djxeno Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 http://www.sundayherald.com/33628May 4, 2003US: 'Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction'By Neil Mackay The Bush administration has admitted that Saddam Hussein probably had no weapons of mass destruction. Senior officials in the Bush administration have admitted that they would be 'amazed' if weapons of mass destruction (WMD) werefound in Iraq. According to administration sources, Saddam shut down and destroyed large parts of his WMD programmes before the invasion ofIraq. Ironically, the claims came as US President George Bush yesterday repeatedly justified the war as necessary to remove Iraq'schemical and biological arms which posed a direct threat to America. Bush claimed: 'Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We will find them.' The comments from within the administration will add further weight to attacks on the Blair government by Labour backbenchers thatthere is no 'smoking gun' and that the war against Iraq -- which centred on claims that Saddam was a risk to Britain, America and theMiddle East because of unconventional weapons -- was unjustified. The senior US official added that America never expected to find a huge arsenal, arguing that the administration was more concernedabout the ability of Saddam's scientists -- which he labelled the 'nuclear mujahidin' -- to develop WMDs when the crisis passed. This represents a clearly dramatic shift in the definition of the Bush doctrine's central tenet -- the pre-emptive strike. Previously,according to Washington, a pre-emptive war could be waged against a hostile country with WMDs in order to protect Americansecurity. Now, however, according to the US official, pre-emptive action is justified against a nation which simply has the ability to developunconventional weapons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by djxeno http://www.sundayherald.com/33628May 4, 2003US: 'Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction'By Neil Mackay The Bush administration has admitted that Saddam Hussein probably had no weapons of mass destruction. Senior officials in the Bush administration have admitted that they would be 'amazed' if weapons of mass destruction (WMD) werefound in Iraq. According to administration sources, Saddam shut down and destroyed large parts of his WMD programmes before the invasion ofIraq. Ironically, the claims came as US President George Bush yesterday repeatedly justified the war as necessary to remove Iraq'schemical and biological arms which posed a direct threat to America. Bush claimed: 'Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. We will find them.' The comments from within the administration will add further weight to attacks on the Blair government by Labour backbenchers thatthere is no 'smoking gun' and that the war against Iraq -- which centred on claims that Saddam was a risk to Britain, America and theMiddle East because of unconventional weapons -- was unjustified. The senior US official added that America never expected to find a huge arsenal, arguing that the administration was more concernedabout the ability of Saddam's scientists -- which he labelled the 'nuclear mujahidin' -- to develop WMDs when the crisis passed. This represents a clearly dramatic shift in the definition of the Bush doctrine's central tenet -- the pre-emptive strike. Previously,according to Washington, a pre-emptive war could be waged against a hostile country with WMDs in order to protect Americansecurity. Now, however, according to the US official, pre-emptive action is justified against a nation which simply has the ability to developunconventional weapons. Even if they don't exist the war was still just! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djxeno Posted May 5 Author Report Share Posted May 5 Why, because a brutal, oppressive dictator was taken out of power? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by djxeno Why, because a brutal, oppressive dictator was taken out of power? The address to the United Nations in Sept 2002 Bush cited 3 reasons we as one voice-one world should confront SADAM . so the UN can "Prove it's relevance" we all know how that debacle of back stabbing and pussy footing went..Bush cited 3 main reasons for action.. Harboring terrorists..We captured Al-Qeada operatives in bahgdad, journalists found documents govt buildings with Bin Laden name whited out proving his association with Iraq to attack a common enemy, the U.S.WMD...3k suits, antropiene, BANNED Al-samoud missiles to deliver them and testimonies from scientists who escaped.. give it time my freind we will find them.. 12 years oif decite can't be unraveled in 3 weeks.. Humanitarian..Bush cited the fiasco of the Oil for food program and the funneling of funds that were allocated for food and medicine but instead lined the pockets, furnished his Places and fed his hunger to obtain WMD'S..If getting 2 out of 3 it was still a good reason to remove him.. I still beleiv that WMD exist time will tell.