It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com 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: 5
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 07:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Shoktek
What are you referring to exactly..?


I believe he his referring to the VX components seaized by the Jordanians after they foiled the attack by the Syrian terrorists.




posted on Apr, 20 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   

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.




Bottom line Jak?
No, sorry, the "bottom line" is that even o'Canoooda believed Saddam had WMD, via Canadian intel. documented WMD reports.

Canada wrong also Jak?
Rest of the world and the UN wrong also Jak?
Seemed that the only one that believed Iraq had no WMD's was Saddam.....

Now Syria has WMD's, for which they claimed they didn't have....indications would be:
>trying to move them into Sudan till the CIA caught on to this. Rumor has it that what Assad did was give or sell them to Al-Qaeda affiliated groups...
> one of those groups was recently thwarted in wasting upwards of 20,000+ innocent people in Jordan. They have been reported and according to the King of Jordan, came out of Syria...again, Syria was not supposed to have VX?

You continually bring up Iraq.....Jak, better hope, for the sake of your vanity, that WMD's are not found in Iraq or found in someone else's yard within the same neighborhood. Better yet, might want to hope that they aren't used on countless innocents and then found to have been a portion of those that came out of Iraq...you know, the ones STILL, to this day, listed as "unaccounted for" within the UN, and the rest of the worlds documented intel. reports.

BTW, might want to hope that they aren't sent to Canada and then used within your lovely nation or transported across the Canadian/US border and subsequently used in the US. I mean after all, even the Canadian papers are saying that o'Canoooda has become the haven for multiples of terrorist organizations and groups.

Vanity....enjoy it while it lasts and hope that it doesn't come back to haunt you.




seekerof

[Edited on 20-4-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 01:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Agent47
I believe he his referring to the VX components seaized by the Jordanians after they foiled the attack by the Syrian terrorists.


This is why nothing you post can be taken seriously. It wasn't Syrian terrorist it was an al-Qaida cell that entered Jordan through Syria. Every news source (credible or otherwise) is reporting that way--even the links that you posted from Newsmax.
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.


Full Story


AL-QAEDA LINKED terrorists were plotting to detonate a large-scale chemical bomb in Jordan that could have killed up to 20,000 people, plus also attack the US embassy and Prime Minister's office with poison gas, officials said yesterday.

Officials close to the investigation said several terror suspects arrested in Jordan last month had confessed that the plots were hatched by Jordanian militant Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi, thought to be a close associate of al-Qaeda boss Usama bin Laden.


Why consistantly put your own lil spin on it? Stop mixing fact with your own opinion. The fact is WMD was in the hands of al-Qaida. Your use of misdirection in this thread is awful. The headline should be AL-QAIDA HAS WMD.

With that out of the way, this could be ground breaking. If they confiscated chemicals they may be able to trace them back to the source and if that source is Iraq there will be concrete proof that Saddam passed WMD's on to al-Qaida.

Then, there is the other possibility that al-Qaida has found another way to get VX. This could open up a whole new front in the war on terror. If these chemicals aren't Iraqi...whoa. We'll have an even larger problem on our hands. That's when Syria or NK could come to the fore-front because both are known to have VX production and/or technology.

The question is where did the weapons come from? Until we know that for sure, we're just guessing.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 07:16 AM
link   
But, by saying its Al-Qaida, aren't you creating a situtation that could closely link them to Saddam's WMD as has been refuted by Bin-Laden, Hussien fans all throughout this site? Its tough to defend one sect of these bastards without incriminating another isn't it? What it is and will eventually boil down to is a whole viper's nest in league with one goal, however, each one has little honor with regard to screwing everyone else for personal gain.


Look, we can all try to pass away all the evidence thats right in front of our faces but Hussien did have WMDs and he did something with them. In my opinion, the only people who are trying to skew that fact have something to gain from their later use. BIG ACCUSATION isn't it? It should be because its a BIG PROBLEM and should be treated as such.

The weapons exist (currently).

They were developed and transported by Saddam Hussien while we sat on our hands pandering and begging to the very people funding it to let us stop it.

They are in the hands of people conspiring with known terrorist.

They will be used against the free world if the opportunity presents itself including those who think they have bought their amnesty.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Saphronia

This is why nothing you post can be taken seriously. It wasn't Syrian terrorist it was an al-Qaida cell that entered Jordan through Syria. Every news source (credible or otherwise) is reporting that way--even the links that you posted from Newsmax.


