SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : I Will Continue to Continue, to Pretend.... -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/21/2006 7:05:41 PM
From: Sully-  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 35834
 
US Found WMDs in Iraq … and Covered It Up?

By Patrick Hynes on Politics
Ankle Biting Pundits

This makes little sense to me.

Sen. Rick Santorum and Rep. Pete Hoekstra held a press conference earlier today during which they revealed information contained in a newly declassified document that says the United States has discovered over 500 chemical munitions in Iraq since 2003.

But they overed it up.

<<< Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.) announced Wednesday the finding of over 500 munitions or weapons of mass destruction, specifically “sarin- and mustard-filled projectiles,” in Iraq.

Reading from unclassified portions of a document developed by the U.S. intelligence community, Santorum said, “Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.”

According to Santorum, “That means in addition to the 500, there are filled and unfilled munitions still believed to exist within the country.”

Reading from the document, Santorum added, “Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the Black Market. Use of these weapons by terrorist or insurgent groups would have implications for coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside of Iraq cannot be ruled out. The most likely munitions remaining are sarin- and mustard-filled projectiles. And I underscore filled.”

Santorum said the “purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and environmental storage conditions.”

While acknowledging that the agents “degrade over time,” the document said that the chemicals “remain hazardous and potentially lethal.” >>>

I have the same questions everyone else has: Why now? Why not in 2003? Is this authentic? And much more. Baffling.

anklebitingpundits.com

cnsnews.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/21/2006 7:39:11 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
WMDs in Iraq

Kathryn Jean Lopez
The Corner

The bullet points from today's declassification, via RJS's office:

- Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.

- Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.

- Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market. Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out.

- The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filled projectiles.

- The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.

- It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqi groups desire to acquire and use chemical weapons.

corner.nationalreview.com

santorum.senate.gov



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 11:51:49 AM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The real story on WMDs needs to be told -- but carefully

by Hugh Hewitt
Townhall.com
Jun 22, 2006

Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum and Michigan Congressman Pete Hoekstra have spent a lot of years in Washington, D.C., and both are very familiar with the agendas at work in the intelligence agencies. Both are also skilled in the use of information that can be disclosed while protecting information that has to be concealed.

So when the pair announced on the first day of summer that they had been provided a classified report on WMDs discovered in Iraq after the invasion, and that Director of National Intelligence John Negroponte had provided an unclassified summary, they began the very constrained effort to alert the public that the story line on WMD in Iraq is incorrect.

Because of the classified nature of the original report on WMD, Santorum and Hoekstra could only convey very basic facts, the two most important of which are:

More than 500 WMDs have been discovered post invasion.

The terrorists -- like Coalition forces -- are looking for WMDs.

Because Senator Santorum is in a re-election battle, the immediate reaction of the Beltway press corps was to dismiss this announcement as little more than a campaign stunt, a reaction that ignores Hoekstra's involvement as well as his and Santorum's long push for more transparency regarding Iraq from the intelligence community.

Some usual suspects --anonymous of course-- were called by Washington Post and other reporters, and the announcement filed under the "doesn't matter" category, where it will remain unless the Administration wants more information to surface.

Here's what we need to know:

Did Saddam and/or his inner circle know where these WMD had been hidden?

How did we find them?

Answers to just those two questions will provide extremely crucial information to a public still intensely and rightly interested in the case for war in 2003.

And the Bush Administration should want the whole record out, no matter what it shows. Though there may be some danger of assisting terrorists in their hunt for other caches of buried WMD, the facts surrounding these finds ought to be able to be disclosed in such a fashion as to serve both the need for the public to understand the entire picture and of course to keep other as-yet-undiscovered WMD out of terrorist hands.

Hugh Hewitt is a nationally syndicated radio show host and Townhall.com's executive editor.

Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com

townhall.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 1:42:09 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The Gas Shells

By wretchard
The Belmont Club

Hot Air has video of Senator Rick Santorum announcing declassified information that about 500 gas-filled artillery shells have been found in Iraq. Senator Santorum's press release says:

<<< June 21, 2006 Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), Chairman of the Senate Republican Conference, joined Congressman Peter Hoekstra, (R-MI-2), Chairman of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, today to make a major announcement regarding the release of newly declassified information that proves the existence of chemical munitions in Iraq since 2003. The information was released by the Director of National Intelligence, John Negroponte, and contained an unclassified summary of analysis conducted by the National Ground Intelligence Center. In March, Senator Santorum began advocating for the release of these documents to the American public.

“The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq,” said Senator Santorum. “It is essential for the American people to understand that these weapons are in Iraq. I will continue to advocate for the complete declassification of this report so we can more fully understand the complete WMD picture inside Iraq.”

The following are the six key points contained in the unclassified overview:

- Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.

- Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq’s pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.

- Pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market. Use of these weapons by terrorists or insurgent groups would have implications for Coalition forces in Iraq. The possibility of use outside Iraq cannot be ruled out.
The most likely munitions remaining are sarin and mustard-filled projectiles.

- The purity of the agent inside the munitions depends on many factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives, and environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal.