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by mr mahs Even if they don't exist the war was still just! excuse my language, but i can't fucking believe you...now that the gov't is coming out and telling you iraq has no wmd's you say the war is still just?...how the fuck dare you?!?!...after all this...after all you have said...we were going there...no no no...we had a right to go there because our national security was at risk because of wmd's...now they come out and tell you they'd be surprised if they found any (eventhough before they told you they were there without any doubts), and you still support this war?...on what basis?...how was our invasion of iraq justified?...legally and morally?...aaaaaaahhhhhhhhhh...you make me so mad...you will just eat up ANYTHING they serve you...damn...they tell you to jump off the bridge and you will, because that's being patriotic...next the gov't will say that we went there to help our economy and liberate the iraqi people at the same time, and you'll say that's ok right?...unbelievable...let's look at the progression of the "reason" why we went to iraq:protect the worldthen..protect the u.s.then...liberate the iraqithen...protect the world economythen...protect our economythen...keep our economy on topharboring terrorists: pure b.s....hussein went against everything fundamentalist groups like al qaeda are for...bin laden hates hussein...wmd's: not found...the gov't is telling you they won't be found...scientists with no name came forward to make "testimonies"...food and medicine: wtf...who put in place the most draconian embargoes that rendered basic medical supplies unobtainable by iraq????...that's right the u.s....and now you're going to say that we had to go to war to make sure they could get basic food and medicine????...wtf... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by mr mahs The address to the United Nations in Sept 2002 Bush cited 3 reasons we as one voice-one world should confront SADAM . so the UN can "Prove it's relevance" we all know how that debacle of back stabbing and pussy footing went..Bush cited 3 main reasons for action.. Harboring terrorists..We captured Al-Qeada operatives in bahgdad, journalists found documents govt buildings with Bin Laden name whited out proving his association with Iraq to attack a common enemy, the U.S.WMD...3k suits, antropiene, BANNED Al-samoud missiles to deliver them and testimonies from scientists who escaped.. give it time my freind we will find them.. 12 years oif decite can't be unraveled in 3 weeks.. Humanitarian..Bush cited the fiasco of the Oil for food program and the funneling of funds that were allocated for food and medicine but instead lined the pockets, furnished his Places and fed his hunger to obtain WMD'S..If getting 2 out of 3 it was still a good reason to remove him.. I still beleiv that WMD exist time will tell.. Yeah, but most ppl on this board(and elsewhere) were crying for war because of perceived national security threats posed by Saddam's "weapons of mass destruction". Seems like most have forgotten that.Gotta say - the administration really did wage a hugely successful propanda battle. I still remember the repeated justification for war - "do you want another 9/11"?Still no substantial evidence saying the Iraqi govt had links with Al queda. More propanda. If you read any of those articles, they always say at the end "not clear if any Iraqi officials met with presumed Al queda operatives". This war was waged to show that the administration could and would bully other nations to do its will. Plain and simple. Whatever other side-effects that result(ie, "liberation" of the Iraqis, etc) are only accidental, or to be used to justify war. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by frenchbread keep our economy on topharboring terrorists: pure b.s....hussein went against everything fundamentalist groups like al qaeda are for...bin laden hates hussein...wmd's: not found...the gov't is telling you they won't be found...scientists with no name came forward to make "testimonies"...food and medicine: wtf...who put in place the most draconian embargoes that rendered basic medical supplies unobtainable by iraq????...that's right the u.s....and now you're going to say that we had to go to war to make sure they could get basic food and medicine????...wtf... You will beleive some far out conspiracy theory from Ted Rall about a pipe line under afghanistan is the reason Bush dropped the twin towers but you won't beleive Iraq is in bed with terrorists.. AMAZINGDon't get ahead of yourself with me admitting they didn't have WMD.. they do but I was mearly saying that if not found I and the majority of other americans wouldn't care and still thinks we did a good thing by removing him..The sanctions were put there by the UNITED NATIONS or do you think we acted unilaterally on that issue?? Are you insane the oil for food program was raped and pillaged by France and that added to the suffering of the Iraqi people.. How may Iraqi you think would have been fed and medicated if he only built 25 Places instaed of 50?? Tour logic is bent.. The UN puts sanctions on him for not abidding by the ceasefiree agreement then the UN implements a food for oil program and he uses the money to build dozens of palaces. WHY DOESN'T THAT ARGUMENT COME OUT OF YOUR CORNER?? There you go again blaming america for everything like a true LIBERAL.