It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Iraq Unloading WMD Into Syria.

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 07:10 PM
The current administration has been harping about Syria aiding the Iraq insurgence but if one looks at the facts, the outlandish claims do have a shred of truth. The following excerpt details how a firm owned by the assad family was dealing millions of dollars of weapons into Iraq. The report uses documented facts to illustrate how Syria helped ramp up the Iraq army leading up to war and how these weapons could end up in the hands of insurgents.

A firm from Syria, headed by a cousin of that countrys leader, Bashar Assad, signed contracts to supply millions of dollars in arms and equipment to Iraq before the United States invaded in March, The Los Angeles Times reported on Tuesday.

In the first of a two-part series written from Damascus, The Times reported that 1,000 heavy machine guns and up to 20 million bullets for assault rifles, supplied by SES International Corp., helped Baghdads ill-equipped army grow stronger before the war began in March. Some supplies may now be aiding the insurgency against the U.S.-led occupation.

Files cited by the Times were taken from the abandoned office of Al Bashair Trading Co., by a reporter for the German magazine Stern shortly after U.S. troops entered Baghdad.

20 Million Bullets are a lot and do not easily dissapear. Clearly the same bullets used to assault contractors, civilians and soldiers are the same that Syria sold to Iraq. How can you expect Assad to protect the middle east if he cant even control his own family? Syria has made billions from aiding Saddam and will continue to turn a profit selling illicit weapons to the Iraq insurgence. Its time to wake up, whether you agree with Iraq or not, Syria is a clear Middle East agressor.

Syria Arms

posted on Apr, 14 2004 @ 11:33 PM
But...from the mouths of exiles...

Chalabi stands by faulty intelligence that toppled Saddam's regime

An Iraqi leader accused of feeding faulty pre-war intelligence to Washington said yesterday his information about Saddam Hussein's weapons, even if discredited, had achieved the aim of persuading America to topple the dictator.

Ahmad Chalabi and his London-based exile group, the Iraqi National Congress, for years provided a conduit for Iraqi defectors who were debriefed by US intelligence agents. But many American officials now blame Mr Chalabi for providing intelligence that turned out to be false or wild exaggerations about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

Mr Chalabi, by far the most effective anti-Saddam lobbyist in Washington, shrugged off charges that he had deliberately misled US intelligence. "We are heroes in error," he told the Telegraph in Baghdad.

"As far as we're concerned we've been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush administration is looking for a scapegoat. We're ready to fall on our swords if he wants."

We've been supporting this guy for years. He's on exile welfare. We've spent $900 million tax payer dollars searching for his fake ass intelligence, not to mentin the $98 million Clinton gave him to start a revolt back in 1998.

Here's the part where I repeat myself:

The 1st problem with the idea that Iraq gave WMD to the Syrian government is that no one can prove that Iraq had weapons. No one is even willing to say that Iraq had WMD, not the Iraqi survey group--not Ahmed Chalabi--not David Kay--not the Iraqi scientist, and most of all, no one in the Bush administration. Everyone has backed down from their earlier claims as the evidence comes in.

There are always going to be hold outs, those that will believe WMD existed no matter how much evidence stacks up against it. Even as the president backs away you have folk that will continue to push their agenda to invade the whole middle east and clear it out or make it a parking lot or whatever the rhetoric is these days.

The 2nd problem with this idea is that the Syrian government is trying to normalize it's relations with the US and Israel. If these weapons existed and they were moved through Syria, they probably went directly into the hands of terrorist because Assad isn't a card carrying Jihadist.

This is even a hard argument to make. Its all in the realm of "if" because there is no proof that the weapons exist, and there is hard evidence that it was destroyed and Saddam was trying to start from scratch. Hopefully, the WMD don't exist because if they do my bet is that Al-qaida has them, not Syria.

Fact is we are in Iraq now, and we have to finish the job. But, we should learn the lessons of Iraq...flawed reports from exiled criminals should never lead us into another costly conflict. Syria poses no threat to the US. Assad has never said he wanted to attack the US, or Israel for that matter.

