Kay Briefs Lawmakers on Iraq WMD

Reuters via Yahoo ^ | 10/2/03 | Rueters

[So Cal Rocket]

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - CIA adviser David Kay, who is coordinating the hunt for weapons of mass destruction in Iraq briefed U.S. lawmakers on Thursday with an interim progress report.

Kay separately briefed the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate intelligence committees behind closed doors in what lawmakers called a highly classified session from which they emerged tight-lipped.

Kay was not expected to produce any solid evidence that chemical or biological weapons had been found, sources have said previously.

The United States went to war against Iraq in March and ousted Saddam Hussein from power in April, largely citing the threat posed by Baghdad's biological and chemical weapons programs and a program to develop nuclear weapons.

But critics have questioned whether the Bush administration exaggerated the threat to get support for the war because no such weapons have been found since U.S. forces invaded Iraq.

Others have urged patience, saying that Iraq is a large country and such weapons are relatively easy to hide.

Last month, the CIA said Kay would present an interim report that would reach no firm conclusions.

When Kay briefed lawmakers in July, he said there could be "surprises" uncovered, but congressional sources have said they were unaware of any major surprises.

[Peach]

Just keep repeating the same old lines. Guess all that botulism, etc. didn't bother you.

Good.

[billbears]

“Even the bulkiest materials we are searching for can be concealed in spaces not much larger than a two-car garage.”

I'm just trying to figure out how they were planning to stuff 30,000 munitions, excuse me 29,984 munitions (since the President said they had found all of 16) into a two car garage. And no, botulism does bother me. It's why I make sure I don't recognize any signs of it when opening canned foods. It also affects 100 babies a year according to USA Today. But none by bioterrorism. Of course the North Koreans are building nuclear weapons and we give them food. Wonder what Hussein would have taken in trade for having no WMDs at all.

I have to admit it is interesting though. For months we've been hearing 'wait for Kay, wait for Kay' in response to no evidence being produced. Kay reports and he admits no evidence has been found. So now we're taking editorials from the UK and articles from the Sun as 'evidence'. I would just like to know when the 'faithful' are going to finally admit that perhaps WMDs didn't exist as outlined by the President. You know just because he's a Republican doesn't make him infallible to bad advice from hawkish PNAC kooks

[Peach]

If Bush was fooled, so was every intelligence agency on the planet. Find one intelligence agency that didn't think he had WMD. Find one country on the UN Security Council who didn't vote unanimously that he didn't have them.

Your agenda is all too clear and I only wish your thinking was as clearheaded.

[edchambers]

He didn't pay off the familys of Palistinian suicide bombers?If he did, it was quite a bit less than Arafat and the Saudis.

You gotta start somewhere, Rumsfeld never ran the war plan by me but I suspect Iraq went down because it was considered easier and less controversial than the Saudis or Palis

He didn't support terrorist traing camps?

Again we could sit here and name half the Arab world that does
Again you gotta start somewhere

The pressing 'reason' was WMDs
Personally I think that was a mistake the terrorism support is much easier to prove the military outcome would have been the same but the political fallout wouldn't.

none of our buisiness so long as he didn't directly attack the continental US right?
Can you find something contrary to that point as outlined in the Constitution?

Just because something is not in the constitution doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

[alpowolf]

I never said that Bush said there was a connection. If you can't follow the conversation leave it be.

[billbears]

Just because something is not in the constitution doesn't mean it's not worth doing.

Ah, but that's a maybe and if you want to do it, then amend the Constitution, don't just act now and try to fix it later. The problem with this nation is that too many times in the past century and a half has the government acted well outside of the bounds of its charter and while the intentions may have been good in the end all it does is eat away at the fabric and intent of what the Founders established

[JohnGalt]

$300 million later, and all David Kay has accomplished is accusing Saddam of a thought crime.

[alpowolf]

Yeah...but just wait until David Kay's next report! ;-)

[JohnGalt]

I heard that the real Iraq report will be available at John Cruedel's Web site for $5 a read.

David Kay = Ken Starr.