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by mr mahs You will beleive some far out conspiracy theory from Ted Rall about a pipe line under afghanistan is the reason Bush dropped the twin towers but you won't beleive Iraq is in bed with terrorists.. AMAZINGfar out conspiracy...tell me the pipeline is not there...tell me that unocal didn't negociate with the taliban to construct that pipeline before the wtc...tell me that the vp of unocal didn't testify before the house that the pipeline wouldn't be constructed until a friendly gov't was put in place in afghanistan...tell me that the u.s. didn't put hamid karzai, former unocal consultant, at the head of afghanistan...i'm not believing conspiracy theories...i believe in facts...you believe in propaganda...Originally posted by mr mahs Don't get ahead of yourself with me admitting they didn't have WMD.. they do but I was mearly saying that if not found I and the majority of other americans wouldn't care and still thinks we did a good thing by removing him..are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know where iraq or the u.s. are on the world map?...are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know anything about the issues, only worry about their job, and jump up and down when their president (who was AWOL during vietnam) lands on a navy carrier, in what is one of the most pronounced and obvious propaganda act in recent history?...Originally posted by mr mahs The sanctions were put there by the UNITED NATIONS or do you think we acted unilaterally on that issue?? Are you insane the oil for food program was raped and pillaged by France and that added to the suffering of the Iraqi people.. How may Iraqi you think would have been fed and medicated if he only built 25 Places instaed of 50?? Tour logic is bent.. The UN puts sanctions on him for not abidding by the ceasefiree agreement then the UN implements a food for oil program and he uses the money to build dozens of palaces. WHY DOESN'T THAT ARGUMENT COME OUT OF YOUR CORNER?? There you go again blaming america for everything like a true LIBERAL.... the sanctions were ENFORCED by the u.n., but make no mistake, they were proposed and pushed through by the u.s....what about the u.s. blockade?...and albright pushing through a resolution to extend the embargoes eventhough at the time, the WHO has reported that 1.2 Million iraqis had died from the embargo...(3/4 of Mil being children)...and that last statement of yours shows your level...all liberals are the same...do you even realize how retarded that is?...how simplistic...but i wouldn't expect any less from the guy still living in lala land...keep on living the dream...and yes, all people who don't agree with the war on iraq are liberals...and yes they all think the same...about everything...damn... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by frenchbread far out conspiracy...tell me the pipeline is not there...tell me that unocal didn't negociate with the taliban to construct that pipeline before the wtc...tell me that the vp of unocal didn't testify before the house that the pipeline wouldn't be constructed until a friendly gov't was put in place in afghanistan...tell me that the u.s. didn't put hamid karzai, former unocal consultant, at the head of afghanistan...i'm not believing conspiracy theories...i believe in facts...you believe in propaganda...are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know where iraq or the u.s. are on the world map?...are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know anything about the issues, only worry about their job, and jump up and down when their president (who was AWOL during vietnam) lands on a navy carrier, in what is one of the most pronounced and obvious propaganda act in recent history?...the sanctions were ENFORCED by the u.n., but make no mistake, they were proposed and pushed through by the u.s....what about the u.s. blockade?...and albright pushing through a resolution to extend the embargoes eventhough at the time, the WHO has reported that 1.2 Million iraqis had died from the embargo...(3/4 of Mil being children)...and that last statement of yours shows your level...all liberals are the same...do you even realize how retarded that is?...how simplistic...but i wouldn't expect any less from the guy still living in lala land...keep on living the dream...and yes, all people who don't agree with the war on iraq are liberals...and yes they all think the same...about everything...damn... GIANT YAWN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by mr mahs You will beleive some far out conspiracy theory from Ted Rall about a pipe line under afghanistan is the reason Bush dropped the twin towers but you won't beleive Iraq is in bed with terrorists.. AMAZING Excellent.