Posted on 07/03/2006 2:47:55 PM PDT by Phsstpok
From Captain's Quarters:
I have written several times about the issue of the mobile laboratories in Iraq and the subsequent conventional wisdom that they served as hydrogen generators for weather balloons instead of WMD production facilities. In April, I pointed out that the hydrogen theory came as a minority opinion within the CIA/DIA teams that reviewed the two labs captured by the Coalition. One month later, Joseph Shahda translated a key memo showing that the Iraqis spent $33 million on the mobile labs in September 2002, while America decided to take military action against the Iraqis, and that the same agency that controlled Iraq's WMD programs (the Military Industrialization Committee) arranged to purchase these facilities.
One key point (besides the memo) that undermines the argument for a civil hydrogen production facility is the ease in which the Iraqis could already produce and store hydrogen. Oil refining creates hydrogen in fairly large quantities as a normal byproduct. If the Iraqis wanted hydrogen for weather balloons, they could have simply pumped it into tanks and used normal trucks to transport it where needed. Now we have another argument against the hydrogen production explanation.
A CQ reader with a doctorate in physical chemistry from the University of Minnesota and with over sixteen years of experience in weapons and materiel laboratory work in the military has written a paper on why the hydrogen lab explanation cannot possibly explain the existence and the engineering of these mobile laboratories. Preferring anonymity for professional reasons, "ChemicalConsultant" has allowed me access to a condensed version of an analysis that he has sent to Joby Warrick at the Washington Post, Reps. Curt Weldon and Jane Harman, and former CIA director John Deutsch, now at MIT -- none of whom have responded to ChemicalConsultant or addressed these concerns.
I will put ChemicalConsultant's CV, stripped of any personal identification, in the extended entry below. Over the next three days I will post his analysis of the physics of hydrogen production and why that explanation makes no sense whatsoever. At the end, I will interview ChemicalConsultant and post the transcript. Continue reading "Mobile Labs Could Not Have Produced Hydrogen As Described, Prologue"
Posted by Captain Ed at 02:00 PM | Comments (6) | TrackBack (0)
Tie this to the disclosure of the 500+ chemical warfare WMD shells that have been found (and covered up by the DBM and dims in Congress) and the house of lies they have been constructing may be crashing about their ears.
Kerry's still lying, how soon will we start dying?
Ping on mobil labs
Dang, Phsstpok.....you have just stretched my mental capabilities with THIS kind of a report...
jeez louise, I still don't get how gas makes a car go...and now THIS???
LOL
Iraqi document translations.
NYT (again) leaking classified info.
"Old" wmd found in Iraq.
Kook Left Wing base revving up.
"Fitzmas" case imploding.
Rove must be rubbing his hands in glee.
Ping mobil labs.
NYT/MSM "Rut-Roh"
Neat tag...
Why in the world would you need a mobile lab to generate hydrogen for weather balloons anyway? They don't have gas bottles in Iraq?
As I understand it, insecticide act is a very similar manner as other nerve agents on the human body, as well as on insects.
This find was immediately dismissed as of no value. That always struck me as absurd.
During the first Gulf War they would launch weather balloons to check conditions before Scud launches.
Sounds like the "civilian hydrogen for weather balloons" explanation for the mobile labs in Iraq is falling apart, thanks to Captain Ed's physical chemist source and the translations of jveritas!!
Now that Colin Powell has already apologized for his UN presentation, and now that the MSM and whole world takes it as a given that the Bush administration was just making stuff up, how does the truth ever get its shoes on, never mind make it around the world?
ping for later
"They" couldn't go with swamp gas this time, so it was weather balloons again, worked in 1947.
Is there some higher power or priority that keeps the Bush White House from using this info that they obviously have to justify their decisions to go in to Iraq?
No these trucks were mobile baby milk plants and distributed ice cream ...the MSM told me so it must be true.
The answer is, it doesn't.
I find myself very frustrated at the lack of coverage of all of the documents that have been translated.
MAYBE, someday, if we get into Syria..and can check for weapons...but, even then, I don't know if it would make the front pages....sigh
I just don't know anymore..... it seems the Bush WH settled a long time ago on the view that it wasn't good to debate the run-up to the war and that they would just "move on"..... for one thing, they want to stay focused upon all the things that are going on all the time, executing now rather than debating the past. But I don't know if anyone there appreciates how badly not just the WH but the USA has been harmed by the very widespread impression that we went to war for at best careless and at worst fabricated intel and judgments about it. It is crucial to set the record straight, though the MSM will have to be dragged kicking and screaming to notice.
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.