WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    Crickets chirping... Anyone? Bush lied anyone? Joe Wilson his wife? Anyone?
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    Read the whole article: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/25546334/. The government knew about the existence of this stuff (byproduct from their reactor) for years and a lot more technology is needed to make a bomb.

    And don't you think if the "myth was exposed" Bush, Cheney, et al would have mentioned their vindication?
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    I think you have your history a little confused. Bush claimed in the State of the Union address that Iraq was seeking (apparently more) yellowcake in Niger as "proof" of the WMD allegation. Wilson established this was false and exposed the truth in the newspapers. His wife was then outed as a CIA operative as part of a smear campaign engineered by Cheney/Rove. So "war opponents" are interested in the issue only because it shows the lack of facts backing up the careless assertions of the President that led to a war that did not have to happen.

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from pollie. Show pollie's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    When was this proven true richard? Please, supply a source other than rush limbaugh, or rightwingnutjobs4war4profit.net.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from brat13. Show brat13's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]When was this proven true richard? Please, supply a source other than rush limbaugh, or rightwingnutjobs4war4profit.net.[/Quote]

    I hate this forum! The CIA outed Plame/Wilson to Cuba before anything Novak wrote and the Soviets knew about her in the 90's. Also the MSM knew about both and actually filed them in their "friend-of-the-court" brief in support of Judith Miller and Matthew Cooper...

    "As the media alleged to the judges (in Footnote 7, page 8, of their brief), Plame's identity as an undercover CIA officer was first disclosed to Russia in the mid-1990s by a spy in Moscow. Of course, the press and its attorneys were smart enough not to argue that such a disclosure would trigger the defense prescribed in Section 422 because it was evidently made by a foreign-intelligence operative, not by a U.S. agency as the statute literally requires."
    "The press informs the judges that the CIA itself "inadvertently" compromised Plame by not taking appropriate measures to safeguard classified documents that the Agency routed to the Swiss embassy in Havana. In the
    Washington Times article — you remember, the one the press hypes when it reports to the federal court but not when it reports to consumers of its news coverage — Gertz elaborates that "[t]he documents were supposed to be sealed from the Cuban government, but [unidentified U.S.] intelligence officials said the Cubans read the classified material and learned the secrets contained in them."
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Reubenhop. Show Reubenhop's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    Rcihard: Yellowcake by itself is not a WMD otherwise we are invading Niger which supposedly had some that tempted Iraq. And we know it is not a WMD because Bush would have gone on national t.v. when it was discovered at the reactor site to crow about his vindication. I know of no solid proof that Iraq was looking for yellowcake beyond the false Niger lead. Regardless of CIA fumbles and bumbles, Plame's status was still protected and it is clear that she became collateral damage in a campaign to discredit Wilson. And Libby was found guilty of obstructing justice and lieing about the situation.

    So there are still no WMD to support the Iraqi invasion.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from anotherman. Show anotherman's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]

    Yes there were no WMD in Iraq. Saddam had 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium so that he could go to 100% nuclear power and not be dependent on all that oil. He was probably sick of dealing with how to deal with all the money from oil too.

    http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=300323577877918

    [/Quote]

    richard:

    The neo-cons would be proud to call you one of their own, for twisting the facts.
    Stop being an apologist for that war-mongering, deceitful and criminal cabal.

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from anotherman. Show anotherman's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]So. Over a million dead Iraqis. A third of the nation turned into refugees. Hunger, fear, mayhem.

    Over nothing. No threat. Just a pissing contest.

    Bush needs to be punished. As does Blair.

    And maybe, just a little, so does everyone who supports this war.

    It's a disgrace.[/Quote]


    TacosGhost:

    I opposed the war from the start, because I saw it for what it was and still is: a personal vendetta of the Bush family and a grab of Iraq's oil resources, driven by greed and Big Oil companies.
    Unfortunately, war supporters remain blind to this day to the neo-con agenda, and choose to put a spin on things and distort facts and reality. That is their modus operandi.
    If there is justice in this world for the thousands of dead GIs and tens of thousands of wounded soldiers, in addition to the tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians killed, and millions of their compatriots displaced by this sordid enterprise, then GWB and his neo-con cabal should be rightfully punished before a court.
    Short of that, I will settle for all of them to burn in hell for eternity, in the afterlife, for all the misdeeds and chaos they have wrecked upon this world.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from anotherman. Show anotherman's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]


    twisting the facts?

    So exactly what fact am I "twisting"?

    [/Quote]


    richard:

    Look up the definition of yellowcake in Wikipedia:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake

    Just having yellowcake in itself does NOT constitute a WMD, as it has to be enriched through a process into enriched uranium, to be useful as a weapon.

    As far as I know, Saddam's Iraq possessed neither a nuclear reactor (their attempt to construct one in the early 80's at Osirak was thwarted by Israel) nor the capabilities to enrich uranium.