Look Im gonna try and be nice about this but your really off base with this. The terrorists were of Syrian nationality and came from Syria, there affiliation to Al Quaida does exist but that does not negate the fact they are Syrian. Over 2 pages of claims and all you can quibble me over is who the terrorists really were? You got some nerve to sit there and keep quiet and then nit pick one post, you cant offer any other evidence to why Assad is censoring his interviews and why his family keeps on violating international law. This just goes to show how you cant be taken seriously as a whole. You say that no WMD exists and yet you offer no evidence to where it went, you say that Assad is a reformist but everything Ive put up goes against that, and you back down and never mention it again. You surrendered but god forbid you admit that you did, you instead try to attack my credibility. I expected more from you, at least one meaningful post to counter the 3 point plan or anything else I have recently displayed.



[Edited on 21-4-2004 by Agent47]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:28 PM
link   
When i first saw this thread, i thought you had mistakenly meant to say US military sneaking WMD into Iraq to make the war look justified.

But instead, youre simply talking about the same Fox News snactioned BS about the imaginary WMD getting snuck into Syria, thats where they are, thats why we cant find them...duh... right, ok, flick back and watch survivor folks, we found the answer.


Heres a little hint. WMD generally are pretty large. Missiles, nukes, chem, material to manufacture it, usually is a little hard to sneak ANYWHERE. With the satelite coverage weve had for 12 years, the fact that we tracked every movement of just about every scud battery, ect, simply doesnt really sell your point very well.

If they tried to slip those WMD anywhere, we would have seen it.

And yes, we were watching the little junior Husseins just as hard as we were watching daddy hussein.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf


Heres a little hint. WMD generally are pretty large. Missiles, nukes, chem, material to manufacture it, usually is a little hard to sneak ANYWHERE. With the satelite coverage weve had for 12 years, the fact that we tracked every movement of just about every scud battery, ect, simply doesnt really sell your point very well.



If we had tracked every single scud battery for the last 12 years then why did Scuds sucessfully land in Sauid Arabia and other locations during the Iraq War?

If WMD is so hard to transport then how do you explain this?


The small amounts of WMD materials needed to carry out a terrorist attack pose real challenges. A nuclear device, for example, could be easily transported in a modest sized truck or a ship's cargo hold. This requires far less and unsophisticated resources compared to delivery by missile or aircraft.



This is not far fetched hypothetical opinions but the actually beliefs held by The Office of Defense Nuclear Nonproliferation.

The components used to make WMD are not in fact that small if you had bothered to go back and read a couple posts you would have seen how large quantities can be concealed.

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. We made no assessment of the size of Iraq's biological weapons holdings but a biological weapon can be carried in a small container.

Now we judged that Saddam had no nuclear weapons but I was not suggesting that. I was highlighting how easy it would be to transport nuclear components.

Now if you would also bother to look back and Read and Think, you would see that 17.5 tons of VX components were seized by the Jordanians, now lets see how you can trasnport 17.5 tons.

With large military trucks it would be an easy task.

Link

[Edited on 21-4-2004 by Agent47]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 03:58 PM
link   
Astrocreep: that's your opinion. You believe Saddam had WMD. An opinion does not equal fact. Some evidence says he MAY have had them, and they MAY have been moved. But, there is also solid evidence from scientist and inspectors that he didn't have them.

That's what I'm trying to add to this thread, an unbiased view. There is no conclusive proof, and some choose to write as though there is using their opinion, and that defeats the purpose of even discussing the information that we find. For every piece of small evidence or shady article written we get an "ah-ha" from the crowd, but no one can give you a conclusive--YES on the wmd question, not even our government.

If there are WMD, I want the government to find them. I suspected that if he had them they went to al-Qaida when he knew that he wasn't going to survive the US threats.

A47: I went over the reasons why I believe Assad to be a moderate several times. I'm not here to change your mind. I say when it's my opinion. I don't like to repeat myself. I've posted what I've found on the subject, and nothing more.

1st time

2nd time

3rd time

As for the captured terrorist being Syrian...I've found no reports that make that claim. When information is posted that I'm interested in, I read it. I find it disgusting when it's wrong. The current information you have doesn't make that claim. It calls them "al-Qaida" linked and led by a Jordanian militant, Abu-Musab al-Zarqawi. I'm interested in what you find why else would I even bother. My point is be objective, and stop twisting the facts to fit your opinions.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Saphronia

A47: I went over the reasons why I believe Assad to be a moderate several times. I'm not here to change your mind. I say when it's my opinion. I don't like to repeat myself. I've posted what I've found on the subject, and nothing more.