- It has been reported in open press that insurgents and Iraqi groups desire to acquire and use chemical weapons. >>>


Technically, this means that the long-lost WMDs have been found. But these may not exactly be the WMDs the public had in mind. The public image associated with WMD stockpiles is probably a hill of diabolical looking devices in a gleaming underground facility like the doomsday machines in a James Bond movie. Five hundred old gas shells may technically be chemical weapons, but it wouldn't be what Hollywood would use for a prop. That doesn't mean the weapons couldn't have killed people. But the calculus on both sides of partisan aisle will not care so much about explosive or chemical payload so much as political impact. Even in their degraded state the shells probably could have killed a lot of people. Captain Ed says:

    An artillery company could have laid down a very effective
attack on an enemy position, quickly killing or disabling
them in a manner outlawed for decades. Of course, that had
been the entire point of the UN Security Council resolutions
-- to strip Saddam of that capability -- and he obviously
retained it, and lied about it.
But. In politics there's always a but.

<<< The next question will be why the White House did not release this information at the time of their discovery. Santorum's statement says, “The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq[.] It is essential for the American people to understand that these weapons are in Iraq. I will continue to advocate for the complete declassification of this report so we can more fully understand the complete WMD picture inside Iraq.” That implies that a broader analysis of WMD in Iraq exists -- and that it differs significantly from the common understanding shown thus far.

Some will claim that the release is strictly for political purposes. They may have a point, but I doubt it will have anything to do with domestic politics. If Bush wanted to use it for that, he would have done so in October 2004 and not in June 2006. This information changes the picture about our pre-war intelligence in time for the Iranian confrontation -- and I suspect that the White House wants to declassify it in order to convince European leaders that our intel actually paid off. >>>

And then there's this from the Real Ugly American reporting on a news interview on TV.
    General Tom Mcinerney is reporting on Fox Hannity and 
Colmes right now that that the administration has been
keeping this low profile to avoid exposing 3 of the 5
members of the UN Security council; Russia, China, and
France. McInerney says these weapons will be traced to
these countries, and asserts it is well known that Russia
helped Saddam move most of his WMD stockpiles out of Iraq
before the war.
Well, who knows? But questions in Iraq have long moved past the stated casus belli of 2003. Saddam's a prisoner. His state is dismantled. The Sunnis, if not overthrown, are at least no longer in control. There is Shi'ite versus Shi'ite conflict in southern Iraq. Iran is not going to walk in and take over the whole place. The issues are different. The development of a missile weapons delivery system by North Korea now adds a dimension to Iranian efforts to acquire a nuclear weapons capability that wasn't there in 2003. In this context, a pile of 500 gas artillery shells though it is everything that 500 gas artillery shells ought to be, may not seem like a hill of beans in this crazy world. Count on the New York Times to realize that -- now.

fallbackbelmont.blogspot.com

hotair.com

santorum.senate.gov

captainsquartersblog.com

therealuglyamerican.com

foxnews.com

news.google.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 1:48:42 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
The WMD Story

Jonah Goldberg
The Corner

I'm still reading up, but my guess is that this story will not change the conventional wisdom much because peoples' minds are made up and while I think this story is significant it's just not enough to change minds. Part of the blame falls on the Bush White House which clearly decided a long time ago to stop aggressively defending this aspect of the decision to go to war. This always struck me as proof — contra the Bush-bashers — that he went to war in good faith. If it had all been a conspiracy, the evil neo-cabal would have protected their cover story a lot better.

corner.nationalreview.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 2:35:17 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
MSM And WMD

By Hugh Hewitt

Here's the WaPo report on the statements made by Senator Santorum yesterday:

<<< Rep. Peter Hoekstra (R-Mich.), chairman of the House intelligence committee, and Sen. Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) told reporters yesterday that weapons of mass destruction had in fact been found in Iraq, despite acknowledgments by the White House and the insistence of the intelligence community that no such weapons had been discovered.

"We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons," Santorum said.

The lawmakers pointed to an unclassified summary from a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center regarding 500 chemical munitions shells that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988.

The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. >>>


This story appears on page 10. There is no story in the New York Times, and the Boston Globe allots two paragraphs:


<<< To counter criticism that no weapons of mass destruction turned up in Iraq even though that was a key argument for going to war, Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., and House Intelligence Chairman Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., released a newly declassified military intelligence report. It said that coalition forces had found 500 munitions in Iraq that contained degraded sarin or mustard nerve agents, produced before the 1991 Gulf War.

Democrats downplayed the intelligence report, saying that a lengthy 2005 report from the top U.S. weapons inspector contemplated that such munitions would be found. A defense official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age. >>>


Note that the "intelligence officials" in the Post story and the "defense official" in the Globe account are saying different things, and that the account in the Post --one cache that had been forgotten-- differs from the description given by Senator Santorum, and does not explain why the report itself cannot be declassified.

If it was one cache of old and useless weapons, buried and forgotten, then the intelligence agency that insists on the classification of the report is not competent.

If the report has different information than that provided the Post, then the paper and its brothers are blinkered by an anti-war ideology from asking the sort of questions such allegations as those made by Senator Santorum would oridnarily prompt.

hughhewitt.com

washingtonpost.com

boston.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 2:40:44 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
For Fear of Endangering Soldiers, Would the Administration Endanger Support for the War?

By Hugh Hewitt

When I reread the transcript of my interview with Senator Santorum, this exchange stood out:

<<< HH: No, what I'm looking for is more [if Saddam] knew he had [the WMD], and he was trying to hide them, as opposed [that] to he'd forgotten where he put them....

RS: Well, there is additional information that I think the public should be made aware of that could answer that question.

HH: Very interestingly put, but you can't answer that based on what was declassified, and what was not?

