ATS: WMD of Iraq Found?, page 3

Originally posted by Esoterica
WND isn't the most trustworthy of sources, but I wouldn't be surprised if this were true. They're likely saving it until right before the election (say a month or two before). Then release the huge lump at once. It'd be a knockout punch on Kerry- after spending the entire campaign talking about how Bush has lied, Bush can show up proving everything he said was true. Kerry's campaign would literally crumble.

In theory, anyway

I agree with you on all counts; not in terms of believing that Bush et al truly figure that it'd be best to wait until they have buildings full of WMD, if they really had a considerable amount already; however, in terms that it's likely what will happen; while for a different reason than what people have stated in this forum.

Journalists Find Many Ways to Kill Truth in Iraq, by Ira Chernus, Mar 18 2004 www.commondreams.org...

Quote: << On March 13 the Iranian news agency Mehr reported a story that, if true, is surely the biggest news of this election year:

"U.S. forces have unloaded a large cargo of parts for constructing long-range missiles and weapons of mass destruction (WMD) in the southern ports of Iraq.

A reliable source from the Iraqi Governing Council, speaking on condition of anonymity, told the Mehr News Agency that U.S. forces, with the help of British forces stationed in southern Iraq, had made extensive efforts to conceal their actions."

According to Mehr's source, the parts are old ones, just the kind the U.S. gave to Saddam Hussein in the 1980s.

... if there is a startling pre-election "discovery," ....

...

Truth is the first casualty of war. We always knew that. Now we know that there's more than one way to kill the truth. >>

Commentary:

That's not only credible, it is extremely; only needing to be verified, while it now seems to be rather too late; although, not in terms of us needing to critically question any claims made by any of the Bush administration, which would be lemming-like to not, or to refuse to, carefully do.

The following article is not totally or perfectly related, but it is to some serious-enough extent.

The Phantom Sovereign, by Jonathan Schell, TomDispatach.com, The Nation, Apr 8 2004 www.commondreams.org... This is a very good article or essay in which the author debunks the notion of there being or the US bringing sovereignty, democracy, a constitution, etc. for the people of Iraq; providing excellent arguments and, in my opinion anyway, competently debunking ....

Regarding WND, the following should be considered of value.

Dubya and the Moonies, date ? www.dubyasworld.com...

Moon Shadow: The Rev, Bush & North Korea, Jan 14 2003
counterpunch.org... Obtained from the above "Dubya and the Moonies" article.

The Bush-Kim-Moon Triangle of Money, Mar 10 2001 www.consortiumnews.com...

The GOP's man on the Moon - Unification Chruch leader and self-proclaimed Messiah builds legacy with support from the Bush administration, Feb 5 2003 www.workingforchange.com...

Stealth tactics, Moonies and the art of cynicism, date ?
www.onlinejournal.com... This is another link provided in the above "Dubya and the Moonies" article.

New UPI editor's journalism oath to Rev. Moon, Nov 10 2003
www.gorenfeld.net... That article doesn't contain much information, while there are hyperlinks to additional materials.

In Depth - Moon and UPI: A New Weapon in an Ideology War, date ? www.mediachannel.org... Got this link from the above article "New UPI editor's journalism oath to Rev. Moon". The webpage lists at least known media and possibly other types of organizations owned by Rev. Moon, plus provides links to various critiques or articles of - basically, anyway - research usefulness. I suggest that people make themselves aware of this kind of information.

Bad Moon on the rise, Sept 24 2003 www.salon.com...

Unification Press International? Rev. Moon Adds United Press International to His Media Empire, Sept 18 2000 www.mediachannel.org... This certainly is an interesting article, and a correction for a hyperlink provided for the extensive list of Moon or Unification Church front groups, is the following Steven Alan Hassan link, Moon Front Groups.

Steven Alan Hassan - Moon Front Groups www.freedomofmind.com... This is the most important resource site that I've come across on the topic of Rev. Moon, the Moon Organization, and Moon's media organizations, front groups, and groups he uses and/or influences, unbeknownst to the people being used. Actually, the link is to a very long list of front groups, and the main moonies directory is also recommended; it should be considered a must; not necessarily meaning that people must believe what's stated about Moon, etc., in this site, and these articles, but at least a must to read and to keep in mind.

Dark Side of Rev. Moon www.consortiumnews.com... Got this link from Steven Hassan's site, and this is an archive of various articles on Rev. Moon, et al, and etc. related.