1st time

2nd time

3rd time



Every single time I have proven that your facts arent facts, they are guesses at what Assad is but I have provided evidence that he is censoring interviews and letting his family run all over the country without having to asnwer to the laws. Thats great you think you are unbiased but your still wrong.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Saphronia
The question is where did the weapons come from? Until we know that for sure, we're just guessing.


The United States provided the Government of Iraq with "dual use" licensed materials which assisted in the development of Iraqi chemical, biological, and missile- system programs, including: (6) chemical warfare agent precursors; chemical warfare agent production facility plans and technical drawings (provided as pesticide production facility plans); chemical warhead filling equipment; biological warfare related materials; missile fabrication equipment; and, missile-system guidance equipment.
- Quoted From the 1994 Reigle Report made to the Senate.


The last pathogens were sent in 1989 according to the reigle report (1993, according to the centers for disease control and prevention), even though the first reports of Iraq using chemical weapons against Iranian troops came about in 1983, and the attacks on the Kurds in 1988 which killed several thousand.

Up until July 18 1990, before Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, the Bush administration gave 4.8 million dollars worth of "strategic technology devices" to MIMI, Iraq's "Ministry of Industry and Military Industrialization", which is responsible for managing NBC related plants and programs in Iraq.


-Information from House Committee on Government Operations report "Strengthening the Export License System".

Some other interesting info according to AGWVA:

In his own book Turmoil and Triumph: My Years as Secretary of State, George Shultz refers to a declassified CIA report which notes Iraq’s use of mustard gas in August 1983, giving further credence to the suggestion that the State Department and/or the National Security Council (NSC) was well aware of Iraq’s use of chemical weapons at this time. If the use of chemical weapons was known in August of 1983, and Donald Rumsfeld went to Iraq in December of 1983, he was on notice that this country was using and was going to continue to use weapons of mass destruction. Why, then, did the United States move to de-list Iraq from those considered to be terrorist nations?

On March 23, 1984, Iran accused Iraq of poisoning 600 of its soldiers with mustard gas and Tabun nerve gas. Donald Rumsfeld returned to Baghdad on March 24, 1984. On that same day, the UPI wire service reported that a team of UN experts had concluded that:

“Mustard gas laced with a nerve agent has been used on Iranian soldiers. Meanwhile, Donald Rumsfeld held talks with foreign minister Tariq Aziz.”

Probably the most critical piece of information is that according to Washington Post journalist Bob Woodward, in a December 15, 1986 article, the CIA began to secretly supply Iraq with intelligence in 1984 that was used to “calibrate” mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops.

It is public record that the U.S. not only armed Iraq from 1983 thru August 1, 1990, but that they also provided the money to Iraq to purchase the weapons via the Atlanta branch of the Banca Nazionale del Lavoro (BNL), George Bush, Sr., and the Export-Import Bank. Iraq received $5 Billion dollars funneled through the Commercial Credit Corporation ostensibly for food credits. It is also public information that at least $2 Billion dollars from the defaulted loan was repaid by the U.S. citizen taxpayers.

-Quoted from gulfwarvets.com/news11.htm


[Edited on 21-4-2004 by Shoktek]



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 04:32 PM
link   
Just cuz we know where every scud is at doesnt mean were gonna be able to intercept them all.

Large military convouys and trucks arent going to go unoticed either.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 04:37 PM
link   
All I have to say is...with the current desperation of our government and intelligence agencies trying to find any hint of WMD to save their respectability, and with our high technology, resourcefulness, special troops, and worldwide partners/informants/agents...there is no way WMD would be in Syria and we would not already know about it...the second there is any real proof of WMD being found or suspected to be ANYWHERE, the bush administration and media will be all over it, and this has not happened yet...just my opinion, as is the rest of this thread, mere speculation...we will have to wait for the real facts to emerge.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 08:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Just cuz we know where every scud is at doesnt mean were gonna be able to intercept them all.

Large military convouys and trucks arent going to go unoticed either.


They were noticed. Severeal of my earlier stories and links described large ammount of military convoys criss crossing the Syrian border in the days leading up to the Iraq war. What was in those trucks I cant say for certain but there indeed was a level of business between the two nations leading up to our intervention.



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 08:50 PM
link   
As Shoktek said time will tell whether or not Syria did indeed receive Iraq's WMD but this time table may be shorter than you think.


