Pentagon in 2002 Found `No Reliable' Iraq Arms Data

Bloomberg ^ | June 6, 2003 | Bloomberg

[ejdrapes]

June 6 (Bloomberg) -- A U.S. Defense Department report in September 2002 found ``no reliable information'' proving that Iraq had chemical weapons, even as Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld was saying the country had amassed stockpiles of the banned arms.

The unreleased report said Iraq ``probably'' had stockpiles of banned chemicals, a more tentative conclusion than Rumsfeld was presenting in public remarks. Iraq has ``amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of chemical weapons, including VX, sarin and mustard gas,'' he told Congress on Sept. 19.

[Matchett-PI]

"...smaller government..."

"...When Ronald Reagan swept onto the scene in the early 1980s, U.S. federal spending was 24 percent of Gross Domestic Product. Today it is 19 percent. That is only half or two thirds the level in most E.U. states, where levels have been rising, not falling. ..."

[VOA]

Pentagon in 2002 Found `No Reliable' Iraq Arms Data

Is this any suprise?
Even Democrats were wailing about the lack of "human operatives" in the
USA intelligence community after 9-11...even trying to make it sound like this was
Dubya's fault.

How quickly they forget the emasculation of the intelligence community by
Senator Frank Church.
A Democrat, if memory serves me right.

And, thanks to having these blind spots imposed by Church and his fellow travelers,
Dubya chose to play it safe and take out another thorn in the side of civilization.

We'll find out how the real results the first Tuesday in November 2004.

[Matchett-PI]

CNN ^ | Feb. 17, 1998 | Bill Clinton

Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq Text of President Clinton's address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and Pentagon staff [Excerpt]:

"...Previously, it [Iraq/Saddam] had vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.

Now listen to this, what did it admit?

It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.

And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

As if we needed further confirmation, you all know what happened to his son-in-law when he made the untimely decision to go back to Iraq.

Next, throughout this entire process, Iraqi agents have undermined and undercut UNSCOM. ...".

[backhoe]

Thanks- your links are copied & saved to disc.

[sirchtruth]

You, not me, are the one who made the Clintonesque statement that the truth in this case is "meaningless."

Do you even know what is, is?

Why do you muddy the waters with your pisscloudy inference?

I did not write the "TRUTH" is meaningless. I wrote your Point was meaningless...Get the difference, Mr. Slick Schitck ?

If anyone is making clintonesque statements, you have without a doubt shown your "I never had sexual realtions with that..,that... that...THAT WOMAN!" ...

Do we even agree that Saddam ever did possess WMD as per the UN?

[templar]

Thanks for your concern, but your condescending arguments don't hold water.

Just show 'em to me. That's all I ask. Just show 'em to me. That is the only argument that holds water or anything else. Just show 'em to me."Until you can do that, condescending is a rather condescending term to be using about me.

So far, everything seems to be coming up as no WMD's in any quantity so untill you can present the evidence of the HUGE QUANTITIES of WMD's we were assured Iraq had ... bye.

[finnman69]

Don't you have an A.N.S.W.E.R. march or something to attend to?

[snooker]

To be fair, how many days do we have? 3? 5? how about 12 years. Yeah that's it. Get back to me in 12 years.

[Captain Kirk]

Cute. Do you have a rational argument? I would especially be interested in your insightful analysis of today's WMD revelations?

[Captain Kirk]

My point was that WMD has not been found despite claims by Cheney, etc. that there was "no doubt." You called this point (i.e. whether or not Cheney, etc. was telling the truth) "meaningless." Do you want to debate over the meaning of "is?"

[sirchtruth]

You called this point (i.e. whether or not Cheney, etc. was telling the truth) "meaningless."

Do I really not write clearly enough for two people now to completely miss my point?

My argument was that whether or not WMD are found is mute after all the atrocities we've seen commited by Iraq...Plus we know that they existed per the UN and Saddam's own admission. (Get a clue!) The ONLY question is either, Where are they, or Where did they go?

The American people supported SH ouster regarless of the WMD issue.

Is there anything else I can do to make that point more clear?

Do any of you out there, other than DUer's and Bush haters need pictures?

[finnman69]

Do any of you out there, other than DUer's and Bush haters need pictures?

Perhaps this and some poster board...but that might be a little too advanced for the Bush haters.

[finnman69]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/925335/posts

Iraq Had Secret Labs, Officer Says
Los Angeles Times ^ | June 8, 2003 | Bob Drogin


Posted on 06/08/2003 1:32 PM EDT by Mister Magoo


Iraq Had Secret Labs, Officer Says

Goal was to someday rebuild chemical and biological weapons, general alleges.

By Bob Drogin Times Staff Writer

June 8, 2003

BAGHDAD -- Saddam Hussein's intelligence services set up a network of clandestine cells and small laboratories after 1996 with the goal of someday rebuilding illicit chemical and biological weapons, according to a former senior Iraqi intelligence officer.

The officer, who held the rank of brigadier general, said each closely guarded weapons team had three or four scientists and other experts who were unknown to U.N. inspectors. He said they worked on computers and conducted crude experiments in bunkers and back rooms in safe houses around Baghdad.

[CyberAnt]

This report - having been hacked apart - has already been debunked by Powell. Sorry ... I would believe Powell before I'd believe anybody.

[Captain Kirk]

Listen Buster, I was a professional and avid Clinton hater on FR before you were a newbie. Just because I dare disagree with you doesn't make me a member of the DUI.

Perhaps the main difference between you and me is consistency. Back in 1998, I, along with most freepers, opposed Clinton's deceptions and "humanitarian intervention" in Kosovo. Now, I also oppose Dubya's deceptions and his ex post facto "humanitarian war" (err.."war of liberation") in Iraq for the same reason. Some of us don't see the world throught partisan rose colored glasses.

[bmwcyle]

The WMDs are not the only problem. Short sighted people like you will allow the real liars to win. You are so easy to be lead by one issue while the mass graves and the training camps fade being over powered by the Red Herring. Freepers are smarter then you seem to be. We live in the age where the great deceiver Satan will fool the majority of people in the world. I see you will be one of his Sheeple. Your as easy as a college freshman as at a frat party.

[Captain Kirk]

Freepers used to use the word "sheeple" those folks who blindly supported Clinton's humanitarian quagmires. Now....apparently, the term is used to describe anyone who rejects blind loyalty to Dubya and the god-like Donald Rumsfeld.

[bmwcyle]

I know when I see a people liberated. We liberated France and then they screwed it up. We did the right thing both times, Sheeple.

[Consort]

It looks like the Democrats have spooked you with their rhetoric before all the data is in. If you want to panic, do it quietly for a while and stop looking for company. If you weren't spooked by the Dems, then you are likely just one of them whether you know it or not.

[Captain Kirk]

I'll "panic" privately when pro-war freepers stop gloating publicly about every little blind alley WMD news report that appears.