Commentary, re. Rev. Moon, et al, and etc. related:

Most of what Rev. Moon rather seems, or more, to be trying to do, as well as what he's either left very and obviously implied, or which he actually stated (forgetting which it is), is that he wants to try to use his news media organizations to try to incite the US government to war ever more; to try to make the final Apocolypse, like as per the Book of Revelations of John the apostle, happen. He refers to the Anti-Christ and Satan, so he most likely is referring to that Book, of John.

As an immediate alert, he owns and/or highly influences Insight Magazine, the Washington Times, and etc.; and, since I've learned of this, more careful reading has been done when reading from these news media, leading to a perception that Steven Hassan is rather very accurate, in addition to entirely serious. And, WND is probably influenced, if not owned, by Rev. Moon, too.

If readers desire more of the above kind of information, regarding news media which have become very bogus, but not about Rev. Moon and his groups, not per se anyway, then read the following Joel Beinin report.

TEL AVIV'S INFLUENCE ON AMERICAN INSTITUTIONS: The Pro-Sharon Think Tank", by Joel Beinin, professor of history at Stanford University www.activistsreader.com... I've read some criticisms of Joel Beinin's work, by several journalists working for mainstream news media, such as Le Monde (France), and either or both the Independent (UK) and/or Guardian (UK); however, the Le Monde one was of seriously unprofessional quality, actually childish nonsense, like childish "name calling" or ridicule; while the UK sourced one that I read was not bad, overly negative, and from what I recall, it left a good impression of Beinin's work or claims, while also that the UK journalist thought some were at least worth questioning.

Again, we do not need to take what those two people state as "set in stone", forever, nor as being totally accurate today, as opposed to yesterday; however, I will not refute their work, and make both reference resources.

Lastly, this hopefully will not be too long; although, fewer links regarding Rev. Moon, et al, and etc. related, may have possibly been sufficient, providing additional ones to atomic articles seemed possibly worthwhile.

Only trying to be helpful.

Muaddib, let me clarify what it is I'm saying. Which, btw, I will do without having to resort to any 'name calling' or erroneous 'labeling' of others as Socialists, Liberals or any of that sh*t.

Using YOUR links and info:

The head of the Iraq Survey Group stated that the group has continued looking for weapons of mass destruction. He also stated that he did not believe that the group has found enough evidence and information to make a final statement with confidence on Iraq's wmd programmes and to determine with confidence the truth of their existence. But they also present information and pictures on what they have found.

So, they are still investigating. Now 3 years after it was used as the Primary reason for launching a War and invading Iraq. Not to mention the difference between 'WMD Programmes' and 'Stockpiles of WMD's' which was one of the ways 'The Story' changed mid stream. But let's look further, using their own words.

Before 9-11
24 Feb 2001
In Cairo, Secretary of State Colin Powell declares: "He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors."

7 Aug 2001
President George W Bush declares: "He's been a menace forever, and we will do -- he needs to open his country up for inspection, so we can see whether or not he's developing weapons of mass destruction."

After 9-11
Nov 2001
Pentagon official Richard Perle: "He has weapons of mass destruction. The lesser risk is in pre-emption. We've got to stop wishing away the problem."

26 Aug 2002
Vice President Dick Cheney declares: "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."

7 Oct 2002
During a speech in Cincinnati, President George W Bush declares: "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."

2 Dec 2002
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declares: "If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world."

9 Jan 2003
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declares: "We know for a fact there are weapons there."

19 Mar 2003
During an address to the nation, President George W Bush declares: "The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder."

And with that build up of Fear Campaigning and as of yet inconclusive proof we now begin the War. Which by the way, isn't against Osama who is blamed for Actually being responsible for attacking us on 9-11, but against Saddam.

During the War
10 Apr 2003
In a message to the Iraqi people, President George W Bush declares: "The goals of our coalition are clear and limited. We will end a brutal regime, whose aggression and weapons of mass destruction make it a unique threat to the world."

10 Apr 2003
In a message to the Iraqi people, British Prime Minister Tony Blair declares: "We did not want this war. But in refusing to give up his weapons of mass destruction, Saddam gave us no choice but to act."

10 Apr 2003
White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declares: "We have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about. And we have high confidence it will be found."

Sounds good so far!! Yet still no Actual Proof, but the speculation is convincing and powerful.

Then comes some doubts, or if not doubt, just a little less confidence than that which was being touted for the past 3 years as absolute certainty.

24 Apr 2003
President George W Bush declares: "We are learning more as we interrogate or have discussions with Iraqi scientists and people within the Iraqi structure, that perhaps he destroyed some, perhaps he dispersed some. And so we will find them."

