igloo Posted June 3 Report Share Posted June 3 Cracking the WMD CaseNo time for defeatism.By Hussain Hindawi & John R. Thomsonhere is no denying it: whereabouts of the Weapons of Mass Destruction is very puzzling and extremely troubling. Finding them, or at the least what has happened to them, is a matter of great importance. It is fully as important — and as assured — as eventually running down Saddam Hussein, his sons, and their assorted cohorts. Part of the puzzle is not complicated, at all: The United States and its allies did not fabricate the existence of WMD or the danger of letting the Butcher of Baghdad and his scientific henchmen continue to develop such awful weapons. George Bush, Dick Cheney, Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice, and Donald Rumsfeld never considered using the nonexistent existence of WMD as an excuse for invading Iraq and deposing its despots. Those who wish the United States harm, whatever the cost, created a monstrous myth. We need only remember the dossier Secretary of State Powell presented to the U.N. Security Council. It was comprehensive, highly detailed and virtually impossible to fabricate, sufficient that after three days study, even the cautious Powell was convinced. The intelligence material the U.S. possessed, much of it finally shared with other members of the Security Council, was replete with photographs and corroborating eyewitness reports. (The information had not been displayed previously because of the well-earned reputation of Hans Blix's inspection operation for leaking key information to Iraqi agents.)There is no way that countless human contacts and electronically gathered data could have been manufactured. Moreover, it would have been equally impossible to keep secret the bogus nature of such a huge enterprise.It is beyond all logic to think any organization could put up such a complex case, without there being at least one person of the hundreds involved who would leak "the true story." Those who would use any pretext to denigrate America have put forth a thoroughly improbable and patently unprovable theory, as virtually all serious analysts have concurred from its first being floated.Indeed, like an accused felon pleading nolo contendere, no contest, in a trial, the absence of any meaningful Iraqi documentation on the disposition of tens of tons of biological, chemical and nuclear materials that were clearly useful only for terrible weapons, stood as mute admission. Consider some of the other, equally sinkable, canards: the two "mobile bio factories" of an estimated 15, those creatively constructed semi-trailers, were simply used to manufacture, well, something (it is possible they in fact could make fertilizer); the trailers were left without any trace of their previous usage ("scrubbed clean" as investigators reported) because of the inherent neatness of the technicians involved; the warehouses of chemicals discovered in numerous locations were part of the country's massive fertilizer program, although admittedly they could have been used for WMD, but of course no WMD have been found; the extremely dangerous radiation levels at the Al-Tuwaitha nuclear facilities not far from Baghdad and the holy city of Najaf were simply left over from the time 15-20 years earlier, when Iraq had a nuclear weapons program, which has long since been discontinued; "Madame Anthrax" and "Doctor Germ", Western sobriquets applied to Huda Ammash and Rahib Taha, the two top female WMD scientists now under detention, were a bizarre attempt by Saddam to seem to support feminine affirmative action.The underlying and persistent contention that Iraqi WMD never existed is particularly dangerous, however. Coming from the Left, it is a pernicious attempt to lull the U.S. and its allies into dropping the search for them. Coming from the right, it is naïve and, worse, unwittingly defeatist.The idea that hundreds of Iraqis employed to develop WMD were only claiming, but not actually, doing so to humor and deceive Saddam is preposterous. Such a concept mirrors the leftist proposition that hundreds of American and British intelligence personnel contrived — and managed to keep secret! — the tale of Iraqi WMD. Similarly, large-scale destruction of WMD would have been revealed by now: if any renegade Baathist lieutenant could do so, he would try to earn his freedom by revealing either story in provable detail.So, where are they? What happened to these vaunted Weapons of Mass Destruction under development and manufactured by Saddam's minions? Although finding them has proved vexing, the answer is neither complicated nor remotely approaching rocket science in sophistication.There are in fact two highly credible — and probable — answers. In the months of contrived and contorted, seemingly endless U.N. diplomacy, Saddam and company had ample time [a] to hide any type and number of weapons in difficult to detect places around California-sized Iraq, and/or to export them into safe havens controlled by the world's far flung, loosely allied terror network.Biological weapons, including the notorious anthrax and the deadly sarin, take up minimal space and there is no difficulty whatever hiding them. A filled letter envelope can immobilize a metropolis. The greater challenge is making certain the awful stuff does not escape from whatever contains it, unless and until the terrorist wishes to release it. A few Baath, al Qaeda, Hamas, or Al-Fatah thugs could already have carried enough to blackmail the world or destroy much of its citizenry, or both.Chemical weapons carry a different advantage for the terrorist. Most of the key ingredients can be readily purchased in a supermarket or hardware store. Thus, when a large cache of an innocent sounding material is found, the professional doubters can attribute its presence to the much abused fertilizer ingredient scam. Can anyone seriously believe all the stuff found in a dozen sites was solely to produce more artificial manure than the entire Middle East could use in a decade?Nuclear weapons, which no one had claimed Iraq as yet possessed in ready-to-use form, are last but far from least. It has of course been well documented that Saddam's minions purchased several key materials for building nuclear weapons and were negotiating with at least three different national organizations for more. Moreover, radiation levels at Al-Tuwaitha, located between Baghdad and Najaf were such that the site was being used for atomic R&D, unless perhaps we are to believe Saddam had conceived a creative way to Chernobylize thousands of Shia, whom he detested, flocking to their holiest center of worship.More worrisome are the ongoing reports that several so-called suitcase nuclear bombs, missing following the fall of the Soviet Union from its inventory, were delivered to Baghdad by newly entrepreneurial Russians. Each such weapon would have the force of the bomb dropped on Nagasaki and if true, could have been secreted in the country or shipped to foreign collaborators, or both.Coalition of the willing experts are certain Iraq maintained a major WMD program to the end of the late hated Iraqi regime, and thankfully are dedicated to locating the potentially devastating weapons. The most dangerous see-no-evil attitude imaginable is