RS: That's right.
>>>

Earlier in the interview was this exchange:

<<< HH: Now Senator, is it your impression that the classified nature of this material is in place in order to protect the information that might assist insurgents from finding additional stockpiles? Is that...

RS: There's certainly...that is clearly an element, and there are certainly parts of this report that were not released that should not be released. And that would certainly be one element of it. But there are other elements that I think can be released that could shed more light as to the volume of the problem that we're confronting, or that we confronted in the sense that how many chemical weapons did Saddam Hussein have prior to the Gulf War, the second Gulf War.
>>>

If there is convincing evidence that Saddam and his senior circle knew of stockpiles of WMD and had hidden them prior to the invasion, the refusal to release that information has greatly damaged the debate about the war, even though the invasion of Iraq rested on other compelling grounds than Saddam's possession of WMD.

The failure to find WMD has had a corrosive effect on the public debate and on some support for the war.

There are only two reasons to have withheld such information.

First, that a political decision was made not to reveal the information until such time as the case could not be rebutted or disparaged except by the nutter fringe. That seems too cautious a move for the Administration.

The second reason is the fear that details of the discoveries would lead terrorists to similarly situated caches, endangering vast numbers of our troops and civilians.

This would be a compelling excuse for the refusal to release the details if in fact the war was carried to a successful conclusion, but ultimately not persuasive if in fact the war effort cannot be sustained because of a loss of support at home.

What we have right now if a very confused picture, and the Adminsitration simply cannot expect the public to be satisfied with the announcement today and the declassified summary provided by Director Negroponte. At a minimum, if more cannot be disclosed, an explanation must be given as to why that is the case.

hughhewitt.com

radioblogger.com




To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 3:32:34 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
    Let’s make the Left come out and explain again and agian 
why 500 rounds of sarin and mustard gas artillery ordnance
A: aren’t WMD ... and B: weren’t a danger to anyone.

Pentagon - "Not the WMDs We Went to War Over"

Posted by SeeDubya
JunkYardBlog

Puh-leaze. Here’s an unnamed Pentagon official:


<<< “This does not reflect a capacity that was built up after 1991,” the official said, adding the munitions “are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had, and not the WMDs for which this country went to war.” >>>

Okay, pal, could you kindly show us those weapons too, then? Or are you waiting to declassify those until 2013?

Until then, these weapons are fine with me, buddy, and you’ll excuse me if I light up a stogey anyway. As I say below, there are ten thousand voices on the left and the right ready to, ahem, drizzle on this parade and minimize the significance of the ongoing discovery of deadly, illegal weaponry. But this is great news, people. What did you want?

There were, as I saw it, four good reasons for going to war in Iraq—strategic, humanitarian, legal, and WMD-preventive. I’ll spare you an exposition of each of those, but suffice to say for now that President Bush put too many eggs in the WMD basket. The humanitarian case and the UN sanctions/ international law case have been vindicated. The strategic question is still in debate and while I think we were right to risk it going in, it’s still in the air as to how it turns out. But the failure to find WMDs has been treated by the Left and the media and the country’s enemies abroad as the sole reason we invaded, and therefore our failure to find any delegitimated (for them) the entire project. But they don’t have that canard to stand on anymore. They can’t frame the issue that way, but they’ll have to come up with a real debate on long term strategies if they want to protest the war—that is, they will have to, if we don’t let them dodge this story.

We should be talking about this, okay? Let’s make the Left come out and explain again and agian why 500 rounds of sarin and mustard gas artillery ordnance A: aren’t WMD (Hello, Juan Cole?) and B: weren’t a danger to anyone.

And no question it’s for real; the declassified document popping up around the web (it’s at MM and Captain’s Quarters, but I couldn’t download the .pdf) comes from one Mr. John Negroponte
(links below).

Back to Fox, where the official continues:

<<< …the findings did raise questions about the years of weapons inspections that had not resulted in locating the fairly sizeable stash of chemical weapons. And he noted that it may say something about Hussein’s intent and desire. The report does suggest that some of the weapons were likely put on the black market and may have been used outside Iraq. >>>


Ah ha. this is a guy with Pentagon-level clearance commenting about the report, and he suggests terrorists may already have discovered and used these outside of Iraq.

Interesting—that’s news to me! Have there been chemical weapons attacks recorded anywhere outside of Iraq since 2003
(inside there was one of these chem shells used as an IED in summer 2004), besides Zarqawi’s attempted attack on Jordan (discussed in the post below, and which I don’t think involoved these kinds of chemicals)? If so, why didn’t we hear about it?

He continues…

<<< He also said that the Defense Department statement shortly after the March 2003 invasion saying that “we had all known weapons facilities secured,” has proven itself to be untrue. “It turned out the whole country was an ammo dump,” he said, adding that on more than one occasion, a conventional weapons site has been uncovered and chemical weapons have been discovered mixed within them. >>>


Puzzling. Ace’s theory-and another mentioned on CQ-was that this was kept secret to protect the Russians or someone doesn’t really hold up to this statement—this was not all a single cache, but the result of prowling through weapons dumps all over the country since 2003.

Which makes it all the stranger that this information is only now being declassified. There is no sources-and-methods consideration for keeping this secret. These weapons were found over a long period of time, at least in part through the very conventional method of sorting through conventional weapons caches. Maybe they will trace back to UN Security Council members, but I can’t say that that would surprise anybody. France, after all, helped build Saddam’s Osirak reactor. russia is supposed to have helped Iraq evacuate WMD’s. And after Oil-for-Food, it’s not like anyone expects these countries to be blameless.