Iraq didn't even have enough guns...but they had stockpiles of WMD instead of using them to protect themselves they sent them to Syria for safe keeping.

posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 08:23 PM
Interesting event here Agent47:
Jordan 'was chemical bomb target'

Al-Qaeda-linked terrorists planned a chemical attack on Jordan's spy headquarters that could have killed 20,000 people, officials have said.

And this:
King Abdullah: Al-Qaida WMDs Came From Syria

Jordan's King Abdullah revealed on Saturday that vehicles reportedly containing chemical weapons and poison gas that were part of a deadly al-Qaida bomb plot came from Syria, the country named by U.S. weapons inspector David Kay last year as a likely repository for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

And link to 6 more articles on this event:
Chemical attack on Jordan foiled, etc.

A number of these articles mention that those who had the WMD had come out of Syria.
I'm sure this raises more questions as to David Kays assertion on Syria and Iran, and Saddam's still unaccounted for WMD.


[Edited on 17-4-2004 by Seekerof]

posted on Apr, 17 2004 @ 08:34 PM

Originally posted by Seekerof

A number of these articles mention that those who had the WMD had come out of Syria.
I'm sure this raises more questions as to David Kays assertion on Syria and Iran, and Saddam's still unaccounted for WMD.


Interesting indeed, I had read a bunch of this about how the plot was foiled and how they had crossed the Syrian border but this is the first I have heard concerning the nature of the attack or where the weapons came from.


posted on Apr, 18 2004 @ 10:20 AM
The evidence of Syrian WMD that I have provided are granted all from either Israeli or American sources. However, that does not suggest that the Arab world is blind to Syria's capabilities. As recently pointed out by Seekerof, the recently foiled Abu Musab al-Zarqawi terror attack was one with WMD. Various Western officials speculated that the weapons could have originated from Syria, as the country was the point of departure for the terrorists. Now it would seem Arab heads of state recognize where the weapons came from. Not considered an Ardent supporter of the West, King Abdullah of Jordan has publicly came out and stated that Syria was the source of the terrorist WMD.

Jordan's King Abdullah revealed on Saturday that vehicles reportedly containing chemical weapons and poison gas that were part of a deadly al-Qaida bomb plot came from Syria, the country named by U.S. weapons inspector David Kay last year as a likely repository for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

King Abdullah said that trucks containing 17.5 tons of explosives had come from Syria, though he took pains not to implicate Syrian President Bashir Assad in the al-Qaida plot, saying, "I'm completely confident that Bashir did not know about it."

In his testimony before Congress last year, weapons inspector Kay said U.S. satellite surveillance showed substantial vehicular traffic going from Iraq to Syria just prior to the U.S. attack on March 19, 2003.

Now you might notice I put in a portion that voids my argument against Bashar, but there is a reason for this. I agree that Bashar had no role in orchestrating the failed strike, but he is now aware of the ability of terrorists to get a hold of Syrian WMD . Once again you have David Kay chiming in that Iraqs WMD were deposited in Iraq, but that is superflous with the fact Syria now has to own up to a WMD arsenal. Regardless of its size it possesses weapons that pose an equal threat to neighbors and foreigners. If Bashar is such a moderate in such a fiery land he will quickly act to correct these flaws in his military arsenal. If Syria has no significant problems except for the Kurds, then why must they continue to keep a WMD stockpile. The WMD came in a large quantity, "17.5 tons" is a sizeable ammount. So I reiterate that yes Bashar is not responsible, but he is now aware. Being aware of his countries WMD arsenal puts him in a prime position to act on good faith and destroy or lock them away.

posted on Apr, 18 2004 @ 10:40 AM
I totally missed this entire thread for over a month. This information is all one could reasonably expect with regard to the 'missing' Iraqi WsMD. I mean, I figured they were mostly evacuated in the '90s before UN heat started coming down.

I think this will also make sense: After GW wins the election, I think 'new' intelligence will surface indicating the presence of WsMD in Syria. Then, if all goes according to [GWs] plan, America will have a relatively safe and near base of operations in theater in Iraq. Right now the prospect of a safe base of operations in theater is looking a little gloomy, but as far as wars go, Iraq is still a kitten...

