The Return of Al Qaeda

[Heracles 417]

So, we have finally arrived in territory of wild speculation. Good!

You don't think Iran has chemical and bio weapons? What, you think they destroyed them after we took out Saddam out of the kindness of their heart? And of course you think that their nuclear program is only for power also.

I was referring to your almost religous belief that Saddam's WMD's have been shipped off to Syria. There's no proof of that. Mind you, none. Yet you keep speculating along those lines.

vice versa. Do you think Syria would spill the beans?

Edited July 13, 2007 by Infidel

[GaryC 7]

As for evidence there is a lot more than just the Iraq general's word for it. The trouble is unless we go to war with Syria and look for ourselves your side will say it's all just wild speculation. I say it's much more likely that he had them and moved them rather than he got rid of them on his own. Here are just a few links that support my side.

http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

http://www.2la.org/syria/wmd.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2.../2/230625.shtml

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,...1340941,00.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=36463

http://www.nysun.com/article/24480

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/26/115712.shtml

http://www.christiansofiraq.com/weaponsjan256.html

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

By Con Coughlin

Last Updated: 11:07pm GMT 24/01/2004

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria was one of Iraq's main allies in the run-up to the war and hundreds of Iraqi officials - including members of Saddam's family - were given refuge in Damascus after the collapse of the Iraqi dictator's regime. Many of the foreign fighters responsible for conducting terrorist attacks against the coalition are believed to have entered Iraq through Syria.

A Syrian official last night said: "These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/25/wirq25.xml

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

As for evidence there is a lot more than just the Iraq general's word for it. The trouble is unless we go to war with Syria and look for ourselves your side will say it's all just wild speculation. I say it's much more likely that he had them and moved them rather than he got rid of them on his own. Here are just a few links that support my side.

http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

http://www.2la.org/syria/wmd.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2.../2/230625.shtml

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/Iraq/0,...1340941,00.html

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article....RTICLE_ID=36463

http://www.nysun.com/article/24480

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/1/26/115712.shtml

http://www.christiansofiraq.com/weaponsjan256.html

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

By Con Coughlin

Last Updated: 11:07pm GMT 24/01/2004

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria was one of Iraq's main allies in the run-up to the war and hundreds of Iraqi officials - including members of Saddam's family - were given refuge in Damascus after the collapse of the Iraqi dictator's regime. Many of the foreign fighters responsible for conducting terrorist attacks against the coalition are believed to have entered Iraq through Syria.

A Syrian official last night said: "These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/25/wirq25.xml

newsmax?

wnd?

christians of iraq?

you must be joking.

The president said Saddam didn't have WMD. Our President. Your President.

Why do you insist on making him out to be a liar?

[GaryC 7]

newsmax?

wnd?

christians of iraq?

you must be joking.

The president said Saddam didn't have WMD. Our President. Your President.

Why do you insist on making him out to be a liar?

You don't think the NYTimes would publish it do you? It would destroy their "Bush lied" line. As usual you disregard what doesn't fit your agenda. The left is so intelectually bankrupt. But putting that aside for a minute I will repost the most damning one.

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

By Con Coughlin

Last Updated: 11:07pm GMT 24/01/2004

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria was one of Iraq's main allies in the run-up to the war and hundreds of Iraqi officials - including members of Saddam's family - were given refuge in Damascus after the collapse of the Iraqi dictator's regime. Many of the foreign fighters responsible for conducting terrorist attacks against the coalition are believed to have entered Iraq through Syria.

A Syrian official last night said: "These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/25/wirq25.xml

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Again, who are you gonna believe - David Kay or your own President?

Make up your mind.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

newsmax?

wnd?

christians of iraq?

you must be joking.

The president said Saddam didn't have WMD. Our President. Your President.

Why do you insist on making him out to be a liar?

You don't think the NYTimes would publish it do you? It would destroy their "Bush lied" line. As usual you disregard what doesn't fit your agenda. The left is so intelectually bankrupt. But putting that aside for a minute I will repost the most damning one.

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

By Con Coughlin

Last Updated: 11:07pm GMT 24/01/2004

David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria.

In an exclusive interview with The Telegraph, Dr Kay, who last week resigned as head of the Iraq Survey Group, said that he had uncovered evidence that unspecified materials had been moved to Syria shortly before last year's war to overthrow Saddam.

"We are not talking about a large stockpile of weapons," he said. "But we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD programme. Precisely what went to Syria, and what has happened to it, is a major issue that needs to be resolved."

Dr Kay's comments will intensify pressure on President Bashar Assad to clarify the extent of his co-operation with Saddam's regime and details of Syria's WMD programme. Mr Assad has said that Syria was entitled to defend itself by acquiring its own biological and chemical weapons arsenal.

