Posted on 10/21/2004 11:45:00 PM PDT by Jeff Head
This compound is extremely hazardous because of its lack of warning properties and delayed biological effects. It may cause burns of the skin, eyes, and mucous membranes. Eye damage may be permanent. Effects may be delayed occurring hours after exposure. Skin permeation may occur in toxic amounts. Both the fumes and the liquid may produce severe irritation. Inhalation may cause irritation of the nose, throat and lungs. Death may occur from overexposure. Prolonged exposures may cause liver and kidney effects. DuPont controls this compound as a potential carcinogen.Also note the barrel indicating it is some sort of chlorine. Chlorine Gas was also a chemical weapon used in World War I. Crates, barrels and boxes of other stuff as well. I believe the Kurds and the Iranians were familiar with some of this stuff.
Dimethyl sulfate vapor and liquid is extremely hazardous because of its deficient warning properties (NO ODOR THRESHOLD, LOOKS LIKE WATER, AND HAS ANALGESIC EFFECTS) and delayed biological effects. DMS hydrolyzes to methyl hydrogen sulfate and eventually sulfuric acid and methanol. Skin or eye contact with low concentrations of Dimethyl Sulfate may cause analgesia (numbness). Therefore, the corrosive action of Dimethyl Sulfate may not be readily detected.
Skin contact with Dimethyl Sulfate may cause skin burns or ulceration. Inital effects include itching, reddening of the skin followed hours later by severe blistering. Evidence suggests that skin permeation can occur in amounts capable of producing the effects of systemic toxicity. Eye contact with Dimethyl Sulfate may cause eye corrosion with corneal or conjunctival ulceration. Permanent eye damage may occur. Both the vapors and the liquid can cause severe irritation; upon slight vapor exposure the whites of the eyes turn red (bloodshot).
Ingestion of Dimethyl Sulfate may cause severe irritation of the mucous membranes of the mouth, throat and gastrointestinal tract.
Inhalation of Dimethyl Sulfate may cause irritation of the upper respiratory passages, angioneurotic edema of larynx with hoarseness, difficulty in swallowing; temporary lung irritation effects with productive cough, discomfort, difficulty breathing, chest pain, shortness of breath or cyanosis; or possibly modest initial symptoms, followed in hours by severe shortness of breath, requiring prompt medical attention. In severe poisonings, central nervous system effects may occur which include unconsciousness, cramps or convulsions, and paralysis. Fatality may result from gross overexposure.
As I have stated to people on this thread...I have no doubts that the chemicals for chemcial weapons were in Iraq. Saddam used them himself in times past.
He either shipped them out of the country or buried them. With or without WMDs, IMHO, we were completely justified in going into Iraq because of its abject violation of agreements it signed to halt hostilities in Desert Storm. We were long past and delinquent in reacting decisively and bringing Saddam down IMHO.
As to these pics...they are interesting. To me, it indicates there is evidence being found in Iraq of chemicals that could potnentially be used as weapons still around. That's all. We are getting some pretty good and interesting replies. That's part of what makes FR so addicting, influential, a source for activism, and a place to meet others and to learn.
There's no doubt in my mind he had them, particularly the chemical variety.
Who? I'm locked down on a military base. Plenty of people here know about it.
It's not my place to go releasing details out to anyone, believe me.
Yes i agree wit tech editor here. I too believe they exist and yes indeed these could be part of a stockpile but what we need is PROOF. DOnt get me wrong, its there...but what we need is photos like these and the scientific documentation to back it up so no one, not even Blix himself, can doubt it.
I mean look how confusiong it gets with a leak...we have had so many false dawns on this..what i want is the documentation to say..NOW SCREW YOU BUDDY , (sound of a manual 300 pages long, hits the desk) READ IT AND WEEP...and we will be outside waiting for the apology (which we all know will never come)...
I dont doubt your pictures dude, and good for you finding them. I do notice that the camo guy does not appear to have a chemical suit on...and i for one would not be walking around barrels like that without protection...anyways...it is there...lets all hope your pictures are the beginning...
That idividual is walking in a different area...where there are boxes and crates of stuff, apparently not next to, or in the same vicinity as the barrels of chems.
Counting days yet?
"Except that I happen to know the freeper who sent them and he did take them in Iraq as advertised. Exactly what they mean is up for grabs...but they were taken there."
Thank you for posting, Jeff. I doubt there are ulterior motives anywhere in this thing and I KNOW that you are an upright man of your word.