GW knew all along that we would be in Iraq much longer than he stated, and he probably also knew the true whereabouts of the WsMD. He just knew that Iraq was a casualty of attrition and UN sanction, and would be a relatively easy place to set up shop. Not to mention that Iraq was the only country in the region he had any semblance of a legitimate excuse to invade.

So, I think we can all expect that after the election, GW will again beat the drum with sticks of fear in order to propogate his infamous "War on Terror". I'm glad my IRR is up!

Agent47, good info, good reference, good work. It's a pleasure to be an associate.

Please keep your hands and feet inside the ride at all times and have fun,


posted on Apr, 18 2004 @ 12:30 PM
All this again brings back into focus this report, which has been posted and sicussed within ATS here recently:
Syria Shipping WMD Components to Sudan

I guess in a re-re-re-re-hash of this its interesting to note and engage some theories:

> the world had claimed (except Saddam/Iraq) and knew, through myriads of intelligence reports and documents, including the UN, that there were illegal WMD's in Iraq.

> Now, because they weren't found in large quantities, those who opposed this claim that Bush 'lied'. Despite tha fact that for many, many years, the WORLD and the WORLD's Intelligence apparatus's chimed that Saddam possessed WMD's. Why is it that Bush is the sole 'liar' in all this? And to those proponents against, why are they so eager to or so easily swayed to believe Saddam and not the WORLD on this matter of WMD possessed?

> It was reported, on a number of occasions and by a number of sources, that the WMD's Saddam had as 'unaccounted for' would have only taken up the total space/area (+/-) equivalent of a two-car garage. That one "thimble" of botulinum toxin, for which Saddam was reported to have had about 15-18,000 litres of, could and can kill roughly a million people.....and that the quantities that Saddam was documented to have, as already indicated, would have or could have eliminated the current population of this world three (3) times over. Interesting....

> Those 'unaccounted for' WMD's would be very appealing to those terrorist groups and organizations, wouldn't they?

> Wouldn't these same terrorist groups and organization also now what has been reported and documented for many years concerning Saddam's WMD? If so, they would surely be trying to find or locate them, wouldn't they? Wouldn't those WMD's be the greatest 'tools' to use against their enemy: the US/America? As such, where would those WMD's be: in that's where these groups have been concentrating, haven't they? Read past articles on what is happening in Iraq, regarding the past "insurgency" problems and such....interesting again.

> The theory(s) behind all this is that according to the WORLD, Iraq/Saddam had WMD's. How better to attract those terrorist groups and organization into a fairly centralized area for engagement (aka: Iraq)? You lure them there. How better to trace down those 'unaccounted for' WMD? You monitor and follow those terrorist groups and organizations into Iraq and where else they go while they are searching for those 'unaccounted for' WMD (aka: 'unaccounted for' WMD's are and is the "bait"). The US and coalition know, somewhat, where those WMD's are or were. For the sake of 'gathering' and attracting those terrorist groups and organization into Iraq, or a centralized engagement zone, the US and coalition do not reveal to the world that there is WMD or where they may be. Why? To 'lure' and engage those groups, and to also see where those groups will lead back to. If the US and coalition were to say "Yes, Iraq had them, here they are, etc." then this would defeat the purpose of drawing those terrorist groups and organizations into Iraq, into a central engagement zone, into their possible destructions, and would also defeat finding where their movements would lead back to....wouldn't it?

> In any event, till this administration and the coalition, as a whole, makes the world announcement that Saddam and Iraq had "NO" WMD's, the theories on this matter and issue, are revealing and yet mystifying, but certainly can incorporate what was mentioned above.


[Edited on 18-4-2004 by Seekerof]

posted on Apr, 18 2004 @ 01:03 PM
The following is a lenghty but powerful body of evidence linking Syria not only to the WMD of Iraq, but the Iraqi insurgence, the corruption of Bashar's administration, and Bahar censoring his own interviews.

The following is a three point plan that will deal with Bashar, his cousin, and his uncle. The start will deal with Bashar's blatant distortion of an interview with the New York Times. The material cited in this report will then lead into Bashars cousin Assef al-Shaleesh, and finally his uncle Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh.