    So, don't put a spin on things like your neo-con idols do.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from lnmonster. Show lnmonster's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    The degree to which this is silly defies description. The 550 tons of yellowcake date from before the 1991 Gulf War. U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers. There was never any evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991.

    The only thing related to the discovery of the yellowcake in 2003 that might be considered newsworthy was that it was still all there where the U.N. inspectors had left it, and the seals had not been broken (other than by the invading US troops). Whew!

    Yellowcake is not even radioactive enough to make a dirty bomb out of. Dirty bombs themselves don't even pose a significant health risk to a population ... they just scare the heck out of people. If you have a program to enrich uranium, you need a source, and yellowcake is one ... but the Israelis destroyed Saddam's enrichment program, remember? That's why Saddam didn't bother trying to get any more yellowcake. If he had tried, it would have meant he was up to somthing in the way of enrichment, which is why Bush lied on the subject.

    Richard, I would have thought you above this kind of conspiratorial nonsense that polishpower is so famous for.

    See http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=5316183
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from anotherman. Show anotherman's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]The degree to which this is silly defies description. The 550 tons of yellowcake date from before the 1991 Gulf War. U.N. inspectors documented and safeguarded the yellowcake, which had been stored in aging drums and containers. There was never any evidence of any yellowcake dating from after 1991.

    The only thing related to the discovery of the yellowcake in 2003 that might be considered newsworthy was that it was still all there where the U.N. inspectors had left it, and the seals had not been broken (other than by the invading US troops). Whew!

    Yellowcake is not even radioactive enough to make a dirty bomb out of. Dirty bombs themselves don't even pose a significant health risk to a population ... they just scare the heck out of people. If you have a program to enrich uranium, you need a source, and yellowcake is one ... but the Israelis destroyed Saddam's enrichment program, remember? That's why Saddam didn't bother trying to get any more yellowcake. If he had tried, it would have meant he was up to somthing in the way of enrichment, which is why Bush lied on the subject.

    Richard, I would have thought you above this kind of conspiratorial nonsense that polishpower is so famous for.

    See http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory?id=5316183[/Quote]


    Inmonster:

    Kudos to you for clearing this whole story up. Hopefully, we can put to bed all this neo-con nonsense about Saddam's supposed "WMDs".
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from tedlicious. Show tedlicious's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]


    richard:

    Look up the definition of yellowcake in Wikipedia:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yellowcake

    Just having yellowcake in itself does NOT constitute a WMD, as it has to be enriched through a process into enriched uranium, to be useful as a weapon.

    As far as I know, Saddam's Iraq possessed neither a nuclear reactor (their attempt to construct one in the early 80's at Osirak was thwarted by Israel) nor the capabilities to enrich uranium.

    So, don't put a spin on things like your neo-con idols do.
    [/Quote]



    You do know and understand that CHEMICAL and BIOLOGICAL weapons are in fact WMD, right????
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from dexter147. Show dexter147's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]


    Inmonster:
    Hopefully, we can put to bed all this neo-con nonsense about Saddam's supposed "WMDs".
    [/Quote]

    Neo-con nonsense? Hmmm....I didn't realize the following people are neo-cons...

    "One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
    President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

    Quoted on CNN
    "If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." — President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

    Quoted on CNN
    Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." — Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

    Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio — from USIA
    "He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." — Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998

    Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio — From USIA
    "We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." — Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D — MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

    See letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others
    "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." — Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

    Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi — House of Representatives website
    "Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

    Answer to a question at the Chicago Council of Foreign Affairs
    "There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." — Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

    Letter to President George W. Bush signed by 9 Congressmen, including Democrats Harold Ford, Jr., Joseph Lieberman, and Benjamin Gilman.
    " We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002

    Online with Jim Lehrer — Public Broadcasting Service
    "We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

    Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today
    "Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

    Transcript of Gore's speech, printed in USA Today
    "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

    U.S. Senate — Ted Kennedy
    "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." — Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

    Congressional Record — Robert Byrd
    "When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." —Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry
    "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. Jay Rockefeller
    "He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

    Congressional Record — Rep. Henry Waxman
    "In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad. In the 4 years since the inspectors, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

    "It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein wiill continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security."
    Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. Hillary Clinton
    "The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.

    "Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened."
    Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. Ted Kennedy
    "There is one thing we agree upon, and that is that Saddam Hussein is an evil man. He is a tyrant. He has used chemical and biological weapons on his own people. He has disregarded United Nations resolutions calling for inspections of his capabilities and research and development programs. His forces regularly fire on American and British jet pilots enforcing the no-fly zones in the north and south of his country. And he has the potential to develop and deploy nuclear weapons... — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. Bob Graham
    But inspectors have had a hard time getting truthful information from the Iraqis they interview. Saddam Hussein terrorizes his people, including his weapons scientists, so effectively that they are afraid to be interviewed in private, let alone outside the country. They know that even the appearance of cooperation could be a death sentence for themselves or their families.