to claim they do not exist, just because they have not as yet been found. While many may have been destroyed in the run-up to war; all serious observers believe a dangerous number still exist. Arguing otherwise serves to weaken allied will to find and destroy them. We must, in short, crack this potentially lethal case. — Hussain Hindawi is a native Iraqi historian, humanitarian, and journalist who currently serves as editor of United Press International's Arabic News Service. John R. Thomson has been involved in the Middle East since 1966 as businessman, diplomat, and journalist. This was originally written for UPI and is reprinted with permission Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted June 3 Author Report Share Posted June 3 *Bump* for the evening crew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted June 5 Author Report Share Posted June 5 Too hard for the resident left, anti -Bush brigade to dispute an Iraqi??C'mon lefties---you have been working soooo hard promoting the Bush WMD "lie", are you reduced to only promoting anti-Bush venon written by antiwar chumps with an misguided agenda? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted June 12 Author Report Share Posted June 12 Why is the anti-war crowd ignoring this--because an Iraqi was the author, and to debate this account would be foolish Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skince55 Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 They are just mad because they have nothing to dispute the fact that the white devil government of the United States was correct in it's assumptions of Iraq posessing a WMD program. Oh wait, I meant Nazi government of the United States :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
igloo Posted June 12 Author Report Share Posted June 12 Originally posted by skince55 They are just mad because they have nothing to dispute the fact that the white devil government of the United States was correct in it's assumptions of Iraq posessing a WMD program. Oh wait, I meant Nazi government of the United States :laugh: Here is an Iraqi iside of the story--but they will ignore that...the same way that they ignore the fact that their God Clinton attacked Iraq twice because of WMD, that foreign intelligence services (including France and Russia) agreed Iraq had WMD, that UN inspectors left in 1998 with confirmed WMD stockpiles, etc, etc, etc, etc, etc... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 They will never admit they had them it would prove Bush right and we all know that can't happen.. Finally someone with balls to protect our country and the left hates that, god forbid they put our country first instaed of worrying what the world thinks.. ... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Haven't read the whole article...haven't had time yet, but just to refute your debate on the "Iraqi side of the story".... did you ever read Scott Ritter's story? He was a US weapons inspector who exposed a lot about the previous weapons inspections?Do you believe him? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Originally posted by raver_mania Haven't read the whole article...haven't had time yet, but just to refute your debate on the "Iraqi side of the story".... did you ever read Scott Ritter's story? He was a US weapons inspector who exposed a lot about the previous weapons inspections?Do you believe him? Oh, another question - what is the status of this Hussain Hindawi? Is he an exiled Iraqi..ever lived in Iraq?One really has to be very critical when one sees articles written by Iraqis who possibly have a biased attitude toward the whole issue. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kramadas Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Once, or if, they do find WMD's, I'll be the first to say I was wrong...however, till then I'm just going to keep questioning, because, like I mentioned earlier, I think there were more ulterior motives for this war (Freeing the Iraqi ppl from a dictator not ranking high on that list). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigpoppanils Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Originally posted by raver_mania OI think there were more ulterior motives for this war (Freeing the Iraqi ppl from a dictator not ranking high on that list). thank youif this war was states as a war of liberation from the beginning, i would have been all for it.but it wasn't. it was all about WMD and links to Al-Qaeda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Originally posted by raver_mania Haven't read the whole article...haven't had time yet, but just to refute your debate on the "Iraqi side of the story".... did you ever read Scott Ritter's story? He was a US weapons inspector who exposed a lot about the previous weapons inspections?Do you believe him? he was on c-span the other day...he had a lot of amazing things to say...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 Originally posted by sassa he was on c-span the other day...he had a lot of amazing things to say...... :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.htmlhttp://www.commondreams.org/views02/0721-02.htm Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Originally posted by sassa http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.htmlhttp://www.commondreams.org/views02/0721-02.htm The guys a loon!In 98 he quits because Clinton was more interested in ruining dresses and NOW all of a sudden Sadam is the pope....HORSE SHIT....He's on the take, that boy is dirty..I am still laughing that you said he had "alot of amazing things to say".... :laugh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sassa Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Originally posted by mr mahs The guys a loon!In 98 he quits because Clinton was more interested in ruining dresses and NOW all of a sudden Sadam is the pope....HORSE SHIT....He's on the take, that boy is dirty..I am still laughing that you said he had "alot of amazing things to say".... :laugh: am i supposed to run off and cry in the corner because you can't see past your bullshit?have you even read anything he has wrote? please get over yourself. :rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
normalnoises Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Can't you see his id can't go beyond Bill O'Reilly? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Originally posted by sassa am i supposed to run off and cry in the corner because you can't see past your bullshit? Yeah this is coming from someone who beleived a article in the ONION.. :laugh: What strikes me is you take the word of someone who is against america what a shock.Scott Ritter is a fraud!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Originally posted by normalnoises Can't you see his id can't go beyond Bill O'Reilly? NO SPIN ZONE Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Scott Ritter is suing Sean Hannity for defamation or in realty of exposing Scott Riters lunacy.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mr mahs Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 Originally posted by sassa he was on c-span the other day...he had a lot of amazing things to say...... :laugh: 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.