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by frenchbread far out conspiracy...tell me the pipeline is not there...tell me that unocal didn't negociate with the taliban to construct that pipeline before the wtc...tell me that the vp of unocal didn't testify before the house that the pipeline wouldn't be constructed until a friendly gov't was put in place in afghanistan...tell me that the u.s. didn't put hamid karzai, former unocal consultant, at the head of afghanistan...i'm not believing conspiracy theories...i believe in facts...you believe in propaganda...are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know where iraq or the u.s. are on the world map?...are you talking about that majority of americans that don't know anything about the issues, only worry about their job, and jump up and down when their president (who was AWOL during vietnam) lands on a navy carrier, in what is one of the most pronounced and obvious propaganda act in recent history?...the sanctions were ENFORCED by the u.n., but make no mistake, they were proposed and pushed through by the u.s....what about the u.s. blockade?...and albright pushing through a resolution to extend the embargoes eventhough at the time, the WHO has reported that 1.2 Million iraqis had died from the embargo...(3/4 of Mil being children)...and that last statement of yours shows your level...all liberals are the same...do you even realize how retarded that is?...how simplistic...but i wouldn't expect any less from the guy still living in lala land...keep on living the dream...and yes, all people who don't agree with the war on iraq are liberals...and yes they all think the same...about everything...damn... 1- The pipeleine being developed... I beleive, and I also state that I hope that it will be completed shortly to help rebuild Afghanistan.. what I am refering to is your beleif that we went to war because of it, or that 911 was committed because of it.. that my freind I don't beleive...2- Conceited are we?? Suddenly the majority of the 300 million people in this country are idiots.. get off it! not everyone is persuing a PHD like yourself but the majority of people can take the facts and make their own decision.. Your rebutal to the latest pols is simply sour grape rationalization.. You would like the country to share the same views as yourself but can't except the fact that all people don't.. You would rather dismiss the poll as surveying idiots I don't get it?3- .. The one responsible for funneling the funds from the oil for food programming into their own pockets is responsible for those deaths why can't you admit that? The sanctions still provided money for the people where did it go? or answer me who was in charge of allocating the funds from the program? I will give one hint it is next to England and the people don't shower Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 Originally posted by mr mahs 2- Conceited are we?? Suddenly the majority of the 300 million people in this country are idiots.. the majority of people in this country are fucking sheep, and beleive whatever the government tells themthis can best be demonstrated by recent polls showing that over 50% of americans beleiving saddam was behind 9/11, not Bin Laden, as well as Clinton's absurd 70%+ approval ratingsand about Iraq being connected to Bin laden....BULLSHIT!if we were invading countries for their connections to Bin laden, we should have gone after Saudi Arabiaso Bin Laden visited Bagdhad...SO WHAT?!MOST OF BIN LADEN'S RECRUITS WERE FROM SAUDI ARABIA! MOST OF HIS FUNDING CAME FROM SAUDI ARABIA!who are the families of those killed in 9/11 suing?the government of SAUDI ARABIA.....NOT FUCKING IRAQ!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frenchbread Posted May 5 Report Share Posted May 5 how big a joke are you?...Originally posted by mr mahs 1- The pipeleine being developed... I beleive, and I also state that I hope that it will be completed shortly to help rebuild Afghanistan.. what I am refering to is your beleif that we went to war because of it, or that 911 was committed because of it.. that my freind I don't beleive...the building of that pipeline has NOTHING to do with helping the afghani people...don't try to pass this off as another "way" to help the afghani people...the construction of this pipeline started way before we went there...and we went there when its construction finally hit a dead end (i.e. taliban refusing to further negociate its construction)...don't try to pass this off as something that's there to help the afghani people...this pipeline is being built by american oil companies...not afghanistan...american oil companies are going to profit from it not afghanistan...Originally posted by mr mahs 2- Conceited are we?? Suddenly the majority of the 300 million people in this country are idiots.. get off it! not everyone is persuing a PHD like yourself but the majority of people can take the facts and make their own decision.. Your rebutal to the latest pols is simply sour grape rationalization.. You would like the country to share the same views as yourself but can't except the fact that all people don't.. You would rather dismiss the poll as surveying idiots I don't get it?please...stop your patriotic bs...this has nothing to do with me...i'm ashamed that our nation has a large majority that cannot think for themselves, or rather that are too lazy to think for themselves and that, as a result, do like you and eat up whatever the big tv is serving up...if you think my characterization is bad, then tell me how YOU would characterize the majority of the u.s. people...that majority that cannot place its OWN country, let alone the country it is invading, on a world map...that majority that just needs to hear insinuations that hussein was behind the wtc attacks enough times to believe it...