Y’all keep drizzling on this parade if you like. Me, I’m going to go chill some champagne now. This is all kinds of good news.

UPDATE: I wonder if this unnamed Pentagon official was a white-bearded fellow with a British accent…

PENTA-GON KENOBI: These are not the WMD’s you’re looking for.

FOX NEWS: These aren’t the WMD’s we’re looking for.

PENTA-GON KENOBI: We can go about our business.

FOX NEWS: You can go about your business. Hey, wildfires!

PENTA-GON KENOBI: Move along.

RIGHT WING BLOGGERS: Move along. Move on. Hey, Ann Coulter said something mean!

Update: previous entry on this subject: woohoo! ;
junkyardblog.net

subsequent: The Parole Hearing
junkyardblog.net

junkyardblog.net

foxnews.com

junkyardblog.net

townhall.com

michellemalkin.com

captainsquartersblog.com

ace.mu.nu

captainsquartersblog.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 5:24:55 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
WMDs in Iraq
By Texas Rainmaker on Uncategorized

There is a lot of buzz about the reports of more WMDs being found in Iraq. I don’t know that this story will be as earth-shattering as some hope. Even if a fully-functional nuclear warhead was discovered with Saddam’s fingerprints and DNA on it next to a picture of Saddam riding the warhead like a circus pony, while holding a sign that says, “America, this nuke’s for you”, the liberalistas would still dismiss it as:

1) fake,
2) planted,
3) having been given to him by Ronald Reagan,
4) a CIA hoax combined with an FBI photoshop and a body double from FEMA.

We know Iraq had WMDs because Saddam used them. And while he may not have had a fully functioning nuclear weapons program the moment we walked in, the Deulfer Report declared that Saddam was simply waiting for the crumbling U.N. sanctions to be lifted to rapidly start up (or restart) the program. And with so-called allies like France, Russia and China trying to help end the sanctions, it was only a matter of time. And given the ties, and mutual hatred of western infidels, between al-Qaida and Baghdad, in a post-9/11 world, it would’ve been negligent to continue down the path of U.N. containment and inspections that were obviously ineffective.

That last point is what makes today’s story newsworthy. Those who oppose our actions in Iraq while claiming the U.N. inspections were “working” are either naive, gullible or just plain stupid. To believe they were working would require you to believe Saddam was an honest and trustworthy man who was actively cooperating with the U.N. and inspectors. The post-2003 invasion discovery of hundreds of chemical weapons, degraded or not, from years past or not, prove that the inspections were not working and that Saddam was actively engaged in deception, hiding such weapons from the inspectors. If he was engaged in deception around old, worn out, potentially unusable weapons, do you think he’d be forthright about active nuclear weapons programs?

If you do, you’re an idiot…

texasrainmaker.com

breitbart.com

texasrainmaker.com

texasrainmaker.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 7:07:14 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Rumsfeld on WMDs, Today

Kathryn Jean Lopez
The Corner

<<< QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, there has been a lot made on Capitol Hill about these chemical weapons that were found and may be quite old. But do you a real concern of these weapons from Saddam's past perhaps having an impact on U.S. troops who are on the ground in Iraq right now?

RUMSFELD: Certainly. What has been announced is accurate, that there have been hundreds of canisters or weapons of various types found that either currently have sarin in them or had sarin in them, and sarin is dangerous. And it's dangerous to our forces, and it's a concern.

So obviously, to the extent we can locate these and destroy them, it is important that we do so. And they are dangerous. Anyone — I'm sure General Casey or anyone else in that country would be concerned if they got in the wrong hands.

They are weapons of mass destruction. They are harmful to human beings. And they have been found. And that had not been by Saddam Hussein, as he inaccurately alleged that he had reported all of his weapons. And they are still being found and discovered.

corner.nationalreview.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/22/2006 8:25:30 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Spin That Sarin

By Ed Driscoll
June 22, 2006

<SNIP>

It's amusing to watch the pushback from the left after Santorum's press conference yesterday. Beginning in mid-2003, the mantra began that Saddam had no WMDs--zip, zero, nadda. Or as Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada said as recently as last week,

<< "There are two things that don't exist in Iraq: cutting and running, and weapons of mass destruction." >>

Now the latest version being fielded is that, well, Saddam had them, but they were old, outdated. pay them no mind.

Of Senator Kerry's time in Vietnam, James Lileks once wrote, "The past was more malleable than you had ever expected." But if anything, that's even more true when it comes to Iraq than the Winter Soldier's salad days. Just look at Al Gore in 1993, and today (see links below).

Update: Evangelical Outpost notes correctly:
    Opposition to the war has nothing to do with the lack of 
WMDs. It never did. We could find a nuclear bomb in Uday
Hussein’s old apartment and John Kerry would still be
gearing up for Winter Soldier II. Unless you dropped your
moral compass off the side of a swift boat in Cambodia,
it’s easy to see that the world is safer because we
secured the one WMD that truly mattered: Saddam Hussein.
    More important than the weapons that were found (or that 
have yet to be found) are the ones that will never be
created by Saddam’s regime. Many Americans, however, still
suffer from the delusion that the only way that Saddam
could have been a significant threat was for him to have
possessed stockpiles of WMDs.
Meanwhile, Shannon Love ressurects Hitchcock's McGuffin device to explain why Saddam's WMDs were ignorned or spun by the left.

