Posted on 06/23/2006 9:22:04 PM PDT by april15Bendovr
Man Says He Has Proof Of Possible WMD's In Iraq
Jack Fink Reporting
(CBS 11 News) DENTON A Denton man says the United States was premature in calling off the search for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
He was one of a handful of people who helped the U.S. military in its search, and says he's concerned about four sites in Iraq that he knows were not searched.
Dave Gaubatz, who is a retired military counter-terrorism agent, believes biological and chemical weapons could be buried at the four sites in Iraq.
The now chief investigator for the Dallas County Medical Examiners Office disputes the U.S.'s previous findings that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the war.
When the Iraq war began in March, 2003, Gaubatz was one of a half dozen Americans assigned by the Pentagon to look for weapons of mass destruction.
On his website, Gaubatz claims there are four sites in Iraq, that were never inspected, that he believes may have biological and chemical weapons.
"It should have been out three years ago. I've been pushing for three years to get the sites inspected, Gaubatz said.
At the end of 2004, when President Bush announced the search for weapons of mass destruction was over, Gaubatz said it wasn't over for him.
I just raised my hand and I said too many people risked their lives to go in at the beginning of the war to identify sites."
Gaubatz claims when he left Iraq in July of 2003, he told his commanders to inspect those four sites in southern Iraq.
The four I identified were the ones multiple people, Iraqis, told me had fresh chemical and biological weapons, Gaubatz said.
In February and March, Gaubatz says he met with two republican congressmen, Curt Weldon, of Pennsylvania, and Peter Hoekstra, of Michigan, who put him in touch with intelligence agencies.
On Wednesday and Thursday of last week, Gaubatz says he met with two officers of the CIA, and another two officers of the Defense Intelligence Agency, at the Dallas FBI building. He says he presented his report, and pinpointed the four unsearched locations.
Gaubatz says he will keep his website open until the government searches the sites. While he can't guarantee weapons are at the sites, he says if they are there, he wouldn't want them to end up in the wrong hands.
So many mysteries, theories and confusion surround the WMDs- and it makes no SENSE. One of the current ones that does make sense to me is General McInerney's...that the involvement of other members of the Security Council make it such a potential international scandal that the administration has chosen to take the "No WMDs" heat rather than force the world to confront itself...
>>... that haven't been useful for a decade.
Should we pop one in your neighborhood to test?
Horse manure.
An anonymous "senior Defense Department official" does *not* provide the "official administration response".
Rumsfeld, however, does.
Read up. Get informed.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1654193/posts
wanna open one in your living room?
Way too much stuff buried in the sand not to follow up.
I would take the statement that "the chemical weapons were not in useable condititions" very cautiously. They may not have been 'artillery/aircraft friendly' but are still very deadly. Is this something you're comfortable with getting into the hands of the insurgents, or other anti-American governments?
I hope you're right. Let the drip, drip, dripping begin. Let's start with prosecuting whoever leaked the top secret national security information to the NY Times on how we track down terrorists moving their money around.
I say give him a team, and just get it over with. This should not have to be a huge deal. If we don't find anything, which I expect because...heck, the ball HAS BEEN DROPPED....we might at least find out what residues imply was there. And if we find the bloody things, Duelfer gets a posthumous kick in the pants. Well deserved.
The fact that the Saudis may have had a hand in our military's "Amnesia" is pretty likely. As for the Washington Times spiking the story...that sounds like heat from Karl Rove. Why? I believe that he would do that. He must think this looks really inept on the part of CharlesDuelfer...and they are covering for him...which is insane. But they have done worse before. Look at how they kept Norman Mineta.
As for the way this guy interacted with Hoekstra and Weldon...two of our best defense hawks...his prickliness is to be expected. He has been getting the run-around from Duelfer and his subordinates right along.
And as for Weldon's prickliness about the military...heck, Gaubatz has no right to quibble. The military is infested with XLlintonites still...but beyond that, I have to agree something is not right in this administration either.