(not even 2 years after the attacks happened)...you tell me how YOU characterize that...don't tell me that the people take the facts and make their own decisions...the only decision they make is which channel to listen to...(and when i say majority, that doesn't mean 300 Mil people...the majority is anywhere from 51% and up...)btw, as u.s. citizen, you should be outraged...not because i pointed out what i did, but because of what i pointed out...the fact our people are so lazy, that they cannot even be bothered to know where the country we bomb for 48 straight hours is located...(let alone where our country is located with respect to the rest of the world)that is an outrage...Originally posted by mr mahs 3- .. The one responsible for funneling the funds from the oil for food programming into their own pockets is responsible for those deaths why can't you admit that? The sanctions still provided money for the people where did it go? or answer me who was in charge of allocating the funds from the program? I will give one hint it is next to England and the people don't shower how old are you man?...what a feakin' child...are you trying to say that france is responsible for the damages caused the 12 years of sanctions pushed by the u.s....sanctions that were supposed to be shorter but that were extended by push of u.s. secretary of state albright?...please... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 Originally posted by frenchbread how big a joke are you?...the building of that pipeline has NOTHING to do with helping the afghani people...don't try to pass this off as another "way" to help the afghani people...the construction of this pipeline started way before we went there...and we went there when its construction finally hit a dead end (i.e. taliban refusing to further negociate its construction)...don't try to pass this off as something that's there to help the afghani people...this pipeline is being built by american oil companies...not afghanistan...american oil companies are going to profit from it not afghanistan...please...stop your patriotic bs...this has nothing to do with me...i'm ashamed that our nation has a large majority that cannot think for themselves, or rather that are too lazy to think for themselves and that, as a result, do like you and eat up whatever the big tv is serving up...if you think my characterization is bad, then tell me how YOU would characterize the majority of the u.s. people...that majority that cannot place its OWN country, let alone the country it is invading, on a world map...that majority that just needs to hear insinuations that hussein was behind the wtc attacks enough times to believe it...(not even 2 years after the attacks happened)...you tell me how YOU characterize that...don't tell me that the people take the facts and make their own decisions...the only decision they make is which channel to listen to...(and when i say majority, that doesn't mean 300 Mil people...the majority is anywhere from 51% and up...)btw, as u.s. citizen, you should be outraged...not because i pointed out what i did, but because of what i pointed out...the fact our people are so lazy, that they cannot even be bothered to know where the country we bomb for 48 straight hours is located...(let alone where our country is located with respect to the rest of the world)that is an outrage...how old are you man?...what a feakin' child...are you trying to say that france is responsible for the damages caused the 12 years of sanctions pushed by the u.s....sanctions that were supposed to be shorter but that were extended by push of u.s. secretary of state albright?...please... Listen you loon you have to stop listening to professers on your campuses that are stuck in the 60's and were too weak to make it in the real world... Except for a select few who came from the private sector to teach the majority od professers are rotting your brains with this revolutionary america is bad crap just listen to your self.. The fact you beleive we desttroyed the twin towers to develop a pipeline proves it...1- Just by bringing big buisness to that country will benefit the economy of Afghanistan vbasic economics..2- I can pinpoint the U.S on the map and so can most of my family who is interested in world affairs.. What you tried to do is stereotype the hole country or like you said 51%_+ as some hill billies.. hey a trillion dollar econmoy is not bad for a bunch of lazy idiots.. 