Laboratory tests on the poison gas smuggled from Syria into Jordan by al Qaeda terrorists earlier this month could determine whether their weapons came from Iraq, intelligence expert John Loftus said Monday.

"What they captured was a poison gas that consisted of several chemicals to be mixed together," Loftus told nationally syndicated radio host John Batchelor. "This has to be a poison gas of what they call the G-series; Sarin, Somin, Taubin and VX."

Loftus said lab tests of the al Qaeda weapons would be key to establishing a link between the WMDs found in Jordan and Saddam's missing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons.


Now Syria has not publicly acknowledged its ability to produce VX gas and the evidence I presented did not clearly outline a VX program. So if they did not indigenously produce the VX then the nearest source would be Iraq. As I have stated multiple times, Iraq had large quantities of VX and had the most advanced production capabilities in the Middle East.

So this could be the momment of truth. If they are indeed Iraqi WMD then I would expect a long silence from detractors and ignorants.

Link



posted on Apr, 21 2004 @ 10:31 PM
link   
Where is Hans Blix at? His voice is the final authority on Iraq and WMD's? Really?
How about this guy?
Former UNSCOM inspector believes Iraq already has nuclear weapons

Are there weapons of mass destruction in Iraq? Did they get smuggled out of Iraq or are they hidden, and if so, where? In the late 1990s, weapons inspector Bill Tierney was held at gunpoint and not allowed to inspect one particular facility he believes could be the motherlode of WMD. Yet, that very site is still not even on the list of sites visited by the Hans Blix inspectors. Why? Tierney also has Arabic documents showing that Saddam Hussein smuggled Weapons of Mass Destruction out of Iraq.


Weapons inspector identifies suspected Iraqi nuke factory

“WMD: Believe Iraq or Believe the Evidence?"


And Skadi, you are absolutely correct on this:

Large military convouys and trucks arent going to go unoticed either.


Care to explain this report away on this?
Syria Storing Iraq's WMDs

Iraqi military officers destroyed or hid chemical, biological and nuclear weapons goods in the weeks before the war, the nation's top satellite spy director said yesterday.

Retired Air Force Lt. Gen. James Clapper, head of the National Imagery and Mapping Agency, said vehicle traffic photographed by U.S. spy satellites indicated that material and documents related to the arms programs were shipped to Syria.




seekerof

[Edited on 21-4-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 09:44 AM
link   
by worldwatcher;


I suspected that if he had them they went to al-Qaida when he knew that he wasn't going to survive the US threats.


Well at least we can agree on this possibility anyways. Its a very dangerous one and those telling us absolutly there was no relationship between the tow have less evidence that there wasn't then we have that there was. We do have proof the weapons existed. We have reports from Un inspectors with legit documentation. If Saddam did destroy them to try and become a peace loving guy, why not let their destruction be officially documented then there would be no question...but thats giving him the benefit of the doubt that I don't think he deserves. I don't think any of us could ever truthfully think he would do something so noble to begin with, thus my statement that those who wish to deny the weapons exist have something to gain by their concielment and possible use later on. I know its a strong accusation but this isn't a game. The stakes are all too real and its time to stop pretending. He had them, he moved them, he hid them and then he got screwed over by his accomplices.



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 11:39 AM
link   
Muaddib & Seeker and whoever still believes that there are WMDs in Iraq (or Iraqi WMDs floating around in Syria).

Reality check #1: You can't just stuff tons of nerve gas and chemical weapons and nuclear weapons in the back of a van and drive it to another location. The weapons themselves need to be kept under strict safety guidelines and they DECAY OVER TIME. With the amount of intel that they had, by aerial photography, do you think they'd notice huge convoys of trucks moving WMDs around?

Reality check #2: David Kay, the lead investigator sent by the Bushies FOUND NOTHING after months of searching. He even claimed that there were NONE and it was lousy intel.

www.cnn.com...

"Kay: No evidence Iraq stockpiled WMDs"

Reality Check #3: Is it just that you have trouble believing that he had none or is it that you refuse to believe your government lied to you and you bought it?

Reality Check #4: Saddam has been incarcerated for a few months now. NO news of WMD. Do you think the CIA isn't pulling out ALL the stops interrogating him? Do you think he would have told them EVERYTHING he
knew already?



Can anyone think of any more Reality Checks?



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Grab a tissue and whip that dribble coming from your lips Jak....your point was a milkdud. Insert quarter and try again please....


Jak:

as quoted by Jakomo
......do you think they'd notice huge convoys of trucks moving WMDs around?