Rumsfeld himself never went out and made sure that Able Danger was released to the public like it clearly should have been. Shame on him. Shame on Rummy. And Shame on Bush for obviously issuing some sort of gag order to aid and abet the Xlintonites burial operation. Covering for them! So I don't doubt this was all running through Weldon's mind when he said "he didn't trust the military." When there is a coverup underway from someone in the organization...you can't. He's right.
The fact that "all" the IRAQI-originated classified reports is AWOL should have triggered a red alert that required all such reports to be reconstituted ASAP. They should all be resubmitted from personal files, etc. or regenerated if possible.
Tanslated: David Gaubatz will keep this site open until the Democrats elect a president of the United States. My definition of all ( WMD) is not the same as the Bush Administrations, but I say there are more, I know where they are, and encourage terrorists to look for them and use them against US forces. Here is my e-mail address.
Sorry, but I have to disagree with this "translation".
There is major evidence that things are not being conducted in the open that should be.
Look what it took to even get the Administration to even release the info on the 500 rounds of Sarin and mustard gas we located. I have thought long and hard about the cover argument that we don't want to tip the terrorists off to the existence of massive unlocated stockpiles that they just have to persuade some Saddam military people into giving over...and 'oila, they have what we feared. Frankly, it is likely they knew already....because we have now found from troves of documents the tremendous degree of interaction between Iraqi intelligence and security forces and Al-Queda. It would be foolish to assume they never discussed the WMD stash available for use against the "common enemy." It would also explain in part, why Osama Bin Laden did follow through with his treaty with Saddam to join the war against the U.S. in Iraq. They know, they have to know, a lot of those WMDs are still there...just buried.
We need to get there first. Which I assume we agree on. This should not be left to chance.
And from what I have seen, if we actually do a serious inspection of the four sites, this guy's "embarassment factor" goes down a whole heck of a lot. But leaving him twisting there just makes it that much worse...for us. It makes it look like we never were seriously looking at all.
Not in the slightest from what I've seen.. Check out Deroy Murdocks' site Saddam Hussein's Philanthropy of Terror
Note how Khodada's drawing from memory pretty accurately depicted Salman Pak as shown by satellite photo:
Khodada's drawing from memory of the Salman Pak terrorist training
And then General Vincent Brooks, who briefed reporters throughout the initial phases of Operation Iraqi Freedom, had his own observations about Saddam Hussein's terrorist pedagogy.
Speaking at an April 6, 2003 press conference, General Brooks said:
The nature of the work being done by some of those people that we captured, their inferences to the type of training that they received, all of these things give us the impression that there was terrorist training that was conducted at Salman Pak.And then there was this:
ping
Or so the enemy (dems and the msm) would have you believe.
The Liberals and drive by media are looking at the Duefler report as the final report.
Look at this article for example at CNN
Report: No WMD stockpiles in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/10/06/iraq.wmd.report/
What year was the Duefler report released?
What the military has found and what Duefler has reported seem to be two very different things.
I wont hang my hat on what Duelfer or UNSCOM weapons inspectors have reported. They both lost the cat and mouse game in Iraq.
Anyone would be foolish to put all thier eggs in the same basket in any discovery of WMD's.
Well, I recall some Dems saying we shouldn't write off a source just because of a typewriter font or the use of an Abilene Kinko's...
Duefler easily can be proved historically inaccurate and apparently has with Rick Santorum Reading Unclassified Versions over 500 Chemical WMDs Found plus the translations of the Harmony Database from good people like jveritas.
Do you think that too many military commanders would have egg on their faces if they were indeed present where indicated, is this causing the inertia to ignore the information?
One would think that all of these sites had been examinied, especially if the CIA had interviewed him.
Well, lets go there , with pick and shovel and see what we can rustle up?
lol.
You say:
1. It is not binary.
2. It is dangerous to handle.
3. We don't know if it is "usefull."
Did I get that right?
So what is your point? Is it not harmful? Want a sniff? Is it not WMD?
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.