Syria was one of Iraq's main allies in the run-up to the war and hundreds of Iraqi officials - including members of Saddam's family - were given refuge in Damascus after the collapse of the Iraqi dictator's regime. Many of the foreign fighters responsible for conducting terrorist attacks against the coalition are believed to have entered Iraq through Syria.

A Syrian official last night said: "These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml...1/25/wirq25.xml

Actually I found the bolded part interesting. Again - we're still very far from the smoking gun. The WMD angle was B/S to begin with - regardless of whether Saddam had them or not. The decision to go to war had already been pre-meditated, and would have taken place anyway regardless of anything Saddam did. The fact that the UN inspectors were essentially forced out by pressure from the US government would seem to suggest that it was very far from the last resort that was claimed.

[GaryC 7]

Actually I found the bolded part interesting. Again - we're still very far from the smoking gun. The WMD angle was B/S to begin with - regardless of whether Saddam had them or not. The decision to go to war had already been pre-meditated, and would have taken place anyway regardless of anything Saddam did. The fact that the UN inspectors were essentially forced out by pressure from the US government would seem to suggest that it was very far from the last resort that was claimed.

Remember what was going on at the time. Saddam had kicked out the inspectors for a while and then decided to let them back in. When they were there Iraq would deny them entry to a facility and then suddenly let them in. It all adds up. He was moving things around and playing a two step with the inspectors. It was all a farce. It was obvious that the inspectors were not going to find anything because Saddam was playing games. That is why the US told the inspectors to leave and that is why congress gave Bush the authority to invade. For some reason the details of the events leading up to the war have been glossed over in the rush to blame Bush.

Look at it this way. If the inspectors had found everything and it all was destroyed why would Saddam play games like he did. He knew that we were going to take him out if he didn't cooperate fully. If he really didn't have anything to hide he would have opened the gates and let the inspectors look at anything they wanted without interferance. That all by itself is a compelling indication that he had something he wanted to keep secret.

Our "allies" in europe were not helping matters much either. Germany and France were lining their pockets with the oil for food scam. Russia was blocking every chance they got because they were selling him weapons. We pretty much had to go it alone for those reasons. Saddam had corrupted most of the UN and the USA and GB had to make a stand. I know a lot of people don't like that but that is the way it is. Just be honest about the run up to the war and what was going on.

[GaryC 7]

Just to refresh your memory here are some headlines about the UN inspectors. Do you see a pattern?

! Update October 2002

What a Difference Four Years Makes

Why U.N. inspectors left Iraq--then and now

"The U.N. orders its weapons inspectors to leave Iraq after the chief inspector reports Baghdad is not fully cooperating with them."

-- Sheila MacVicar, ABC World News This Morning, 12/16/98

"To bolster its claim, Iraq let reporters see one laboratory U.N. inspectors once visited before they were kicked out four years ago."

--John McWethy, ABC World News Tonight, 8/12/02

"The Iraq story boiled over last night when the chief U.N. weapons inspector, Richard Butler, said that Iraq had not fully cooperated with inspectors and--as they had promised to do. As a result, the U.N. ordered its inspectors to leave Iraq this morning"

--Katie Couric, NBC's Today, 12/16/98

"As Washington debates when and how to attack Iraq, a surprise offer from Baghdad. It is ready to talk about re-admitting U.N. weapons inspectors after kicking them out four years ago."

--Maurice DuBois, NBC's Saturday Today, 8/3/02

"The chief U.N. weapons inspector ordered his monitors to leave Baghdad today after saying that Iraq had once again reneged on its promise to cooperate--a report that renewed the threat of U.S. and British airstrikes."

--AP, 12/16/98

"Information on Iraq's programs has been spotty since Saddam expelled U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998."

--AP, 9/7/02

"Immediately after submitting his report on Baghdad's noncompliance, Butler ordered his inspectors to leave Iraq."

--Los Angeles Times, 12/17/98

"It is not known whether Iraq has rebuilt clandestine nuclear facilities since U.N. inspectors were forced out in 1998, but the report said the regime lacks nuclear material for a bomb and the capability to make weapons."

--Los Angeles Times, 9/10/02

"The United Nations once again has ordered its weapons inspectors out of Iraq. Today's evacuation follows a new warning from chief weapons inspector Richard Butler accusing Iraq of once again failing to cooperate with the inspectors. The United States and Britain repeatedly have warned that Iraq's failure to cooperate with the inspectors could lead to air strikes."

--Bob Edwards, NPR, 12/16/98

"If he has secret weapons, he's had four years since he kicked out the inspectors to hide all of them."

--Daniel Schorr, NPR, 8/3/02

"This is the second time in a month that UNSCOM has pulled out in the face of a possible U.S.-led attack. But this time there may be no turning back. Weapons inspectors packed up their personal belongings and loaded up equipment at U.N. headquarters after a predawn evacuation order. In a matter of hours, they were gone, more than 120 of them headed for a flight to Bahrain."