Jak....you contradicting your flow of thoughts or something because the post right above yours has a link to an article that answers that question. In short, the answer is a resounding YES!




as quoted by Jakomo
David Kay, the lead investigator sent by the Bushies FOUND NOTHING after months of searching. He even claimed that there were NONE and it was lousy intel.


Again Jak....your spew runneth' over. "Nothing" implies far more than you give it credit for or understand in political language/speak. Dr. Kay has said many things in regards to lack of Iraq WMD's but in your selective reasoning and your selective article quoting you forgot, as par, duh, to mention what the article you presented further says:

Kay also raised the possibility -- one he first discussed in a weekend interview with "The Sunday Telegraph" of London -- that clues about banned weapons programs might reside across Iraq's western border.

"There is ample evidence of movement to Syria before the war -- satellite photographs, reports on the ground of a constant stream of trucks, cars, rail traffic across the border. We simply don't know what was moved," Kay said.

Link already graciously provided by Jakomo


Damn Jak, just damn......
*shakes head*



seekerof

[Edited on 22-4-2004 by Seekerof]



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 01:21 PM
link   
Seekerof: ""There is ample evidence of movement to Syria before the war -- satellite photographs, reports on the ground of a constant stream of trucks, cars, rail traffic across the border. We simply don't know what was moved," Kay said.'"

THAT'S YOUR EVIDENCE?

"We simply don't know what was moved."


LOL! Wow how totally rock-solid.


Hey, my strongest evidence so far about the fact that Saddam had no WMDs left is:

THEY HAVEN'T FOUND ANY AT ALL"

The world hasn't found any. Keep clinging to your false hope, that's the most solid proof out there. But some people refuse to believe the truth even if it is staring them in the face.

You went to WAR based on the supposed FACT that Saddam had WMDs. It was imperative to attack him before he used them (45 minute window of opportunity and all that).

And here we are, a year and a bit later and nobody has found anything. At all.

But keep clinging. Watch only US media, don't dare watch the BBC, they just had a documentary yesterday about this, exposing the total lie it was.

You'll eventually come around to my point of view because it's based on fact and not conjecture.

I'm patient because I'm sure. You've been squawking about this for months and the only thing that has changed is that your argument has gotten more desperate and non-sensical.

j



posted on Apr, 22 2004 @ 02:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by astrocreep
If Saddam did destroy them to try and become a peace loving guy, why not let their destruction be officially documented then there would be no question...but thats giving him the benefit of the doubt that I don't think he deserves. I don't think any of us could ever truthfully think he would do something so noble to begin with, thus my statement that those who wish to deny the weapons exist have something to gain by their concielment and possible use later on. I know its a strong accusation but this isn't a game. The stakes are all too real and its time to stop pretending.

He had them, he moved them, he hid them and then he got screwed over by his accomplices.


Actually, I'm not pretending. There is hard evidence and testimony that the weapons were destroyed.

Earlier in this thread I posted an article that explains why the UN wasn't party to the destruction of the chem/bio weapons. Its an interesting piece to consider.

Link

Iraq says they destroyed these weapons because of a defector named Hussein Kamel. Up until the time of his defection Iraq had claimed that they didn't have any of these weapons. So they wouldn't be caught--they were secretly destroyed.

Hans Blix and his inspectors were taken to the site of the "so called" destruction. Blix has said the test proved there were weapons destroyed there, but we can't account for how much...so yes...i believe its possible that Saddam had chem/bioweapons. But, it's just as likely that he didn't.

If the VX from the foiled Jordan attacks is traced back to Saddam that will prove that Saddam's weapons are in the hands of al-Qaida.

From the above link:


...investigators have found no support for the two main fears expressed in London and Washington before the war: that Iraq had a hidden arsenal of old weapons and built advanced programs for new ones. In public statements and unauthorized interviews, investigators said they have discovered no work on former germ-warfare agents such as anthrax bacteria, and no work on a new designer pathogen -- combining pox virus and snake venom -- that led U.S. scientists on a highly classified hunt for several months. The investigators assess that Iraq did not, as charged in London and Washington, resume production of its most lethal nerve agent, VX, or learn to make it last longer in storage.


The VX may not be Saddam's, and that's an extremely serious situation. Because if it isn't, al-Qaida has wmd and we don't know where they came from. In 1998, President Clinton destroyed a plant in the Sudan that was in the final stages of producing VX. It's likely that the technology is being sold by the scientist of these shakey regimes.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join