal was inactivated. The growth media purchased for the proscribed activities was also destroyed. [S/1996/848]

so wp facility that was destroyed 6 years before the war.

And? Iraq was continuing to cover up their production of NBC weapons. Would you have bet they wouldn't try it again?

Bet yer life? </BLOCKQUOTE>

one small note. there was no production of nbc weapons.

I'll bet my life that when professionals like scott ritter say "if they were restarting it, we'd know it" they mean just that. it isn't like north korea suddenly surprised us with their nuclear research. even if they had all the material and all the equipment it was still a matter of years before they could put something together. it isn't like we were running out of time on this non-existent calamity.

retired_ks reddy · 09-06-2007, 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Daaaaave:

one small note. there was no production of nbc weapons.

I'll bet my life that when professionals like scott ritter say "if they were restarting it, we'd know it" they mean just that. it isn't like north korea suddenly surprised us with their nuclear research. even if they had all the material and all the equipment it was still a matter of years before they could put something together. it isn't like we were running out of time on this non-existent calamity.

Then why was Al Hakem/am destroyed? And Ritter also thought there were weapons right up until he got sacked. He also thought they could be put together in weeks.

retired_ks reddy · 09-06-2007, 07:04 PM

*Chemical/biological weapons that is, not nukes.

retired_the gizmo · 09-06-2007, 07:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bflaff:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Daaaaave:so wp facility that was destroyed 6 years before the war.

I think the 'I don't want to believe what my lyin' eyes are telling me' rationale was that what the factory produced could have been moved, and hidden, in who knows what quantities, before the place was bombed.

After 9/11, wanna stake your career on that? And even if you did, would your superiors? </BLOCKQUOTE>

would I let my country go to war based on a hunch that's based on a guess that's based on a suspicion? no.

and even assuming that hunch based on the guess based on the suspicions was true, you gonna tell me it adds up to

"Iraq has chemical and biological weapons. Saddam has continued to produce them. He has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and biological weapons which could be activated within 45 minutes."

retired_ks reddy · 09-06-2007, 07:08 PM

Last UNMOVIC report before 9/11.

"Conclusions:

18. Much progress has been achieved in the
disarmament area in Iraq since 1991 and some
remaining issues may prove on examination to be of
limited significance. Nevertheless, as noted by the
Security Council in resolution 1284 (1999), there
remain unresolved disarmament issues, including
issues of key importance. Moreover, the absence of
inspectors, and the lack of continuity of knowledge
since 1998, raises the question whether additional
issues have arisen that must also be resolved.
UNMOVIC has reached a level of preparedness which
would allow it to implement the mandate given to it in
an independent, effective and non-provocative manner.
The cooperation of Iraq with UNMOVIC, as demanded
by the Security Council, would create the opportunity
for it to build confidence, which no unilateral
statements can provide, that it is fully complying with
all relevant resolutions of the Security Council and
thus opening the prospect of the lifting of sanctions."

retired_the gizmo · 09-06-2007, 07:09 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Sir Bert Preast:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Originally posted by Daaaaave:

one small note. there was no production of nbc weapons.

I'll bet my life that when professionals like scott ritter say "if they were restarting it, we'd know it" they mean just that. it isn't like north korea suddenly surprised us with their nuclear research. even if they had all the material and all the equipment it was still a matter of years before they could put something together. it isn't like we were running out of time on this non-existent calamity.

Then why was Al Hakem/am destroyed? And Ritter also thought there were weapons right up until he got sacked. He also thought they could be put together in weeks. </BLOCKQUOTE>

it was destroyed because it was a weapons facility? that doesn't change the fact that it wasn't in use because the iraqis had abandoned it?

months, not weeks.

and he also stated that war was not the answer, but renewed diplomacy. so yeah...he hopped right on board that bandwagon.

cia admits bush knew saddam had no weapons of mass destruction

Grab a beer, sit back and relax.

cia admits bush knew saddam had no weapons of mass destruction