Update: Ian Schwartz has a round-up of cable and Blogosphere opinion.
exposetheleft.com

eddriscoll.com

floppingaces.net

thinkprogress.org

eddriscoll.com

eddriscoll.com

powerlineblog.com

evangelicaloutpost.com

shannonlove.blogspot.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/23/2006 3:57:47 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
About Those WMDs

Powerline
    [H]undreds of chemical weapons, at a minimum, were 
secreted in various locations around Iraq--as also shown
by this document (see link below) --and it is reasonable
to conclude that, even though the CIA and nearly all
other observers over-estimated Iraq's WMD capabilities,
the fear that Saddam might use such weapons, or slip them
to a terrorist group, was well-founded.
Michael Ledeen writes:
    Please point out to your readers that Negroponte only 
declassified a few fragments of a much bigger document.
Read the press conference and you will see that Santorum
and Hoekstra were furious at the meager declassification.
They will push for more, and we all must do that. I am
told that there is a lot more in the full document, which
CIA is desperate to protect, since it shows the miserable
job they did looking for WMDs in Iraq.
UPDATE: Glenn Reynolds comments:
    Some future historians will have fun with the CIA's 
bureaucratic turf wars. I just hope that they're writing
in English, and not Arabic . . .
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/014466.php

powerlineblog.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/23/2006 4:23:48 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Rumsfeld Confirms WMD Finds

Power Line

Earlier today, Donald Rumsfeld and Gen. George Casey gave a joint press conference on Iraq. I haven't seen a full transcript yet, but one of the subjects they addressed was yesterday's report on the hundreds of chemical and biological weapons that have been found in Iraq:

<<< QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, there has been a lot made on Capitol Hill about these chemical weapons that were found and may be quite old. But do you have a real concern of these weapons from Saddam's past perhaps having an impact on U.S. troops who are on the ground in Iraq right now?

RUMSFELD : Certainly. What has been announced is accurate, that there have been hundreds of canisters or weapons of various types found that either currently have sarin in them or had sarin in them, and sarin is dangerous. And it's dangerous to our forces, and it's a concern.

So obviously, to the extent we can locate these and destroy them, it is important that we do so. And they are dangerous. Anyone -- I'm sure General Casey or anyone else in that country would be concerned if they got in the wrong hands.

They are weapons of mass destruction . They are harmful to human beings. And they have been found. And that had not been by Saddam Hussein, as he inaccurately alleged that he had reported all of his weapons . And they are still being found and discovered.
>>>

In From the Cold, written by a former intelligence agent, has more. He suggests that
    "intel bureaucrats were apparently uncomfortable with the 
revelation that they had been wrong on Iraqi WMD, not
once, not twice, but a total of three times."
UPDATE: The reporter who asked the question of Rumsfeld emphasized that the canisters "may be quite old," as I did last night. An extremely plugged-in reader with sources on the Hill writes:
    It is only partially true to say that the WMD counted in 
the report are old--There are NEW "things" which have NOT
been uncovered before, and which MAY all be from that
period, but some of it is in pristine condition.
The same reader adds, concerning the legacy media stories on the WMD report:
    Someone ought to be asking about the Department of Defense
official who has been downplaying this, trying to bury the
story. Rumsfeld came out with a big statement about this
this afternoon and still the DoD "official" keeps
namelessly trying to be named president of the Bush Lied
League. If you check you will see that in all the articles
where they go to someone to downplay it, it is always a
DoD intelligence official.
    Whoever this person is should be fired not only for 
deliberately trying to mislead the American people but
also endangering our security.
We've written about this countless times. Liberals in the press go to liberals in the federal bureaucracy, especially the intelligence agencies, for leaks and anonymous commentary. The reporters then present this "information" as though it were objective and authoritative. In fact, the liberal leakers/commentators are no more objective and no more authoritative than the liberal reporters themselves.

powerlineblog.com

formerspook.blogspot.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/25/2006 1:45:27 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
WMDs: The real scandal

by Kevin McCullough
Townhall.com
Jun 25, 2006

By now much of the nation has finally heard the truth; George Bush never lied about weapons of mass destruction. By now most of America is realizing that the President who has been pummeled mercilessly on the fact that such weapons were missing, is deserving of public apologies from every Ted, Dick, and Harry the Senate can cough up.

If you have been living under a rock here's the short measure of it. On Wednesday of this last week, Senator Rick Santorum and Congressman Peter Hoekstra revealed to the press for the first time the declassified portion of documents demonstrating that U.S. military had uncovered a minimum of 500 weaponized munitions that could in fact be used to deliver mustard and saran gas.

Senator Santorum confirmed on my radio broadcast
(hear the audio at the link below) that these weapons were the kind used to kill 5000 Kurds by Saddam. Saddam only needed 3 of these missiles to accomplish that feat - we've uncovered 500. That's enough nerve agents to kill more than 8.3 million people - or the Island of Manhattan, or the city of Chicago.

The lying leftists who will get all of us killed if we don't remain vigilant were very slow to respond.

The New York Times who has run hundreds of stories in the last two years on the global war on terror and attempted to reiterate on their news and editorial pages that the President lied to the American people - remained completely silent on the issue the day following the discovery. The Boston Globe committed all of two paragraphs. The Washington Post five. Yet combined these newspapers used thousands of paragraphs with huge, large font headlines to say again and again that the President had lied.

