White House: Iraq WMD Claim Debunked

Newsmax ^ | April 12, 2006 | Carl Limbacher

[ChessExpert]

... "The lead suggested that what the president was saying was based on something that had been debunked, and that is not true," McClellan said. "In fact, the president was saying something that was based on what the intelligence community - through the CIA and DIA - were saying." ...

[ChessExpert]

This article rebutts the "Bush lied" story of the Washington Post. (I find the title to be completely confusing.)

But do we really know that these were not mobile labs? I remember one FreeRepublic post that had pictures and pursuasive analysis indicating that these were mobile biological labs. Did the Bush adminstration give up to easily?

[birbear]

Did the Bush adminstration give up to easily?

Can't hold back... must say something... too easy to make joke...grrrrr...

[xcamel]

Why has Bush administration given up to easily on every issue they've had dead-to-rights?

[Mike Darancette]

I remember when the vehicles first showed and I stated at the time that the RATS would say they were Ice Cream trucks for the children.

[ChessExpert]

too easily

[HKMk23]

Why has Bush administration given up to easily on every issue they've had dead-to-rights?

Aww, that's too easy! The WH just doesn't want to provide any traction for accusations that they're 'gloating'. No. Really. When was the last Administration that specifically avoided capitalizing on it's successes in the way this one has?

[BluH2o]

Why has Bush administration given up to easily on every issue they've had dead-to-rights?

Because, it seems (it pains me to say this), they are clueless. They're caught flat-footed so often (Katrina, Miers, etc.,) you really have to wonder if they have a grasp on reality.

[HawaiianGecko]

Two cases of arguments complete with form, content and conclusion.
CASE #1
A. Five hundred reports of evidence say that Iraq had WMD.
B. A mere six reports indicate Iraq didn't.
C. Administration believes Iraq had WMD.

Media conclusion: Iraq clearly doesn't have WMD. Administration is lying.

CASE #2
A. Five hundred reports of evidence say that Iraq had WMD.
B. A mere six reports indicate Iraq didn't.
C. Administration believes Iraq doesn't have WMD.

Media conclusion: Iraq clearly has WMD. Administration is lying.
 

 

[Cicero]

But do we really know that these were not mobile labs?

Well, no. According to Powerline Blog, one group of investigators said that they were not labs, but two groups said that they were. WaPo admitted as much, but buried it near the bottom of their story where no one would notice it.

[hole_n_one]

CNN acknowledges that "sources" say raw intelligence data would never get to the President in a mere 2-3 days.

In the next breath, they call it a scandal nonetheless.

[xcamel]

It was indeed a rhetorical question.
less than 2% of the "Saddam docs" translated and 50% of the stuff the media reported as lies were indeed true.

[ChessExpert]

I remember when the vehicles first showed and I stated at the time that the RATS would say they were Ice Cream trucks for the children.

Too true.

From the article:

The Washington Post reported Wednesday that experts on a Pentagon-sponsored mission who examined the trailers concluded that they had nothing to do with biological weapons and sent their findings to Washington in a classified report on May 27, 2003.

One day later, the Central Intelligence Agency and Defense Intelligence Agency publicly issued an assessment saying the opposite _ that U.S. officials were confident that the trailers were used to produce biological weapons. The assessment said the mobile facilities represented "the strongest evidence to date that Iraq was hiding a biological warfare program."

So how did this become a consensus that these were not mobile biological trailers? It sounds like a difference of opinion to me.

[o_zarkman44]

The quality of our leadership points directly to the unelected government underlings who are actually the policy steering mechanism. There is where the incompetence lays, or lies.
How can so many loud voices of opposition be ignored from the people who elected Bush? Because he is sheltered from those reports that would exhibit doubt on what the underlings are trying to achieve imho.

[wingsof liberty]

The worst part of this whole story is how the Washington Post and ABC misreport a story and once again, get off scott free. All they do is issue a pathetic excuse of an apology and theyre off the hook. Their logic undoubtedly being "Well, at least the damage was done."

[truth_seeker]

"Why has Bush administration given up to easily on every issue they've had dead-to-rights?"

And then have "Mr. Emotion" Scott as the messenger, to boot?

[popdonnelly]

The MSM is just lying, as usual. Their minds are made up, and nothing will persuade them that the facts aren't what they supposedly believe.

[Prost1]

1999 discussion of WMD! Click on Zinni!
and click on Slocombe!

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/congress/1999_h/index.html

No WMD...No WMD...No WMD!!!! Hahahahhahaha, yeah, right! Why Operation Fox?

[petercooper]

"Dual use"

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/04/15/sprj.irq.no.labs/index.html http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/05/22/sprj.irq.powell.trucks/ http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/28/iraq/main555876.shtml http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A60140-2003May30?language=printer http://www.jinsa.org/articles/articles.html/function/view/categoryid/168/documentid/2036/history/3,2360,652,168,2036

[ChessExpert]

Thanks for the resource material. All I see is claim and counterclaim.

The most negative comment from someone with any credibility is:

The 11 cargo containers were filled with new laboratory equipment apparently intended to make conventional weapons, said team leader Chief Warrant Officer 2 Monte Gonzalez.

"Based on what we've seen, the containers are full of millions of dollars worth of high-tech equipment," he said. "It possibly has a dual use. But it does not appear to be weapons of mass destruction."

I'm sorry, but that is not good enough. What purported conventional weapons? As for the weak mention of dual use - what is the purported dual use? Is this dual use really credible? Here is another quote from the same article:

Brig. Gen. Benjamin Freakley, of the Army's 101st Airborne Division, said Monday soldiers found what they thought were 11 mobile chemical and biological laboratories. (Full story) "Initial reports indicate that this is clearly a case of denial and deception on the part of the Iraqi government," Freakley said. "These chemical labs are present, and now we just have to determine what in fact they were really being used for."

So where does that leave us? Well CNN had no trouble coming to a conclusion. Their headline is Tests rule out suspect bio-labs. But that conclusion is clearly unwarranted from the information they provided.

What do I think? I think that few people have the guts to take on the Liberal News Industry. I remember the "spare parts horror story." I think only Aviation Week magazine stood up to the high tech lynching of the Department of Defense and its contractors. DoD officials did nothing. I bet the Army knows these are mobile biological labs but fears incurring the wrath of the MSM.