EVIL PROOF [Brits Find Bunker Full of WMD's in S. Iraq Oil Fields]

The Daily Telegraph ^ | March 28, 2003 | Bruce Wilson

[PISANO]

That is what I remember too.......the chemical suits....maybe they are awaiting further comfirmation also.

[Salvation]

**Haven't heard a thing about this.**

Me either. Unless O'Reilly brushed the surface and dismissed it yesterday.

[blam]

"Yes it was reported by CBN (not sure if I saw it yesterday on FreeRepublic or this morning) and Mike Savage said he will wait for another source to report on it before he gets excited. "

I heard about this yesterday. Can't remember where.

[knak]

bumping to follow up later

[Gasshog]

said contained suspected "weapons of mass destruction".

key word...not too reliable Id say

[Pagey]

I'm sure " Hans 'I am worthless' Blix" mind is racing as to how he is going to find a way to make this stuff disappear too.

[k2blader]

"Evil Proof" is the headline. I added the stuff in brackets, taken from the article's first sentence.

I should have typed "[Brits Find Bunker Full of Suspected WMD's in S. Iraq Oil Fields]". Sorry about that.

[Carry_Okie]

Bump to self

[wardaddy]

I would like a reliable source ...in fact a multiple source dog and pony show...BUT,

They have them...make no mistake. They have used them against their own folks and Iran and we have found stashes of gas gear and intercepted alleged orders for the diehards to use them etc.

Does anyone really think they've destroyed all their WMDs?

I sure don't.

[Go Gordon]

Very interesting, calling Dr. Blix, uhoh.

Sorry mate, Blix just retired...

[k2blader]

Maybe a more accurate headline would be "Evil 'Categorical Proof'". :-)

[oyez]

I think the stories are being squashed for some reason. I read two other instances of chemweps being reported but there is never a follow up. If were pulling in evidence for G_d's sake go on record. Of course Saddams's not the bad guy in this war.

[oyez]

I think the stories are being squashed for some reason. I read two other instances of chemweps being reported but there is never a follow up. If were pulling in evidence for G_d's sake go on record. Of course Saddams's not the bad guy in this war.

[peeve23]

As soon as the US/Britain announce that they have definitely found WMD's then the public relations reason for Saddam NOT to use them becomes moot. As soon as he's caught, then he loses nothing by using them.

I'm convinced we're not announcing these things so that he will continue NOT to start using them in the early stages of the conflict.

He would have used them in the final stages in any case -- when his back's against the wall -- but why give him reason to use them earlier?

[Illbay]

Could this be it?

[k2blader]

Hoon withdraws claim that protection suits are 'proof' of chemical weapons
By Paul Waugh Deputy Political Editor
28 March 2003

Geoff Hoon, the Defence Secretary, was forced yesterday to retract claims that the discovery of more than 100 bio-chemical protection suits in Iraq was "categorical" proof that Saddam Hussein was preparing to use weapons of mass destruction.

The Ministry of Defence revealed that the Royal Irish Regiment discovered the suits and gas masks, which were in good working order, in a command post abandoned by Iraqi troops in the Rumaila oilfield of southern Iraq.

Mr Hoon originally told a press briefing at the MoD that the find showed categorically that "the Iraqi regime is prepared to use weapons of mass destruction". But when a reporter pointed out that similar suits were used by Iraq in the 1980s to protect against chemical attack from Iran, Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, the Chief of Defence Staff, conceded that the equipment found was not offensive. "There is no evidence so far in what we've found," he said. "They ought to be defensive protection suits and respirators and so forth ... So far we didn't find anything which was offensive, no." The kit was "effective, well cared for and in good working order", he added.

Mr Hoon later admitted that the evidence was "obviously not conclusive" evidence that the Iraqis were set to use chemical weapons against UK or US troops. But he added: "It's clearly indicative of an intention; otherwise why equip his own forces to deal with a threat which he knows we do not have? So it must only be to protect his forces from his own use of those weapons."

Mr Hoon repeated Tony Blair's warning this week that any Iraqi commander who sanctions the use of such weapons would be committing a war crime and "will be held personally responsible for his action".

Iraqi PoWs have given details to US forces of chemical protection suits issued to them, but until now no clear evidence had been found.

The MoD showed a film recorded in recent days of soldiers from the Royal Irish Regiment searching a recently deserted Iraqi command position in the Rumaila oilfield. Sir Michael said the Iraqi troops had "left in a hurry", abandoning equipment and paperwork, which was now being examined by intelligence staff. Sir Michael added that the documentation may offer information about Iraq's plans to use weapons of mass destruction.

"The use of chemical and biological weapons against our forces has always been one of our chief concerns," he said. "We certainly remember the terrible results of their use in the past, and making sure that the regime does not get the opportunity to deploy these weapons has been a high priority in our planning and target selection."

Mr Hoon said no non-lethal chemical weapons such as CS gas had been used in the campaign by the UK. Britain was fully signed up to the Chemical Weapons Convention which prohibited the use of such weapons in conflict.

Independent.co.uk - Hoon withdraws claim that protection suits are 'proof' of chemical weapons

[knak]

here is yet another story that does not mention the chem weapons

Hoon withdraws claim that protection suits are 'proof' of chemical weapons

[Illbay]

Reporters in Baghdad said the missile had almost certainly come from an allied aircraft.

Based on what? I mean, what expertise to these reporters possess? They all have Iraqi Interior Ministry handlers.

[Illbay]

The "other supposed find" turned out to be a dud. That was the US 3ID.

This is the Brits, a different "find." This sounds a bit more likely, since it is the Daily Telegraph, a published story not an off-the-cuff "Gee, Pat (we know you want ratings so) we're not sure, but we think we found..." sort of thing.