When I asked Senator Santorum the real meaning of it all as it related to the American position prior to the liberation of Iraq he responded quite simply,
    "it meant that Secretary of State Powell told the truth 
when he went before the United Nations Security Council."
As I have reported previously we've had first hand knowledge that some of the weapons were removed from Iraq via outfitted 747 Jumbo and 727 jets to Damascus. General Georges Sada testified to as much on my show (hear the audio at the link below.) But at that, there was always a suspicion that not all of the weapons had been able to be moved. I believe that the President firmly believed that they would in fact be uncovered by the respective United Nations inspection teams. But let's face it - the last U.N. Inspections team that actually found what it was looking for was immediately kicked out.

The announcement by Santorum also pointed out something else of keen importance. The declassified version of the report indicates that there are many more weapons likely to be found even yet in Iraq.

There may be perfectly legitimate reasons for waiting on the announcements of such, and even delaying the announcement weeks to months after the discovery. U.S. soldiers could be made vulnerable if the location of such stockpiles were made known to the jihadists who are composed of mostly foreign fighters in Iraq. Telegraphing in advance the knowledge of such weapon's existence might entice two sets of weapons' seekers to emerge.

It is also worth noting that none of the leftists in the United States Congress have apologized for lying to the American people.
They have not offered apologies to President Bush, and to add even more pain to their misery the Senate rejected John Kerry's, "pull out of Iraq now" bill by a vote of 86 to 13.

For a season or two the left has had what they thought was the smoking gun for the President and his party - to say he lied to the American people and weapons of mass destruction was what he lied about. What they would never address is how so many foreign intelligence agencies also concluded the same thing as the U.S. based on the best available evidence at the time. Heck, even John Kerry looked at the evidence and concluded that Saddam had weapons and was a threat. Turns out - all those intel agencies, our own CIA information, the administration, and most importantly our fighting men and women are now all justified. The U.S. was right all along.

That smoking gun has now been turned on themselves. For having told the American people their own form of a lie - that WMDs did not exist, and to do so - so many times they deserve every ounce of scrutiny and request for public apology that they receive.

It is also a disgrace that the media has done no more than yawn at the story or give meager back page mention of it when they were willing to tout long and loud that the President lied - with much less evidence that he did. Their callousness to the truth, their unwillingness to correct their positions or to report the facts and their willingness to slander a commander in chief - in the midst of war time are deserving of subscribers canceling their subscriptions in mass numbers. For if one can not depend upon the information they read - then they should get their information from more reliable sources.

As an American, we should stand proud today that even though left ran the spin for a while, the truth is coming out.

And as scripture says, the TRUTH will set you free...

Kevin McCullough's first hardback title "The MuscleHead Revolution" is now available for pre-order. Kevin McCullough is heard daily in New York City, Connecticut, Rhode Island, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, and Delaware on WMCA 570/970 from 2-5pm. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com.

Copyright © 2006 Townhall.com

townhall.com

foxnews.com

wmca.com

wmca.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/27/2006 4:38:26 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
Why Is the Intelligence Community Stonewalling on Saddam's WMD?

Andy McCarthy
The Corner

I can certainly understand the reluctance — if that's what it is — of the intelligence community (IC) to go up in a balloon over the recent report that WMD have in fact been found in Iraq — something discussed here last week by Michael Ledeen, Kathryn, Tim Graham, Jim Robbins, Jonah and me. So far, what's been found does not match up with the IC's expectations prior to the war.

But there's a difference between being overly exuberant about a significant development and failing to report it. And there's a similarly big difference between failing to report it and stonewalling.

That's what Sen. Rick Santorum and Rep. Pete Hoekstra point out in their joint op-ed on OpinionJournal.com. Why in the world is this information being withheld from members of Congress and the public?

If there is some operational intelligence that we have good reasons to hold back on, fine. But the whole "Bush lied and people died" slander is built around what is apparently a fiction. Given all that has been said about the WMD investigation (including an elaborate investigation by a special panel, the Silberman-Robb Commission), what possible good reason is there not to clarify for the American people what we now know about Saddam's weapons ... and about how much investigation remains to be done?

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

corner.nationalreview.com

online.wsj.com

wmd.gov



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/28/2006 3:42:51 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
    The left and their allies in the press are apparently too 
dense to understand the significance of the Coalition
previously finding biological agent seed cultures, several
hundred tons of purified nuclear material, and tons of
chemical weapon (CW) precursors. But this entire
controversy has never been about the weapons themselves,
the age of the munitions, or the media promoted fantasy of
pallets of chemical rounds ready to be loaded into Iraqi
artillery pieces. From the beginning it has been about
the campaign of disinformation and deception of the
antique media and the shadow government within our
intelligence agencies to discredit the administration in
a time of war.


Saddam’s WMD: Discovery and Denial

Douglas Hanson
The American Thinker
June 28th, 2006

Last week, Senator Rick Santorum and Rep. Pete Hoekstra revealed declassified portions of a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center (NGIC) that said Coalition forces in Iraq have recovered several hundred munitions containing degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent. The report also stated that “filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.”

Now that our units in Iraq have discovered the smoking gun that the left has seemingly wanted for the past three years, they have shifted the goalposts again. And one more time, the facts of Saddam’s WMD must be presented to the American people to counter the lies of the media, and regrettably, some people in our own government agencies.

