Posted on 04/19/2007 3:13:26 AM PDT by aculeus
“And the President and military let them.”
Yep, unlike the socialist nervana there is free speech in this country.
Wikipedia has a nice writeup on him too.
I think they were in Sandy Berger’s sox.
And what benefit would the USA be gaining by protecting Germany, France, and Russia from the revelation that they supplied Saddam with banned weapons?
This is a very interesting question.
Could it be that President Bush has made a very strategic decision to withhold information that would be incredibly damaging to the Russians and others?
It seems that no matter HOW bad it gets in Iraq, a major WMD revelation isn’t in the cards...
bookmark
bttt
Interesting read.
5.56mm
But at the time of the 2nd Gulf War (2003), most of the WMDs and materials for their production have been already removed from Iraq to Syria and Lebanon (and earlier to Sudan, Libya and Algeria), either by the Iraqis themselves (with the help of Syria) or by the Russians.
Snip from this excellent source.
Whatever the case; it will be ignored. . .there have been articles. . .stories of WMD's or their prep etc; et al. . .NONE have made a swats difference in the Dem/Left story line; or the Repubs 'line' either, for that matter - or rather, their lack of one.
Bush moved too soon. . .should have waited for Saddam to actually show his stuff. . .a parade or a detonation; a just a 'release' of noxius poisons for 'testing purposes'. . .but like the demands re N.Korea; Iran. . .he thought it better to do it 'before' all that; but you just cannot satisfy some people.
Just 'damned if you. . .and damned if you don't. . .' if you are a Republican President, named George Bush.
bump for later read
Karl Rove’s White House emails can never be erased because they are always buried in the hard drive and retrieveable, but intelligence reports can vanish or be erased completely.
They had been constructed through building dams which were removed after the huge subterranean vaults had been excavated so that these were concealed beneath the river bed. The bunker walls were made of reinforced concrete five feet thick.
There is no way construction like this would escape the notice of our satellites, and even sparse ground assets could notice a major river damned up for what would have to be days at a time for such construction.
Is there any evidence of this in the record? If not, it likely did not happen -- no way it was done in secret.
This isn't how they usually do under-river construction. Most of the time they drill from the sides for tunnels. And the one case I know of where the tunnel was done from above, the sections of tunnel were built and sealed and dropped THROUGH the water into channels dug while the water was in place, not by damming the water.
I have said many times if you want to hide something you hide it in an area where your enemy has no access to.
save
Now, we're supposed to believe a report from melainephillips.com instead? I'd have to be desperate for vindication to accept the claims without more substantiation than that. Have we lost all capacity for critical thought? For introspection?
bookmark
I’d bet the administration never hear of his reports. The CIA and FBI are busing preparing for the second comming of Xlinton.
I have a slightly used bridge for sale.
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.