Point 1.

Bashar is on record as censoring his interviews and lying to the international media.

Syrian President Bashar Assad tampered with the transcript of a lengthy interview he conducted with the New York Times, presenting a condensed Arabic version to his citizens while the full version, in English, was published abroad.
Questions and answers regarding Syria's domestic situation, Iraq, Hezbollah, normalization with Israel and U.S.-Syrian security cooperation were omitted from the Nov. 30 interview, noted Syrian journalist Subhi Hadidi, writing on Al-Rai, the website of the Syrian Communist party.
Hadidi said the English version had 11,280 words while the official Syrian press published only 5,500 words yet called it the "full version."

Now this is not a serious offense as Bashar does run a fragil Baathist state, but the topics to which he lied are very dubious. This tampering also voids Saphronias argument that Bashar is attempting reform within Syria, state censorship sounds very simmilar to the conduct of his tyranical father. Furthermore the text ommited would suggest reforms and would please Syria, unless of course it is built around lies. Lets have a look.

In another omitted section, Assad denied his nation suppresses speech.
Question: There is a period where dialogue was open, people were going to forums and there were discussions. It has all stopped. Why is that?
Assad: No, nothing has stopped. You can go to Al-Atasi Institute and we have many others.
Question: Just two months ago, they tried to have one in Aleppo and the men were arrested when they showed up.'
Al-Assad: That had to do with speaking about certain ethnicity. They didn't criticize the government; they talked about the rights of the Kurds. The Kurds are Syrians, so what rights of the Kurds? It is something related to the national unity if you talk about ethnicities. We have Chechens, Armenians and you are not allowed in the law of Syria to talk about this. This is our law. I don't know them, but they make demonstrations for things related to this issue, which is not allowed in our law. It is not related to the regime.

Hadidi said it is clear why the Syrian media did not publish this section.
"There is no Al-Atasi Institute; the only thing there is is a club," he wrote. "The Aleppo residents were not demonstrating but came to a political symposium whose topic was not Kurds' rights. But even if they had been [demonstrating] what's the crime?"

I have to ask, why is it unlawful to speak of the different ethnicities in your country? If Bashar is such a sweeping moderate in Syria then why is it unlawful to discuss the rights of the Kurds. Yet this is trivial when you realize that the afformentioned citizens werent even talking about Kurds! It would appear that Bashar attempted to scapegoat a peaceful process on a touchy ethnic issue.

But these issues pale in comparison to the fact Bashar lied outright about the crackdown on free speach. He claims you can go to the Al-Atasi Institute and see free speach but this institute doesnt exist. In another section of the article Bashar threatens to give the adress of the Al Atasi Institute! And how are we supposed to know anyones home from a simple adress. It appears that something fishy is going on in Syria and Bashar is avoiding the issue. Moving right along lets have another look at what else was omitted.


Bashar is surrounded by corrupt and dangerous family thugs who conduct illegal business and aid the Iraq insurgence.

The official Syrian news agency also censored a section in which Assad was pressed about corruption "around" him, in his circle of power.
The president responded: "Why around me? What do you mean?"
In response, the interviewer brought up a scandal involving Assad's cousin's entanglement in a mobile phone business deal, and said, "The list is long."
Assad replied: "He is a Syrian like all Syrians, whether he is my cousin, my brother, my friend, or anyone else. There is Syrian law."
Hadidi noted, however, a man who exposed the corrupt business deal, Riyadh Seif, has been imprisoned, ostensibly on tax evasion charges.
As WorldNetDaily reported, a relative of the president, Assef al-Shaleesh, runs Al Bashair Trading Co., a front for the Assad family involved prior to the Iraq war in oil and arms smuggling. Al-Bashair has offices in Damascus, Beirut and Baghdad.
Al-Shaleesh's uncle, Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh, is reported to have hidden Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in three locations in Syria.

This would be the same individual who I accused of partaking in the illegal oil for food scam, and may have helped arm the Iraq insurgents.

