Us Terror Alerts - Effective Or Waste Of Time & $?

JohnM · January 4, 2004

KrustKidd - please by all means fell free to piss off - all you are doing is simply critisising and not offering anything vaild or worth reading for that matter.

If I thought like you - this would be my contribution to ANY thread.

"Ya see? All you right-wing military closet homos just sit there clutching their rifles in fear that the boggy man is just around the corner ready to take them out. Just another example of SMALL DICK and NO BALLS syndrom. Its folks like you that get suckered punched in bars - knocked down on their fat soft white asses and left wondering why."

Ok - so that dosn't really get us anywhere does it Clint?

Your a dying breed.

Moving on.......

Righturnonred - "You think the alerts are bullshit because [you think] the Bush administration is a complete farce and you use the Iraq invasion as an example.

Well, you have every right to think that way even if you really have no logical jusification for it."

Please enlighten me as to why I have no logical justification? Or let me guess - you are just going to be critical and not offer an arguement? If so please read my above reply to Krusty the Clown.

JM

KrustyKidd · January 4, 2004

KrustKidd - please by all means fell free to piss off - all you are doing is simply critisising and not offering anything vaild or worth reading for that matter.
If I thought like you - this would be my contribution to ANY thread.

"Ya see? All you right-wing military closet homos just sit there clutching their rifles in fear that the boggy man is just around the corner ready to take them out. Just another example of SMALL DICK and NO BALLS syndrom. Its folks like you that get suckered punched in bars - knocked down on their fat soft white asses and left wondering why."

Ok - so that dosn't really get us anywhere does it Clint?

Your a dying breed.

No, if you thought like me you would have a point you could back up with facts or links. Also, you wouldn't be placing your d**k in a door waiting for somebody to slam it shut.

WMD material has been found in Iraq. Res 687 stated that Iraq had to rid itself of all WMD equipment and material and even specified some types of 'dual use' equipment. Even Blix kept on tripping over the stuff so it is an irrefuatable fact that WMD equipment and material was in Iraq. As for WMD themselves that can be as simple as a scud with a four pound cylander filled with mustard agent. Saddam had both of those. Did he have hordes of ready to go Scuds filled with this? Jaques Chirac thought so, Hillary Clinton as well. Matter of fact from Ted Kennedy to Michael Moore many Liberals did. The proof is in past threads that I have alrready linked. Now prove to me that scince only 10 of 130 weapons sites have been inspected in Iraq and less than half of the country has been gone over that Bush was wrong about WMD. Now you are going to tell me and prove to me that in a country the size of California that there is not a propane size cylinder with some type of deadly chemical anywhere that can be placed into the nose cone of a Scud missile?

That should be enough to get you started. Report back when you have irrefutable proof.

A tip: thousands of Democrats have tried this, from Rockerfeller to Clinton and all have failed with better info and resources than you could hope for so I doubt you have proof that they don't. As a matter of fact, Rockerfeller is Vice Chair of the Senate Intelligence Sub Committee and in a leaked memo was admitted to using his position to gather intelligence to overthrow Bush so you can be sure if he could prove that there were no WMD then you would know it.ROCKERFELLER THE RAT

JohnM · January 4, 2004

Krusty - I know that Iraq had WMD back in the 80's - provided from the US. Check it out for yourself.

"The proof is in past threads that I have alrready linked"

Yes your first link - Iraq and WMD - posted from RScott was a very enjoyable read.

Fist line - CNN reports from CIA Weapons Inspector - right there I have to laugh. Not very impartial.

Although I did enjoy reading the following article....

(provided in part to appease your URL fetish)

http://www.cnn.com/2003/ALLPOLITICS/07/31/...arch/index.html

The rest you provied simply isn't very thought provoking.

"Now prove to me that scince only 10 of 130 weapons sites have been inspected in Iraq and less than half of the country has been gone over that Bush was wrong about WMD. Now you are going to tell me and prove to me that in a country the size of California that there is not a propane size cylinder with some type of deadly chemical anywhere that can be placed into the nose cone of a Scud missile?"

As I am not an military expert I cannot say in either case, but I would certainly consider this report over anything you may have to offer on the subject

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/docume...es_05062003.pdf

JM

Morgan · January 4, 2004

JohnM,

I think the following comments and pictures speak volumes about the monumnetal task that lies ahead for the US/UK WMD inspectors and it puts into question any remarks made by wide-eyed Hans Blix and his merry men in Land Cruisers who were led in circles by Saddam and da' boys.

Pictures of a MIG-25 found covered underground in Iraq are provided through a link on an Iraqi blogger'ssite called "Iraq at a glance." here's what the Iraqi blogger says:

MIC aircraft discovered hidden under sand in the desert in Iraq

Monday, December 08, 2003 check this:(The extraction of an Iraqi MiG aircraft buried in the Iraqi desert) Now, I think it is very easy to hide the (WMD's) in a desert! ...Am I right.. watch at the area that might be used to bury a town!!So, how can they find the WMD's in few months?? I think it will last for years to search every yard in Iraq!!
It is difficult..isn't it?

Here's the specific url for the actual pictures of the MIG-25:

http://cryptome.org/iraq-mig.htm

I rest my case.

KrustyKidd · January 4, 2004

As I am not an military expert I cannot say in either case,

That's right John. You are not. As well, you claim that Bush has lied, yet have no proof. Allegations are not proof.

The links I provided were threads in which you should have posted this subject. I don't care if you read them or not but they do provide evidence and opinions that we are rehashing ad nauseum here. Oh, I also came across this little article from today. The Bush hating Rockerfeller agrees with the "Boooo meter" being activated. You are going to tell me that the man who wants to put Bush away more than any other Dem is lying now?

