Posted on 11/16/2007 5:06:24 AM PST by SJackson
Maybe we don’t know a whole lot because....
“Pentagon Fears Old Iraq WMD May Be Used” on our troops if insurgents knew where to look.
http://www.nysun.com/article/35001
Maybe they fear old WMD might be used against other Middle Eastern countries.....
Well anyway....al Queda has always dreamed using CW...even improvised ones. Why did Zaraqawi have a chemical bomb ready to go off in Jordan?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3635381.stm
Chemicals are plentiful anywhere.
If you have ill will in your heart and a good chemist....you can kill scores of people.
During WWI Chlorine gas was used...
What happens if you have a tanker truck filled with chlorine gas...a improvised chemical weapon in Iraq?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6660585.stm
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9DDB5758-2725-4E24-AC4C-32CD8EC80046.htm
Let’s wait for the captured Iraqi documents to be translated in full.
I’m still placing my bets Saddam did had those WMD one way or another. My bet he put all his equipment and supplies in civilian establishments; many things to make chemical or biological weapons are used in civilian everyday application too.
That’s where he hid them.
Technically he was WMD FREE.
Former UN Butler said Anthrax can be made in a brewery.
Duelfer Report said Saddam had enough ingredients locally...like Sulfer...to make Mustard Gas.
And....Who wants to vote for Ron Paul?
.....I doubt this will be welcomed by the MSM ......
It is too long and complex for public consumption. If it can’t be explaine in 600 words or less it is not suitable.
Am beyond tired of the 'fraud' of the story as it has continued to energise our enemies - Democrats that is - from it's inception. . .
Never believed, of course, that Bush lied. Certainly not the first time, anyway. But when he allowed this fraud of 'lie' to propagate; take on a life of it's own; while saying nothing to dispute or disperse it. . .that became his lie. . .IMHO.
Frankly; do not 'get it'. . .the truth has always been on 'our side'. But who knew; and who cared to actually prove it.
Certainly not, President Bush.
IMHO - Information about Proliferated WMD and Potentially Loose WMD is top secret classified intel. Just look at the Israeli attack on the possible nuclear facility in Syria. We still do not know the details of what happened. GWB refuses to even answer questions about the operation. Some have assumed that the 'cone of silence' is to protect peace agreements with North Korea. In the present day Middle East, Saddam is dead, but there are still actual WMD threats from some of the nations. The Syrians vast Chemical WMD and suspected Biological WMD are a threat. And as the Israelis have shown, Syrias potential Nuclear WMD are or were a great threat. This threads article also states that Syria enhanced its WMD capabilities when the Russians evacuated material before we entered Iraq. And then of course there is Iran with its extensive Chemical and Biological WMD. And of course their Nuclear WMD programs. There are also some very dirty secrets that I am sure the US does not want exposed. Like for example how during Gulf War I we bombed a lot of Saddams Chemical and Biological Facilities. Just imagine what that did for the neighborhood. We probably did not want a repeat. After all, it appears that the administration wanted to rebuild Iraq and if Saddam fired a few chemical and biological WMD around the neighborhood, the rebuilding effort would have been much more difficult. And as we found out after the 2006 election debacle, GWB appears to have interests that are above political party. Could be decent national security interests or could be Globalist RINO interests or it could be a combination of both. We only know half the story and it is far from over.
Were you happy with Jamie Gorelic being the 9/11 Commission?
Yeah, we've got good enough intel on the 'who' and 'where' they're spinning, Sal, and the Syrians and Iranians are waiting for the attacks to begin.
I always figured we'd attack on a weekend with a new-moon to maximize our Stealth capabilities. We got past the weekend of November 9th, and the next one is on December 7th, but any weekend will do, now that we're in the 'dark' months.
I fully expect our domestic muzzies to attempt whatever mischief they've got planned, so count those mosques in your neighbourhood and stay well armed and safe ................................. FRegards
It is my personal opinion that this documentation should be taken and rolled very tightly into a very stiff cylinder and rammed up the arse of every Democrat in Congress.
Now that'd be an interesting day to unleash hell.
I've followed your posts for a while, and when I see a new moon I always think, "Now coach? Please, now!"
8^)
We are on the verge of victory in Iraq due to chasing Al Qaeda out. I have never understood why Democrats or the Ron Paul Cult could be so invested in failure?
Many of the people posting on this very thread have provided your ilk irrefutable evidence showing countless links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Many of us have not trusted The 911 Commission, Senate Select Intelligence Committee or conspiracy theories.
Could you please explain maybe as a spokesman for the Ron Paul crowd why DR. Pauls campaign has the appearance of being activists for losing the war in Iraq
This article shares some details with a previous post on FR that describes the Russian involvement with shipping materials to Syria. The previous post was one of five parts on the subject.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1608280/posts
LOL! Yeah, it's my 'Patton' attitude, I guess. We know who the bastards are, and we ought to kill 'em!
Stay well armed and safe ....................... FRegards
Still waiting for a response on post #90
Not surprising...
‘Special Report’ Panel on Majority Leader Reid’s Latest Tactics
Friday, November 16, 2007
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311939,00.html
This is a rush transcript of “Special Report With Brit Hume” from November 15, 2007. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEN HARRY REID, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER, D-NEV.: The marines can go until sometime in March, and the army can go until late in February. And those are very conservative figures.