ALL Haz Mat, since 1999, is originally labled with a UN #. You can google them, or ask a trucker, he would have a handbook in his truck. Good to see sadman was following the UN guidelines for HazMat handling. (sarc)
:O)
P
Re: believe me if we found anything the administration would definately get it out there.
They sure are keeping a soft voice on what we DID find.
Less than 60!
How many for you? Go ahead, rub it in. I can take it.
I was sold on the 10,000 liters of Anthrax, R-400 bombs, 122mm rockets and the recent sarin IED.
Allow me to quote Rush (from memory):
Botulinum toxin is the deadliest substance known. One gram, one thimbull full of this can kill one million people.
Saddam was listed by weapons inspectors to have in his possession eighteen thousand liters of it. Eighteen thousand liters of botulinum toxin is enough to kill the entire current human population of the earth....three times.
If our President was a Democrat and needed to prove that there was WMD in Iraq, just finding a pack of sparklers there would be enough proof for the left and media.
Iraq having a history with the British in their heyday, and the king's English being a useful and widely spoken language in trade, I would expect Iraqis to use English on the Brit style of spelling words rather than the American style as well. As you can see they use the Brit form "defence" as opposed to our form, "defense." Knowing already that Iraq used English as well as the official Arabic on its highway signage, seeing English & Arabic labels on shipping materials should be no surprise.
It still looks weird... but can't be casually dismissed for that reason.
As far a chemical precursors go I don't think anyone doubts that Iraq had tons of them- it's just that the press and the extremists have redefined "WMD" to a very narrow term referring exclusively to vast quantites of weapons already armed with fully mixed chemicals, or warheads already fitted with nuclear devices, or vast quantities of biological agents all ready to go.
They have specifically excluded the concept of programs, and with them asked us to dismiss and ignore not only the precursors we have found in quantity, but also the vials of pathogens which could be used to create vast quantities o pathogens which were found in a scientists' fridge, the numerous concealed laboratories and other facilities, the taped conversations of Iraqis trying to conceal their activities, the before and after satellite photos showing activities on the ground, the large numbers of scientists specializing in WMD, the assassination attempts on some scientists, the rather advanced stage of the Iraqi missile development program, the drones, Iraqi scientists' ties to the Libyan nuclear program, the presence of old WMD shells which should have been destroyed were Iraq to be in compliance, the bribery of the press, foreign government officials, UN officials and inspectors etc, etc. (Why bribe inspectors to not see what Iraq supposedly didn't have anyway?)
Look.
Simply being a HAZMAT isn't a WMD.
If it was, the area under my kitchen sink would be a WMD storage site.
Personally, I really don't even like the inclusion of chemical WEAPONS in the whole "WMD" rubric, because they're not really any more efficient in killing people with the same effort as conventional explosives and actually less effective (look at the Aum Shinryko Tokyo subway attack and compare it with the Madrid train bombings), and the gap between the lethality of chemical weapons and that of biological and nuclear weapons is ENORMOUS.
I guess we've now defined every single chemical that is potentially fatal if you breathe it or drink it as a chemical weapon. Iraq was never mandated to completely shut down all industrial and economic activity by the UN.
I mean, we're oohing and aahing over a barrel of CHLORINE now? Geez, I'm waiting for Hans Blix to descend on a my local pool supply store any minute now.
Yeah, you're right, and the military and other defense agencies are wrong to be concerned about the use of chemical weapons.
Of course you've mistaken awkward deplowment on the Tokyo devised for low lethality. Bad mistake. Go back to Bhopal for a look at lethality.
Oops, but I forgot that YOU don't like to think of chemical weapons as WMD...
I'm sick and tired of people thinking that there were (or are) no WMD in Iraq. These people are the same ones that think if you found a cylinder in one room, a rifle barrel in another, bullets in a different room, that there was no gun in the house! I think if we put together everthing that HAS been found in Iraq, we'd have WMD. But, of course I could be wrong.............I'm no scientist!
Because the U.N. found them.
What's frightening: all the stuff looks rifled through as if somebody grabbed the best of the lot in a hurry and took off.
Even worse, the leftist terrorist enablers/sympathisers here in the US will say insane crap like "It isn't militarily significant quantities" (as if the planes on 9/11 were in 'militarily significant quantities?)
Or "It's OOOoold!"
Or, "It's leftover from Desert Storm!!" (Yeah, and Blix said it wasn't there!! blindboy didn't find it!)
*sigh*
Thanks for the images, they do go a long way to cementing the fact that when it comes to terrorism, Saddam, and protecting the US and it's interests, the left isn't really interested in protecting defending and upholding truth anywhere at any time.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.