Originally posted by Agent 47
A firm from Syria, headed by a cousin of that countrys leader, Bashar Assad, signed contracts to supply millions of dollars in arms and equipment to Iraq before the United States invaded in March, The Los Angeles Times reported on Tuesday.

In the first of a two-part series written from Damascus, The Times reported that 1,000 heavy machine guns and up to 20 million bullets for assault rifles, supplied by SES International Corp., helped Baghdads ill-equipped army grow stronger before the war began in March. Some supplies may now be aiding the insurgency against the U.S.-led occupation.

If law is law then why is Bashar's cousin still running a million dollar business profitting from illegal transactions. Why does Bashar have to lie to his own people and censor these accusations in the state press. If Bashar is on record as denouncing Iraqi opposition then why does he allow his cousin to sell them large quantities of arms? Why must he lie to his people and not make them aware of this.


Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh uncle to Bashar played a key role in transporting Iraqs WMD into the Beeka Valley. Shaleesh is a member of Bashars inner circle.

Al-Shaleesh's uncle, Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh, is reported to have hidden Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in three locations in Syria.

In an exclusive interview Monday with the London Telegraph, Assad came closer than ever before to admitting his country possessed stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

So we have Syrian terrorists with WMD, Syrian army with WMD, and Bashar calling for the destruction of WMD? That doesnt sound like a uniform party line. You cant stand here and say that Syria does not possess WMD. So where did it come from? The first Arab country to successfully develop WMD was Iraq, who else could have provided Syria the knowledge to pursue their own program? More over, Iraqs last stockpile of WMD was moved into Syria by this Al Shaleesh character.

Bashar Assad is hiding Iraqi weapons of mass destruction in three locations in Syria, according to intelligence sources cited by an exiled opposition party.

The weapons were smuggled in large wooden crates and barrels by Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh, known for moving arms into Iraq in violation of U.N. resolutions and for sending recruits to fight coalition forces, said the U.S.-based Reform Party of Syria.
One weapons-cache location identified by the sources is a mountain tunnel near the village of al-Baidah in northwest Syria, the report said. The tunnel is known to house a branch of the Assad regime's national security apparatus.

Two other arms supplies are reported to be in west-central Syria. One is hidden at a factory operated by the Syrian Air Force, near the village of Tal Snan, between the cities of Hama and Salmiyeh. The third location is tunnels beneath the small town of Shinshar, which belongs to the 661 battalion of the Syrian Air Force.

Assad told the London paper Syria rejects American and British demands for concessions on weapons of mass destruction, insisting Damascus is entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own chemical and biological deterrent.

If Bashar is a positive leader for Syria then why must he play the Israel card and try to defend his WMD arsenal. It would be highly unlikely that Israel would ever strike Syria with WMD and yet Bashar makes this claim. Furthermore, the hard facts show Bashars cousin trafficking in illegal goods, so why would it be any different for his father. This article only confirms the fact that Syria has WMD and that this WMD came in part from Iraq.

The facts speak for themselves.

Bashar Censors Interview

Syria Hiding Iraq WMD

[Edited on 18-4-2004 by Agent47]

posted on Apr, 18 2004 @ 08:34 PM
Double Post.

[Edited on 18-4-2004 by Agent47]

posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 10:16 PM
WABC Radio is running a report that the "poison gas" that was part of the planned but thwarted attack in Jordon has been identified as VX nerve gas, as per the King of Jordan.
I did a quick search and noticed that VX is one of those "unaccounted for" 'WMD items' that is still listed as not being verified as destroyed or accounted for.

I also found a report by Hans Blix in 2003 was given saying this also. Compare it to what he is spewing today...

Here his report:
The Blix Report: Anthrax, missiles and nerve gas... all missing
28 January 2003

These reports by the BBC and Iraq Watch listing "unaccounted for" 'items', also listing VX nerve gas:
Iraq: The disputed evidence
Iraqi Weapons: Five Unanswered Questions


posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 11:38 PM
If you really want a surprise wait until 2005,

I have MORE than just a feeling they have somehting going on down there in the region

the WMDs are defintaely in a difrrent country. It's somewhere in a valley/desert.

posted on Apr, 19 2004 @ 11:45 PM

It's somewhere in a valley/desert.