I am confident that if we did not give them another penny, they could go for another six months.
ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY: The high degree of uncertainty on funding for the war is immensely complicating this task and will have many real consequences for this department and for our men and women in uniform.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
BRIT HUME, HOST: So what are these guys talking about? Well it is this — the Congress has passed and sent to the president something like a $470 billion Appropriations Bill to cover the Defense Department generally.
This war, however, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are being covered separately on separate funding measures, and the president has asked for something along the order of $200 billion for those, and he is not, apparently, going to get it.
Related
They are passing pieces of it, which contain restrictions that he finds unacceptable, which can’t even really pass the congress as a whole, and they are holding back the funds, Harry Reid arguing, and Nancy Pelosi as well, one presumes, that they can reprogram some of this other money and keep the whole thing going. Some thoughts on this whole controversy now from Fred Barnes, the executive editor of The Weekly Standard, Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, and Mort Kondrake, the executive editor of Roll Call — FOX News contributors all.
Let’s talk a little bit about this issue, where it is going, who it is effecting, and who is right in the argument over whether holding this money for now affects anything.
MORT KONDRAKE, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, ROLL CALL: It does affect things. The Pentagon can reprogrammed some money in order to keep the troops supplied for awhile without this bridge money being passed, but the, as Harry Reid even acknowledges, the money runs out, and the troops are in danger.
Basically what the Democrats are doing is playing chicken with the lives and well-being of our soldiers in the field, ultimately. And Bush already plans to do one of the things that’s required in this, and that is to start redeploying troops.
HUME: One unit is already home, I think.
KONDRAKE: Right, exactly.
So the issue is over whether you set a goal of everybody out by the end of 2008. Even Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama acknowledged that all troops will not be out of Iraq by even the end of their first term, they’re not even saying.
So this is more extreme than even with the Democratic presidential candidates are saying. And I believe Dana Perino is exactly right —
HUME: White House spokesman.
KONDRAKE: White House spokesman — that the Democrats were going to drop this whole matter. Then Moveon.org and Code Pink started blaring at them, and they decided that they had to revisit this thing again and impose more restrictions. And it is unconscionable, frankly.
MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: I do think the Democrats are caught between their inability to actually stop the war — and they certainly have tried enough times, and we’ve established the fact that they do not have the votes to do that — and the desire of their base, which is unhappy.
And one of the reasons the congress is so unpopular is because the Democratic Congress has lost a lot of support among liberal, antiwar voters who thought they were elected to end the war.
HUME: We have a couple poll numbers that are relevant to what you’re saying, Mara. This Fox News opinion dynamics poll on the congress’ job approval shows that it’s virtually unchanged since less than a month ago. The disapproval number appears to have kicked up.
Let’s look at this on the troop surge, which a lot of people were very skeptical of for a long time. Back in September you had a small plurality saying that it had led to improvements, with fully 45 percent saying it made no difference.
Look at now — 59 to 32 improvement over not made a difference. So public opinion on that appears to be shifting.
I wonder, Fred, if the political hazards that the Democrats face here- -and, obviously they are caught between the fact that the left does not want them to give an inch on this, and that public opinion may be shifting on whether the war is going better — that they may be it in real trouble here politically.
FRED BARNES, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, WEEKLY STANDARD: I think they are in real trouble.
I happened to be at the lunch three or four weeks ago when Nancy Pelosi announced that they would not have any more Iraq votes. They had tried, but those horrible Republicans had blocked them, and they were going to move onto other issues.
And now they’re back again. They’ve had their chain jerked by some of the lefties in their party, and they responded.
Historically, though, let’s just remember one thing. In the 2000 election, Democrats did not run on a promise of ending the war in Iraq.
HUME: In 2004?
BARNES: No, they never ran on that in 2006. They were critical of the war. They never said they would “Vote for us, we will end the war in Iraq.”
LIASSON: Plenty of Democratic candidates did say that.
BARNES: I do not think many did at all, and, certainly, none of Rob Emanuel’s favorites, all these moderates.
Some of the Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi, are in a state of total denial. They pretend that the civil war is still going on in Iraq full speed — of course it is not. They pretend that Al Qaeda is still a huge force there — they have practically been defeated. Al Qaeda has no strongholds anywhere in Iraq anymore.
It still exists, and they can still kill —
HUME: So what are the political consequences of this? How is it going to play out?
BARNES: The political consequence is, if the progress continues, and we are a year from now when the election comes up, and Democrats are still pretending like the war, as Harry Reid said six months ago, is lost, they will have no credibility whatsoever.
HUME: Do you agree with that, Mara? Do you think that is a danger for them?
LIASSON: I don’t know. I think if things really changed, and these improvements continue to grow, it could be a problem. But I think the Democrats have plenty of time to adjust.
KONDRAKE: I agree with that. There is a long way to go. There has to be some political progress on the ground, or else the public will be turned off to this. But if there is, the Democrats are in bad shape.
Good luck trying to end the WOD. Its all you guys have left and its almost ridiculous as the Ron Paul Cults attempt to delegitimize the war on terrorism.
**THIS — if totally accurate — should blow the WMD-ostrich heads totally out of the sand.**
Do you think the lamestream media will pick this up, though? Especially in an election year?
Maybe we should start saying Hilliarized media?????
Anyone else catch that?
mark
.
bump
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.