3--France and Russia pushed harder for the oil for food program then any other country why? The funds in the escrow account at the U.N was controlled by France if you don't beleive Sadam is responsible for the death of his own people then you are dillusional my freind.. France made it possible for the revenue to be used to build weapons they are just as guilty...This is a statment put out by the state department..-More could be done, if Saddam Hussein would fully cooperate with the UN, both in the Oil-for-Food Program and in disarmament. Instead, the Iraqi government continues to exploit the Program. It has withheld sales from the market for political reasons and continues to smuggle oil out illegally –I am sure you will dismiss the statement because it came from the U.S. government.. just posted it to amuse you.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 Just wondering, but:- Why does some believe every conspiracy theory vomited but can not for one second believe that Hussein expertly hid weapons, moved them, and destroyed others BEFORE the war started?......If you want to discount 12 years of becoming experts at hiding things, that's your call.....but Iraq sure had months and months when the UN was jerking around the past year, and certainly when inspections started again -Why were some willing to give 100 ineffective weapons inspectors more time but not the U.S. to find WMD, even after the US continually said before the war that Iraqi scientists and people were the key to finding them?-Isn't it a little curious that Iraq is so "clean', even after the UN, and weapons inspectors know for a fact that Iraq had WMD after 1998, and Iraq NEVER provided any proof they destroyed their confirmed stockpiles?IMO, there were many justifications for this war...many, with WMD being one of them..I believe they will be found.....If they are not, I will also be the first who expects answers....not from the standpoint of a massive Bush lie, but a massive intelligence failure, or worse--did we create a self-fulfilling prophecy that WMD were handed to terrorist organizations in the months leading up to the war..Raver--I do not necessarily disagree with you that the US wanted to send a message as one of the reasons for this war--actually, taking down a ruthless dictator who has given the international community the finger the last 12 years is not a bad thing--and if it sends a message to other regimes like Syria, N Korea, and Iran--so be it....diplomacy is not what this region respects,..you can not deny that the upside of this show of force for reform and peace in the region is enormous But I do not think it is fair to diminish the "liberation" of the Iraqi people as an unintended consequence...not for this President--like him or not, right or wrong, he is a man of personal conviction, and IMO--he believed in this....he gets killed for being a religious man, but then gets killed for using liberation as a justificaton?bigpoppinails-- I am with you on the Saudi's.....enough already-they are the chief exporters and financial supporters of Wahhibism (spelling?), and it needs to be addressed...hopefully, by pulling our troops out, a new approach can take place Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cintron Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 Saddam HAD wmd's. That's the point. He had them right up until he realized we weren't fucking around and we were going to invade.Then he got rid of them and destroyed them. It's so simple i can't believe you're overlooking it.if you had something your neighbor wanted you to get rid of, and he was getting pissed, wouldn't you keep it right up until the cops came knocking on your door? Then, just as they're parking outside, flush it down the toilet and "hey guess I dont have anything illegal"...and then the neighbor looks like a fool.so simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 Originally posted by cintron Saddam HAD wmd's. That's the point. He had them right up until he realized we weren't fucking around and we were going to invade.Then he got rid of them and destroyed them. It's so simple i can't believe you're overlooking it.if you had something your neighbor wanted you to get rid of, and he was getting pissed, wouldn't you keep it right up until the cops came knocking on your door? Then, just as they're parking outside, flush it down the toilet and "hey guess I dont have anything illegal"...and then the neighbor looks like a fool.so simple. I'm with ya... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted May 6 Report Share Posted May 6 http://www.rense.com/general32/we.htmHow Did Saddam Get Weapons Of Mass Destruction?We Sold Them To HimBy Neil Mackay and Felicity ArbuthnotThe Sunday Herald - UK12-10-2The United States and Britain sold Saddam Hussein the technology and materials Iraq needed to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons of mass destruction. Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene. Classified US Defence Dep-artment documents also seen by the Sunday Herald show that Britain sold Iraq the drug pralidoxine, an antidote to nerve gas, in March 1992, after the end of the Gulf war. Pralidoxine can be reverse engineered to create nerve gas. The Senate committee's rep orts on 'US Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual-Use Exports to Iraq', undertaken in 1992 in the wake of the Gulf war, give the date and destination of all US exports. The reports show, for example, that on May 2, 1986, two batches of bacillus anthracis -- the micro-organism that causes anthrax -- were shipped to the Iraqi Ministry of Higher Education, along with two batches of the bacterium clostridium botulinum, the agent that causes deadly botulism poisoning. One batch each of salmonella and E coli were shipped to the Iraqi State Company for Drug Industries on August 31, 1987. Other shipments went from the US to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission on July 11, 1988; the Department of Biology at the University of Basrah in November 1989; the Department of Microbiology at Baghdad University in June 1985; the Ministry of Health in April 1985 and Officers' City, a military complex in Baghdad, in March and April 1986. The shipments to Iraq went on even after Saddam Hussein ordered the gassing of the Kurdish town of Halabja, in which at least 5000 men, women and children died. The atrocity, which shocked the world, took place in March 1988, but a month later the components and materials of weapons of mass destruction were continuing to arrive in Baghdad from the US. The Senate report also makes clear that: 'The United States provided the government of Iraq with 'dual use' licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological and missile-system programmes.' This assistance, according to the report, included 'chemical warfare-agent precursors, chem ical warfare-agent production facility plans and technical drawings, chemical warfare filling equipment, biological warfare-related materials, missile fabrication equipment and missile system guidance equipment'. Donald Riegle, then chairman of the committee, said: 'UN inspectors had identified many United States manufactured items that had been exported from the United States to Iraq under licences issued by the Department of Commerce, and [established] that these items were used to further Iraq's chemical and nuclear weapons development and its missile delivery system development programmes.' Riegle added that, between January 1985 and August 1990, the 'executive branch of our government approved 771 different export licences for sale of dual-use technology to Iraq. I think that is a devastating record'. It is thought the information contained in the Senate committee reports is likely to make up much of the 'evidence of proof' that Bush and Blair will reveal in the coming days to justify the US and Britain going to war with Iraq. It is unlikely, however, that the two leaders will admit it was the Western powers that armed Saddam with these weapons of mass destruction. However, Bush and Blair will also have to prove that Saddam still has chemical, biological and nuclear capabilities. This looks like a difficult case to clinch in view of the fact that Scott Ritter, the UN's former chief weapons inspector in Iraq, says the United Nations des troyed most of Iraq's wea pons of mass destruction and doubts that Saddam could have rebuilt his stocks by now. According to Ritter, between 90% and 95% of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction were des troyed by the UN. He believes the remainder were probably used or destroyed during 'the ravages of the Gulf War'. Ritter has described himself as a 'card-carrying Republican' who voted for George W Bush. Nevertheless, he has called the president a 'liar' over his claims that Saddam Hussein is a threat to America. Ritter has also alleged that the manufacture of chemical and biological weapons emits certain gases, which would have been detected by satellite. 'We have seen none of this,' he insists. 'If Iraq was producing weapons today, we would have definitive proof.' He also dismisses claims that Iraq may have a nuclear weapons capacity or be on the verge of attaining one, saying that gamma-particle atomic radiation from the radioactive materials in the warheads would also have been detected by western surveillance. The UN's former co-ordinator in Iraq and former UN under-secretary general, Count Hans von Sponeck, has also told the Sunday Herald that he believes the West is lying about Iraq's weapons programme. Von Sponeck visited the Al-Dora and Faluja factories near Baghdad in 1999 after they were 'comprehensively trashed' on the orders of UN inspectors, on the grounds that they were suspected of being chemical weapons plants. He returned to the site late in July this year, with a German TV crew, and said both plants were still wrecked. 'We filmed the evidence of the dishonesty of the claims that they were producing chemical and biological weapons,' von Sponeck has told the Sunday Herald. 'They are indeed in the same destroyed state which we witnessed in 1999. There was no trace of any resumed activity at all.' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.