    "To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may dislike running ''a defection agency,' but that could be the only way to obtain truthful information about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction — Sen. Joseph Biden

    Congressional Record — Sen. Joseph Biden
    "With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?
    Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002

    Congressional Record — Sen. John F. Kerry
    "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.

    "Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction. — Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from dexter147. Show dexter147's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]
    That's a heck of a cut and paste job there dexter. Who woulda thunk it - a list of democrats! Wheeeeeeeee!



    You do love to grandstand, you do. For all your show-offy posturing as being above the fray, you're as pious as FOS as any other poster.

    Welcome Home, ya ninny![/Quote]

    So are you just following me around now so you can whine about this thing you have about me in your head? Do I now have a personal stalker? I'm not flattered. It's creepy actually
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from lnmonster. Show lnmonster's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    Gee, usually when I post the facts on an issue, it terminates the discussion permanently. This time, the thread only went dormant for four months. Go figure.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from dexter147. Show dexter147's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]

    oh, it's not the cutting and pasting per say - even a good citation comes down to that here -

    it's the cliche of digging up a list of quotes from "the other side" to win a little game of partisan "gotcha!" that make me want to vomit. it's THAT kind of cutting and pasting that borders on trolling, IMNSHO.

    or, "oh look, i found a list of a hundred republican pederasts! I win!!!"

    It's stupid and sick at the very same time.[/Quote]

    Ah...who's judging now???? Nothing worse than a whiny hypocrite...lol
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from dexter147. Show dexter147's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote]


    When did I ever come out against judging? I just pointed out you're judgmental about judgers, and I thought that was ironic.

    And judging the merits of an argument, is what the name of the game is, right? The 'partisan list' maneuver is a fallacy of logic for the present age. It's almost like a statistical mirage.

    Message board hacks are in love with it.

    It needs to go.



    pssssst!

    your buttons are showing
    [/Quote]


    Whatever....fallacy this!
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from mtbr1975. Show mtbr1975's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    The Republicans are wusses compared to the Democrats attack dogs? Are you serious? You really must be smoking some good drugs you typed that with a straight face.
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from TomSinMA. Show TomSinMA's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    [Quote][Quote]
    I think you have your history a little confused. Bush claimed in the State of the Union address that Iraq was seeking (apparently more) yellowcake in Niger as "proof" of the WMD allegation. Wilson established this was false and exposed the truth in the newspapers. His wife was then outed as a CIA operative as part of a smear campaign engineered by Cheney/Rove. So "war opponents" are interested in the issue only because it shows the lack of facts backing up the careless assertions of the President that led to a war that did not have to happen.
    [/Quote]

    So let me get this right - the fact that Iraq had 550 metric tons of yellowcake means nothing as far as WMD goes. When the President claimed that Iraq tried to buy more - which was eventually proven to be TRUE - war opponents only cared that he was wrong (or as they would erroneously say "he lied"), not that he was wrong about a WMD?

    I suppose we just should have let them continue on to be another Iran which has a little more than yellowcake.

    You are also wrong about "outing". No one was ever even charged with outing anyone, let alone outing . And it turned out to be a whining liberal Richard Armitage in the State Dept. that did it, not Bush/Cheney.[/Quote]

    The 500 metric tons of yellowcake dated from BEFORE the Gilf War of 1991. It has been packed up and placed under UN seal. The entire world knew about it! It was no shock.

    As for the Niger affair, it was NEVER proven to e true. IN fact, the entire matter was based on documents found in Italy, which were later proven to be forgeries. Predictable, no one has ever found out who forged them.

    Plame was indeed outed. IN a filing at the Libby trial, the CIA certified, under oath, that Plame WAS a covert operative, working for a CIA front company named Brewster Jennings!! Soon after, the White House admitted that Brewster Jenning WAS a front company and had been indeed had their cover blown They also refused to speculate how much damage to nation security had been done as a result. The fact that no one was charged lies in the way the law is written , which makes it nearly impossible to gain a conviction because of the restrictions. However, Fitzgerald DID state in his official report that Cheney "threw sand" into the eyes of investigators, thereby making a thourough investigation impossible. IN George HW Bush stated soon after, the entire affair was "treasonous" and if George W Bush approved Plame's outing, then it is clear he suborned treason.

    Finally, the IAEA stated , categorically, that they had NO EVIDENCE that iraq had restarted his nuclear program. All they had was furture "dreams".

    None of these cases are over. It seems that Obama WILL appoint a special prosecutor to conduct a criminal investigation into these and other matters. It is important to point out that in anya such criminal investigation, executive privilege may NOT be invoked. ( US vs Nixon)

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from lnmonster. Show lnmonster's posts

    WMD in Iraq Myth Exposed

    Thanks, Tom. Perhaps you should adopt as a slogan, "We post the facts ... so YOU don't have to."
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share