Humm....where could that be? that would be a small place indeed huh? considering that most of the middle east are valleys and deserts..... but i think you are right, they will be found there.

[Edited on 20-4-2004 by Muaddib]

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 07:56 AM
I'm assuming that the member is refering to the Bekaa Valley, one spot that has been speculated on already?


posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 10:14 AM
Wow you people are totally delusional.

He had NO WMD left! Why would he give them to Syria when he knew that he would eventually be killed or captured?

Proof? In one year of occupation, NOTHING!

It was a lie. Trying to prove it as true over 14 months after the fact is a little late.


posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 11:25 AM
Typical left wing Canadian liberalism with a mix of amnesty international to boot.


posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 12:05 PM
Seekerof: "Typical left wing Canadian liberalism with a mix of amnesty international to boot."

Whatever, I'm right, you're wrong. Try to justify it whichever way you want to, the bottom line is you're mistaken.

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 12:57 PM
Actually, I think what has been presented in this thread is more than enough evidence to support that WMDs were moved from Iraq to Syria and maybe even other sypatheic countries. Agent 47, hats off to you and Seek for such thorough work.

I have said all along when the WMDs weren't found that the question we had better be asking isn't whether or not they existed but where the hell are they?

To beat it all, we now have some of these weapons via foiled terrorist plot and thats hard evidence.

However, I have begun to speculate why Hussien and sons were killed/captured. Seems, they might have been betrayed by Syria who now is rid of them and conveniently enough, now have their entire weapons program with little R&D costs if any. Who came out ahead there and who got the old screwgy?

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 03:24 PM

Originally posted by Jakomo
Seekerof: "Typical left wing Canadian liberalism with a mix of amnesty international to boot."

Whatever, I'm right, you're wrong. Try to justify it whichever way you want to, the bottom line is you're mistaken.

Do tell why you are so right . I have presented over a dozen different articles detailing Iraqs WMD situation in the late 1990s, blatant connections to Zu Alhema al-Shaleesh and transactions with Iraq millitary officials, the fact Shaleesh's nephew is an active participant in arming Iraqi resistance. The ties between these countries run deep and Syria did not suddenly obtain the ability to indeginously create WMD. The tech came from Russia and other parties who also helped establish the Iraqi R&D. What is your evidence? There is no clear cut record of the Iraq WMD being destroyed and as I have pointed out above.

Iraq probably possessed one hundred to five hundred metric tons of CW munitions fill. One hundred metric tons would fit in a backyard swimming pool; five hundred could be hidden in a small warehouse.

These materials did not dissappeare overnight and last time I checked they were not expended in action. So what became of them? They were moved to the same place Iraq moved Saddam's sons, billions of Saddams loot, and some of Saddam's fighters. Saddam wanted to keep his prided WMD safe from Western hands and Syria is a logical choice. If your so right then what contradicts all of the satellite imagery and eye witness accounts I provided.

Fact is your simply wrong.

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 04:20 PM

Whatever, I'm right, you're wrong. Try to justify it whichever way you want to, the bottom line is you're mistaken.

Wow, great proof Jakomo, we should all believe you now, your proof is irrefutable....

Let's see what Richard Murphy, the Council's Hasib J. Sabbagh senior fellow in Middle East studies has to say about Iraq being able to hide WMD.

"Q. Publicly, the Iraqis keep saying they have no weapons of mass destruction. Do you believe that? The administration obviously does not. How do you reconcile that?

A. The first test comes with the declaration Saddam must make by December 8. The Iraqis may assert that their "dual-use" equipment--in factories such as those producing plastics, pesticides, and fertilizer--no longer produces WMD. Saddam will be running a big risk if he categorically denies by December 8 having WMD stocks and insists he has absolutely no manufacturing capability. We will soon see how skillful the Iraqis are at eliminating any traces of WMD in these facilities. I suspect they will have done a pretty good job at hiding those traces."

Excerpt taken from.

"BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq hit a snag Monday when a search of a military-industrial complex near the heart of Baghdad revealed that equipment tagged by previous inspectors was missing.