The left and their allies in the press are apparently too dense to understand the significance of the Coalition previously finding biological agent seed cultures, several hundred tons of purified nuclear material, and tons of chemical weapon (CW) precursors. But this entire controversy has never been about the weapons themselves, the age of the munitions, or the media promoted fantasy of pallets of chemical rounds ready to be loaded into Iraqi artillery pieces. From the beginning it has been about the campaign of disinformation and deception of the antique media and the shadow government within our intelligence agencies to discredit the administration in a time of war.

The SecState and Pre-war Intelligence

A typical response to the NGIC report on these chemical weapons is found in a piece by Dafna Linzer in the Washington Post. After briefly covering Santorum’s and Hoekstra’s news conference, Linzer quotes the proverbial unnamed “intelligence officials” who said that these,

<<< …shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. >>>


This is a false statement and in fact, directly contradicts publicly divulged US and European pre-war intelligence estimates as stated by both the President in his 2003 State of the Union address, and former Secretary of State Colin Powell’s speech before the UN a little over a week later.

According to the US and the UN, the age of the weapons was immaterial. The primary issue has always been one of accountability. The weapons and banned material either had to have been verified as destroyed or be made available for inspection and inventory by UN agencies. Since Saddam actively resisted the inspectors, and then later kicked them out of Iraq, Powell was obligated to present to the UN key intelligence assessments about the unknown status of Iraq’s chemical weapons:

• Saddam Hussein has never accounted for vast amounts of chemical weaponry: 550 artillery shells with mustard, 30,000 empty munitions and enough precursors to increase his stockpile to as much as 500 tons of chemical agents. [Emphasis mine]

• If we consider just one category of missing weaponry—6,500 bombs from the Iran-Iraq war—UNMOVIC says the amount of chemical agent in them would be in the order of 1,000 tons

• We know that Iraq has embedded key portions of its illicit chemical weapons infrastructure within its legitimate civilian industry. [Emphasis mine] Illicit and legitimate production can go on simultaneously; or, on a dime, this dual-use infrastructure can turn from clandestine to commercial and then back again.


Because of the NGIC report, we now know that Powell’s number of 550 unaccounted for CW rounds was amazingly accurate.
Coupled with previous reporting on precursors and on accounts provided by Ken Timmerman, who could now logically contradict Powell’s pre-war intelligence on CW? Ironically, the people who most regret the information provided during the speech are Powell himself and his former military aide. Somebody had better give them a call and tell them that at least on the CW intelligence portion of his speech, Powell was right.

Coalition Forces and Chemical Weapons

What is surprising in the wake of the report is that the military leadership seems to have joined the “nothing to see here” crowd, even though it has been Army and Marine units in Iraq that have done the heavy lifting in uncovering Saddam’s CW. Almost from the very start of Operation Iraqi Freedom Coalition troops discovered CW precursors co-located with military ordnance yards or in ammo dumps. These finds included huge warehouses and caches of “commercial and agricultural” chemicals, including 55 gallon drums buried in bunkers six feet underground. Notably, this is another instance where the former SecState’s assessment has been proven true.

Tests performed on these substances by chemical warfare specialists produced positive results for sarin, cyclo-sarin, and mustard agents. But later, the ISG pronounced all of the military’s tests as flawed, and the CW uncovered as inconsequential. Meanwhile, the media and the ISG focused on the technical minutiae of Powell’s data on mobile bio-war labs to divert attention from the significance of our troops’ discoveries.

As the NGIC report shows, units continued to turn up large amounts of chemical munitions whose potency could last for well over 20 years.
Yet, in response to the potential force protection problems should these rounds ever be used against our troops, the Coalition command in Iraq has seemingly adopted the ISG’s tactics of minimization and disinformation. Major William Willhoite, a spokesman for Multi-National Forces-Iraq (MNF-I) stated

<<< No old chemical weapons have yet been rigged to improvised explosive devices used by Iraq’s insurgents. “We have never had an IED utilizing anything but conventional munitions,” >>>


The good Major is either not very well read or he has completely ignored open source civilian and military accounts of our forces’ encounters with WMD since the end of major combat operations:


• In May of 2004, elements of the 1st Cavalry Division encountered a 155mm binary chemical artillery shell wired as an IED foxnews.com. The round exploded before it could be rendered safe exposing two US soldiers to the deadly nerve agent, who then displayed the classic symptoms of sarin exposure: dilated pupils and nausea. Later tests confirmed that the shell contained three to four liters of sarin.

• On May 2, 2004, a 155mm shell filled with mustard agent was discovered; this one also rigged as an IED. In keeping with the tradition of dismissing Coalition forces recovering WMDs, ISG testing concluded that the mustard gas was “stored improperly” and was thus “ineffective.”

• Later in May, the 1st Cavalry Division again discovered CW when Troop D, 9th Cavalry Regiment seized over forty 155mm artillery rounds suspected of containing a chemical warfare agent because they were leaking an unknown substance.

• And finally last August, US troops raided a warehouse in Mosul and discovered a chemical weapons factory containing 1,500 gallons of 11 different chemical agent precursors. A military spokesman said that the facility was a new one that was established after the 2003 invasion of Iraq.

And before all of these incidents, in January of 2004, Danish forces in Southern Iraq discovered 120mm mortar shells with a mysterious liquid inside that initially tested positive for blister agents. Further tests by the ISG were, of course, negative.

