[Utmost Certainty]

Did a quick search, didn't see it posted. Apologies if this is already the case.

[Arm_Bears]

Pathetic, absolutely pathetic.

[yonif]

Its the democrats who are doing all the sabotaging.

[ezo4]

The way I see it that if they do this kind of stuff. They basically want the American population to suffer from a evil Dictator using or selling large weapons to crazy people willing to blow us up, or gas, or infect us with some disease.

This is crazy!

[muslims=borg]

Its pretty clear, they are all traitors. They will go to any length to defy Dubya.

[abclily]

What makes Carl Levin think he speaks for the American people? He says we want the inspections to proceed. Proceed where? The inspections are a complete waste of time and money. Time and money that could be better spent delivering the Iraqi people from their bondage. Carl Levin does not care about the Iraqi people. Carl Levin does not care about the citizens of the United States.

[xm177e2]

There's no excuse for this kind of behavior. Levin should be driven from office. What he's saying is dishonest in the extreme.

[maestro]

The 'Democrats' would prefer that the U.N. send into Iraq at least 100,000,000 armed U.N. 'Inspectors' to take over all of Iraq.

How about a bump for the new 'U.N. Iraqi Oil Company'.

/sarcasm

[UncleSamUSA]

This is such garbage and is typical of the British Trash Press which is virulently anti-US, despite the position of their PM Tony Blair.

Notice how the lead sentence says "Senior Democrats"... plural.. and then proceeds to quote extensively from exactly ONE Senator, the crackpot Carl Levin who has been anti-war from birth and voted against the original Gulf War (which the UK paper conveniently omits).

Carl Levin is a total crackpot, and his blatherings only give aid and comfort to the enemy. But then again, Michigan does have one of the largest Muslim populations in the US.

Connect the dots.

[NewRomeTacitus]

Democrat Senator from Michigan. The state that harbors more Arabs than Kuwait. Surely a coincidence.

[MonroeDNA]

WAAAAAAAAH!

Where's that crying dem baby post when you need it.

[Rodney King]

If there is nothing there, then what could the CIA possibly conceal?

[cyncooper]

Thank you very much for the latest dem outrage.

Unbelievable.

[DWPittelli]

This is one of those stories where most people will think that, if what Levin says is true, then the CIA and Bush Administration are doing something wrong. But Levin and the author fail to see that even if it is true (and I hope it is), then the CIA is doing exactly what it should.

To put it simply: Suppose that Saddam has banned weapons in 100 sites, and the CIA knows where 10 of those sites are. If the CIA keeps this info to itself, then and only then can we know if Saddam has given up all his weapons (as he is supposed to). Saddam, not knowing which 10 we know about, must give up all or virtually all his weapons to ensure that we do not know that he is cheating (and could prove it with a commando raid or in the aftermath of an aerial bombardment).

But if the CIA announces those 10 sites, Saddam can probably get the weapons out of most of them before the inspectors can get to them. And even in the unlikely case that the inspectors get all 10, then we have only reduced Saddam's arsenal by 10% (something we could do with aerial bombing anyway, at our leisure if we don't tell all). Worse, Saddam now knows that the rest of his weapons are safe, provided he keeps them in place and prevents new defections. And he can keep them without fear of exposure.

So it would be hugely stupid for the CIA to tell the inspectors where they think weapons are. (Perhaps they could try a site or two, that they know the inspectors can get to quickly, but they certainly shouldn't "shoot their load.") And Levin is another of Saddam's useful idiots.

[cyncooper]

I heard an exchange between Levin and Tenet yesterday and wasn't sure what it referred to. Well, it turns out the Levin isn't expecting Iraq to have complied with any agreements, and is blaming the CIA for not telling the inspectors where they would find the weapons of mass destruction.

In his bizzaro world it is the CIA he holds accountable. Somehow he thinks that Iraq producing, storing, and hiding WMD is not the biggie, and if only the CIA had tipped off the inspectors the inspections would then have "worked".

The accusation of US sabotage emerged from a series of Senate hearings on Capitol Hill. On Tuesday, George Tenet, the CIA director, told the armed services committee panel that the agency had provided the UN inspectors with all the information it had on "high" and "moderate" interest locations inside Iraq ? those sites where there was a possibility of finding banned weapons. But Mr Tenet later told a different panel that he had been mistaken and that there were in fact "a handful" of locations the UN inspectors may not have known about.

Senator Levin, from Michigan, responded by saying the CIA director had not been telling the truth. Citing a number of classified letters he had obtained from the agency, he said it was clear the CIA had not shared information with the inspectors about a "large number of sites of significant value".

[KarlInOhio]

There are a few possibilities here:

1. The Iraqis don't have anything so the CIA can't tell them where to find something. (not likely)

2. The Iraqis have WMD, but the CIA doesn't have a handle on exact locations. Then we don't give false info to the UN because not finding anything would set us back.

3. We know where it is and the inspectors will leak it when they find out so the Iraqis will move it. We need to have recon available to watch it be moved.

4. We know where it is and the Iraqis refuse admission.

5. We know where it is and the inspectors find it.

In the last 3 cases we need to have aircraft and troops to be ready to start the war that day or very soon afterwards. Therefore we don't give the info to the UN until we are ready for war. I don't think that will be next week. Maybe the end of February or early March, but not right now.

[america-rules]

IT's not an INSPECTION !

The so called inspectors are verifiers and Iraq is supposed to show them where to look. They're not there to "find" anything !

[diotima]

ON NOW! UNSPUN with AnnaZ and Mercuria!
6pm pdt/9pm edt

We'll be speaking with Freedom Alliance's FRED GEDRICH about Kofi & Krew (and Saddam, too!). PLUS... Boneheaded Lie-beral Quotes Commie Rat Bastard of the Week Anna's NEW Waste Of Ink Award

Click HERE to LISTEN LIVE while you FReep!

Click HERE for the RadioFR Chat Room!

Miss a show? Click HERE for the RadioFR Archives!

[VOA]

Democrats claim CIA sabotaging Iraq inspections

Guess some Democratic dim-bulb must have watched the "Law And Order" episode
that aired last night. (I don't know if it was a re-run).

It was loosely based on the Ira Einhorn character, the radical academic who murdered
his girlfriend and then went on the lam...then said the CIA had framed him for murder
in order to discredit him.

What a world! Only Democrats could help me string the subjects of "Law And Order",
"Ira Einhorn", "Saddam Hussein" and "Iraq" together in one post.

[wilmington2]

Sen Karl Levin is pro-French as it was he back in October of 2002 that tried to make any attack authorized by the Iraq War Resolution contingent on UN approval. He is allied with France, Germany, Libya, and Cuba all of which follow the same line. Sen. Levin gets away with being against US defense, because he has cultivated the art of looking concerned. Makes him look like a serious thinker.

[aculeus]

Carl Levin, please run for President!

You need more exposure!