Weapons inspectors in 1996 used numbered stickers to tag the equipment, which could have dual use in weapons production or civilian work, to be able to track it.

"None of these are currently present at the facility," said Hiro Ueki, a spokesman for the current inspection team. "It was claimed that some had been destroyed by the bombing of the site; some had been transferred to other sites."

The inspectors asked Iraqi officials if they can see the equipment elsewhere.

Some cameras left to monitor the Al Karama General Co. complex also could not be found, a U.N. statement said on the fifth day of the round of inspections, which resumed Wednesday."

Excerpts taken from.

Muaddib----Lets see the actions of Iraq in the years before and leading up to the war in Iraq.----


In March, Iraq delays weapons inspectors' visits to five different sites, drawing condemnation from the Security Council. Three months later, Iraq again denies weapons inspectors access to sites they want to inspect. The Security Council responds June 12 by passing Resolution 1060, which demands yet again that Iraq provide inspectors unhindered access but which stops short of authorizing or threatening the use of force to support the inspectors."

Baghdad soon steps up its obstructionist activities. Iraqi officials in June jeopardize the safety of weapons inspectors by grabbing at the controls of UNSCOM helicopters while they are airborne, and Iraq blocks access to several sites.

Another round of Iraqi noncooperation begins in September, highlighted by Iraq barring weapons inspections at locations it describes as "presidential sites."

Iraq continues to block inspections at the eight locations it labels as presidential sites and refuses another inspection elsewhere, charging that too many US and British inspectors are on the team. In February, as Iraq stands firm on barring visits to presidential sites and a U.S.-led military buildup continues in the region, both the United States and Britain release reports detailing what weapons and equipment they believe Iraq is still hiding."

Muaddib---But mysteriously a month later inspectors are allowed to visit these sites...humm a month that enough time to hide any evidence or move them?---

"Inspectors visit the presidential sites in March and April without incident, and the Security Council issues a May statement expressing satisfaction with Iraq's recent cooperation.

On August 5, Iraq announces that it is suspending cooperation with UNSCOM and IAEA inspections. The Security Council condemns Iraq's decision the next day and one month later passes Resolution 1194, calling for Iraq to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors.

With a U.S.-British attack imminent, Iraq announces November 14 that it will cooperate with inspectors. Baghdad's cooperation is short-lived, however, and the IAEA and UNSCOM withdraw their personnel from Iraq December 16, just hours before the United States and the United Kingdom begin three days of air strikes, during which Baghdad declares that weapons inspections are finished. "


For its part, Iraq insists that sanctions must be lifted before inspectors can return. "

Muaddib---Once again Saddam is delaying and buying time...-----

The council approves a UNMOVIC work plan, but no UNMOVIC inspector sets foot inside Iraq, which still opposes the return of weapons inspectors."

Seeking to bolster the Iraq sanctions regime, which has been weakened as countries and companies illegally buy oil from Iraq and export prohibited goods to the country, the United States and the United Kingdom suggest overhauling the sanctions to focus more on military and dual-use goods and less on civilian trade."

On September 12, amid increasing speculation that the United States is preparing to invade Iraq to oust Saddam Hussein, President Bush delivers a speech to the United Nations calling on the organization to enforce its resolutions for disarming Iraq. Bush strongly implies that if the United Nations does not act, the United States will - a message that US officials make more explicit the following week.

Four days later, Baghdad announces that it will allow arms inspectors to return "without conditions." Iraqi and UN officials meet September 17 to discuss the logistical arrangements for the return of inspectors and announce that final arrangements will be made at a meeting scheduled for the end of the month. The United States contends that there is nothing to talk about and warns that the Iraqis are simply stalling.

The Bush administration continues to press the Security Council to approve a new UN resolution calling for Iraq to give weapons inspectors unfettered access and authorizing the use of force if Iraq does not comply."

Excerpts taken from.

[Edited on 20-4-2004 by Muaddib]

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 04:34 PM

Originally posted by astrocreep
To beat it all, we now have some of these weapons via foiled terrorist plot and thats hard evidence.

What are you referring to exactly..?

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in