In many ways, the effort to publicize declassified portions of the NGIC report is similar to the Weekly Standard’s fight with the DIA to release tens of thousands of unclassified documents seized after OIF. But as Santorum and Hoekstra point out, this episode of obstructing the requests of our lawmakers occurred because elements within our own intelligence community deliberately abused their classification authority to withhold open source information about discoveries of Saddam’s chemical weapons.

Keep in mind that there is a lot more material left to be “declassified.”

The White House is also downplaying the NGIC report, and has for years avoided talking about open source reports on uncovering WMDs that essentially prove one of its reasons for invading Iraq. Quite possibly they have realized that making the case for war focusing on disarming Saddam of his WMDs was unwise given the inherent imperfections of intelligence collection and analysis, and, as it turns out, the presence of an embedded opposition in both the intelligence and military bureaucracies.

By trumpeting the WMD “stockpile” image, the left and the media could bend and shape public opinion when the imagined stacks of chemical munitions out in the open failed to quickly materialize. It was holding the President and our units in the field to a standard that they could not possibly meet, especially when the factual accounts concerning CW finds quickly fell into the memory hole thanks to a compliant press establishment.

Ultimately though, I believe the specifics of the “slam dunk” on Saddam’s WMD will largely be proven true thanks to the hard work of men like Santorum and Hoekstra and of course, with thanks to our courageous men and women fighting in the War on Terror.

Douglas Hanson is the National Security Correspondent of the American Thinker.

americanthinker.com

foxnews.com

americanthinker.com

americanthinker.com

rushlimbaugh.com

washingtonpost.com

whitehouse.gov

cnn.com

frontpagemag.com

cnn.com

nysun.com

foxnews.com

estripes.com

washingtonpost.com

weeklystandard.com

online.wsj.com



To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/30/2006 3:01:21 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
If one layer of disinformation fails, just throw on another

J.R. Dunn
The American Thinker

Rather than actually investigate the WMD information revealed by Sen. Rick Santorum and Rep. Pete Hoekstra, the legacy media is instead either ignoring the report or dismissing it with the claim that the recovered war gasses have “deteriorated to the point of harmlessness.”

Now, this may true of nerve gasses like sarin and taubun, which can deteriorate in a matter of hours on contact with oxygen, but mustard gas? Au contraire. A cursory web search reveals hundreds of stories testifying to the persistent properties of mustard gas, many dealing with an incident with roots in WW II.

At the end of the war, the Allies were left holding stockpiles of thousands of tons of war gasses in Nazi armories. It was decided to get rid of the stuff by the simplest means possible – by dumping it. Tens of thousands of shells and containers, the bulk of it (over 300,000 tons) being mustard gas, were dropped into the Baltic, where, according to this article sourced from none other than The New York Times, they remain to this day (linked below).

That is, the portion that hasn’t been dredged up by unwitting fishermen, as occurred, according to this story, in 1969 (linked below). That’s twenty-three years on the ocean bottom for that particular sample, which was still potent enough to put a man in the hospital for three months. That one’s courtesy of Reuters, a notorious WMD doubter.

In fact, it’s well known that mustard gas deteriorates slowly even under the most severe conditions, as this story reveals:
    “Mustard gas can damage DNA, causes cancer and survives 
for at least five years on the ocean floor before
dissolving.”
It also quotes Dr. Jiri Matousek stating that the hazard will last “tens to hundreds of years”. That one’s from Newsweek (linked below). Do reporters ever read their own publications? Good question – maybe somebody can take a poll.

But it gets even better with this piece (linked below), covering a gas pipeline being laid beneath the Baltic. The pipeline’s route passes close to a gas dump, and concerns exist that construction work may flood the Baltic with – you guessed it – deadly mustard gas. Note the date: June 13, 2006.

From horrific to harmless in only two weeks. That’s fast.

We could go on – all these stories are off the very first page of a web search. There are three-hundred-odd more if anybody cares to look.

(As a bonus, here’s a story about Czech scientists who have introduced a new, low-impact method of neutralizing mustard gas. God bless ‘em, I say. As Nicholas Cage put it in The Rock, “It’s something we wish we could disinvent.”)
radio.cz

americanthinker.com

americanthinker.com

defensetech.org

smh.com.au

veteransforamerica.org

en.rian.ru




To: Sully- who wrote (20802)6/30/2006 3:14:47 PM
From: Sully-  Respond to of 35834
 
It's official: WMDs were found in Iraq

John B. Dwyer
The American Thinker

The Department of Defense has released an article making official the designation of the 500 warheads found in Iraq as WMD:

<<< The 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center’s commander said here today.

“These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes … they do constitute weapons of mass destruction,” Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.

The Chemical Weapons Convention is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. It was signed in 1993 and entered into force in 1997.

The munitions found contain sarin and mustard gases, Army Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said. Sarin attacks the neurological system and is potentially lethal.

“Mustard is a blister agent (that) actually produces burning of any area (where) an individual may come in contact with the agent,” he said. It also is potentially fatal if it gets into a person’s lungs.

The munitions addressed in the report were produced in the 1980s, Maples said. Badly corroded, they could not currently be used as originally intended, Chu added.

While that’s reassuring, the agent remaining in the weapons would be very valuable to terrorists and insurgents, Maples said. “We’re talking chemical agents here that could be packaged in a different format and have a great effect,” he said, referencing the sarin-gas attack on a Japanese subway in the mid-1990s. >>>

americanthinker.com

defenselink.mil