Sen. Jay Rockefeller, the senior Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee, said officials are getting "an enormous amount of much more than single-source reporting (on terror threats) that is very specific." He said the information can come from computerized watch lists, interception of communications and intelligence agents.
Rockefeller said mistakes are inevitable, but added that the failure to respond "is a far worse alternative in spite of the inconvenience to passengers."

ROCKERFELLER THE RAT II

Here's a few quotes from your buddies.

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated 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 refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others
"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to re

build 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 Qaeda 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 will continue to increase his capacity 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." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998

"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." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

" Weapons of mass destruction. That's right, he had them. We should know -- we gave them to him!" Michael Moore

I see you didn't like Kay's report. It's funny how the left thought that all sorts of evidence would be 'planted' but when he turned up nothing spectacular they didn't argue with it. Matter of fact they used this report as evidence that they were right all along. Only when it was pointed out that he had indeed turned up enough evidence to prove Saddam was in violation of both 687 and 1441 and thus exonerated Bush did they say (like you) that he is CIA and biased etc. Here is Blix's of 27 Jan 2003. Remember, Kay had unfettered access, whereas Blix had, in comparison, next to none. If you don't like this either then there is not much else I can present to you and in turn, ask for you to give me proof of your allegations that there is no WMD or material in Iraq. As before, I wait for your factual report.

Paragraph 9 of Resolution 1441 (2002) states that this cooperation shall be "active". It is not enough to open doors. Inspection is not a game of "catch as catch can".. It is not built upon the premise of trust. Rather, it is designed to lead to trust, if there is both openness to the inspectors and action to present them with items to destroy or credible evidence about the absence of any such items.
On 7 December 2002, Iraq submitted a declaration of some 12,000 pages in response to Paragraph 3 of Resolution 1441 (2002) and within the time stipulated by the Security Council. These reports do not contend that weapons of mass destruction remain in Iraq, but nor do they exclude that possibility. They point to lack of evidence and inconsistencies, which raise question marks, which must be straightened out, if weapons dossiers are to be closed and confidence is to arise.

I shall only give some examples of issues and questions that need to be answered and I turn first to the sector of chemical weapons. The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed. Iraq has declared that it only produced VX on a pilot scale, just a few [metric] tons and that the quality was poor and the product unstable. Consequently, it was said, that the agent was never weaponized. Iraq said that the small quantity of agent remaining after the Gulf War was unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. UNMOVIC, however, has information that conflicts with this account. Indeed, even one of the documents provided by Iraq indicates that the purity of the agent, at least in laboratory production, was higher than declared. There are also indications that the agent was weaponizied.

The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 [metric] tons.

The discovery of a number of 122 mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions. . The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.

There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. As I reported to the Council on 19 December last year, Iraq did not declare a significant quantity, some 650 kg, of bacterial growth media, which was acknowledged as imported in Iraq's submission to the Amorim panel in February 1999. As part of its 7 December 2002 declaration, Iraq resubmitted the Amorim panel document, but the table showing this particular import of media was not included. The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

In the letter of 24 January to the President of the Council, Iraq's Foreign Minister stated that "all imported quantities of growth media were declared". This is not evidence. I note that the quantity of media involved would suffice to produce, for example, about 5,000 liters of concentrated anthrax.

The Al Samoud's diameter was increased from an earlier version to the present 760 mm. This modification was made despite a 1994 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM directing Iraq to limit its missile diameters to less than 600 mm. Furthermore, a November 1997 letter from the Executive Chairman of UNSCOM to Iraq prohibited the use of engines from certain surface-to-air missiles for the use in ballistic missiles.

During my recent meeting in Baghdad, we were briefed on these two programs. We were told that the final range for both systems would be less than the permitted maximum range of 150 km.

When we have urged our Iraqi counterparts to present more evidence, we have all too often met the response that there are no more documents. All existing relevant documents have been presented, we are told. All documents relating to the biological weapons program were destroyed together with the weapons.

However, Iraq has all the archives of the Government and its various departments, institutions and mechanisms. It should have budgetary documents, requests for funds and reports on how they have been used. It should also have letters of credit and bills of lading, reports on production and losses of material.

This interpretation is refuted by the Iraqi side, which claims that research staff sometimes may bring home papers from their work places. On our side, we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes.

To summarize the summary:

There are also indications that the agent was weaponizied.

Hmmm, that would mean WMD right?

Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 [metric] tons..

Hmmm, that would mean WMD right? Somewhere in the amount of 2 million pounds of it, enough to fill three or four semi trailers.

The absence of this table would appear to be deliberate as the pages of the resubmitted document were renumbered.

Hmmm that would mean deception and not cooperating with inspectors right?

I note that the quantity of media involved would suffice to produce, for example, about 5,000 liters of concentrated anthrax.

Hmmm, that would mean WMD if dropped in one of the warheads they had right?

final range for both systems would be less than the permitted maximum range of 150 km.

Hmmm, scince then Blix has discovered these have a range of more than 600 miles. This would mean prohibitted weapons right?

such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes

Hmmm, scince then they have discovered scientists with crates of 'take home work' documents in their homes. One even had parts for a freakin particle separator in his garden as 'take nhome work' for crying out loud!

Where is this stuff? Well, they bury fighter jets and move labs around. Why is it beyond the scope of your immagination to think that three trailers containg drums of whatever are not somewhere under the ground in the uninspected two thirds of Iraq? Or in one of these unaccounted for warheads in one of the 120 uninspected weapons depots? Of course you can prove that they are not right?