29 Apr 2003
In Moscow, British Prime Minister Tony Blair wonders openly: "Where is Saddam? Where are those arsenals of weapons of mass destruction, if they indeed were in existence? We don't know whether perhaps Saddam is still hiding somewhere underground in a bunker, sitting on cases containing weapons of mass destruction, and is preparing for blowing the whole thing up, bringing down with him the lives of hundreds of thousands of people. We simply do not know."

But wait. Everyone knew for sure. Without a doubt. Swearing up and down, "We know", 'We know", "We know". But now you say 'We simply do not know." Bummer!!

But that's ok, cause once the War is over and we've caught Saddam, then for sure they'll be found. Right??? Stockpiles of Weapons that were ready and posed a threat to the entire world and could be used any minute.

21 Jan 2004
During his State of the Union speech, President Bush gingerly avoids the topic of whether WMDs actually exist in Iraq by declaring: "We are seeking all the facts. Already the Kay Report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations. Had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day."

23 Jan 2004
In an interview with Reuters, former weapons inspector David Kay is asked about the WMDs. He opines: "I don't think they existed. I think there were stockpiles at the end of the first Gulf War and those were a combination of U.N. inspectors and unilateral Iraqi action got rid of them. I think the best evidence is that they did not resume large-scale production, and that's what we're really talking about, is large stockpiles, not the small. Large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the period after '95."

27 Jan 2004
Regarding the possibility that Saddam might never have had any appreciable WMDs, President Bush puts on the tap shoes: "First of all, I think it's very important for us to let the Iraq Survey Group do its work so we can find out the facts and compare the facts to what was thought."

16 May 2004
Secretary of State Colin Powell tells Meet the Press: "When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I'm deeply disappointed... it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it."

So what's the deal??

Understand, I'm not saying there never were any Bio/Chem Weapons ever. In fact, I seem to remember that we actually provided some of them way back when, when we were on better terms with Saddam. What they are saying now as proof of the chemical weapons is even far from being equal to what was being said at the beginning.

"Pesticides are the key elements in the chemical-agent arena," Hanson says. "In fact, the general pesticide chemical formula (organophosphate) is the 'grandfather' of modern-day nerve agents."

Now, being that all this 'Pesticide' seems a little excessive for a country of sand and little agriculture to say the least. Plus the fact that they were found in old military ammo dumps certainly looks like they are chemicals for military purposes.

However, does this justify the claims that were made or justify our Invasion of another country? Is that enough to justify everything that has happened so far or the chaos and continued War that seems to be building up as a result? Does it prove that the administration or the intelligence they were using as Extremely accurate, or is it more that the intel was just barely correct at all and the Administration blew it out of proportion without even being able to very their claims? Also, why did the reason for all this go from 'Terrorists - Specifically Osama and 9-11' to 'Saddam and Terroism in General' and finally to 'Freedom in Iraq & Promoting Democracy' with 'War on Terrorism' as a secondary issue?

Trust me, I'm not trying to 'Hang' Bush Co. and avoid this new evidence. If they are finding links and stuff now, great, but IMO, putting the puzzle together and coming up with some proof after and during a pre-emtive War with unknown side effects is like skydiving without first checking to make sure there is a Parachute on your back and not someone's camping supplies.

This article is also claiming that it's because of the Media Covering up the facts and trying to make Bush look bad as the reason nobody has seen any of this 'Hard Evidence' until now. Yet in another report it openly states this at the end:

This report was written in accordance with Pentagon ground rules allowing so-called embedded reporting, in which journalists join deployed troops.

So does that mean the Pentagon is trying to Cover-Up evidence and make the Administration look bad? Apparently they are controlling the what is being reported, but why would they cover up anything?

This whole thing stinks of B.S. and Propaganda and Illegal War Profiteering as well as being built upon Lies, confusion, and just out right Incompetence from any and all angles. So my stance on this is that 'There is NO JUSTIFICATION for what's happened or might happen in the future' Either they were wrong from the beginning making it Criminal, or they were right in their assumptions and lucky something did turn up, but either way they've handled the entire thing like a bunch of Incompetent War Pigs. There is NO WAY of telling what is planted and what is real.

It very well could be something else that is being over looked here. Perhaps there were Weapons there & the U.S. did Know this. Also, perhaps they did find them too and chose not to reveal their discovery though. Surely you'd ask, 'But why the hell would they do that??' Could it be that these Weapons and materials that Saddam allegedly was going to use against the U.S. and others actually came from us?? That maybe it was the U.S. who was supplying these things?? We did in the past after all. We have also pulled out the U.N. inspectors who are now no longer allowed to search except on the boarders. The reason could be that if they discovered and traced the materials to their origin, that it would then point right back to the U.S. Just something others way want to think about....