--Jane Arraf, CNN, 12/16/98

"What Mr. Bush is being urged to do by many advisers is focus on the simple fact that Saddam Hussein signed a piece of paper at the end of the Persian Gulf War, promising that the United Nations could have unfettered weapons inspections in Iraq. It has now been several years since those inspectors were kicked out."

--John King, CNN, 8/18/02

"Russian Ambassador Sergei Lavrov criticized Butler for evacuating inspectors from Iraq Wednesday morning without seeking permission from the Security Council."

--USA Today, 12/17/98

"Saddam expelled U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998, accusing some of being U.S. spies."

--USA Today, 9/4/02

"But the most recent irritant was Mr. Butler's quick withdrawal from Iraq on Wednesday of all his inspectors and those of the International Atomic Energy Agency, which monitors Iraqi nuclear programs, without Security Council permission. Mr. Butler acted after a telephone call from Peter Burleigh, the American representative to the United Nations, and a discussion with Secretary General Kofi Annan, who had also spoken to Mr. Burleigh."

--New York Times, 12/18/98

"America's goal should be to ensure that Iraq is disarmed of all unconventional weapons.... To thwart this goal, Baghdad expelled United Nations arms inspectors four years ago."

--New York Times editorial, 8/3/02

"Butler ordered his inspectors to evacuate Baghdad, in anticipation of a military attack, on Tuesday night--at a time when most members of the Security Council had yet to receive his report."

--Washington Post, 12/18/98

"Since 1998, when U.N. inspectors were expelled, Iraq has almost certainly been working to build more chemical and biological weapons."

--Washington Post editorial, 8/4/02

"Butler abruptly pulled all of his inspectors out of Iraq shortly after handing Annan a report yesterday afternoon on Baghdad's continued failure to cooperate with UNSCOM, the agency that searches for Iraq's prohibited weapons of mass destruction."

-- Newsday, 12/17/98

"The reason Hussein gave was that the U.N. inspectors' work was completed years ago, before he kicked them out in 1998, and they dismantled whatever weapons they found. That's disingenuous."

--Newsday editorial, 8/14/02

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1123

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Actually I found the bolded part interesting. Again - we're still very far from the smoking gun. The WMD angle was B/S to begin with - regardless of whether Saddam had them or not. The decision to go to war had already been pre-meditated, and would have taken place anyway regardless of anything Saddam did. The fact that the UN inspectors were essentially forced out by pressure from the US government would seem to suggest that it was very far from the last resort that was claimed.

Remember what was going on at the time.

I do. I remember that the White House claimed to know where the WMD's and the labs are. They had satellite images and all. Now I wonder, if we had them pinpointed and imaged, then how did Saddam move them over there without that being detected? I also remember that in 2004 (yes, your sources are THAT old) the White House and the supporters of this illegal attack on Iraq were looking for their smoking gun like a druggie for his next fix.

Look, if there was any credible evidence of any sort, you know as well as I do that the White House would use it to say: See, we told you so. But instead, Bush admits that the claim that led to the invasion cannot be substantiated. You're the last guy on the planet to still believe this fairytale in 2007.

Edited July 14, 2007 by ET-US2004

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Just to refresh your memory here are some headlines about the UN inspectors. Do you see a pattern?

! Update October 2002

1998 - 2002? Are you kidding me?

Once the US flexed muscle (read: the Congress gave the President power to use military force if necessary), Saddam complied. The resolution accomplished what it was to accomplish - bring Saddam into compliance. Once he let the inspectors work and it became clear that nothing was left there to be detected, Bush called the UN to pull their boys out as he was sending our boys in. That's the pattern that you're missing, Gary.

[GaryC 7]

Just to refresh your memory here are some headlines about the UN inspectors. Do you see a pattern?

! Update October 2002

1998 - 2002? Are you kidding me?

Once the US flexed muscle (read: the Congress gave the President power to use military force if necessary), Saddam complied. The resolution accomplished what it was to accomplish - bring Saddam into compliance. Once he let the inspectors work and it became clear that nothing was left there to be detected, Bush called the UN to pull their boys out as he was sending our boys in. That's the pattern that you're missing, Gary.

The pattern you seem to be blind to is that Saddam had 4 years to hide his stuff. 4 years is a long time. Long enough to hide anything they want to. Satelites can't see in the dark. Things can be moved under the cover of darkness. Face it, you just want to bash Bush and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

[w¡n9Nµ7 §£@¥€r 123]

Face it, you just want to bash Bush and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

Bash Bush?

ET is saying Saddam didn't have WMD. BUSH AGREES!

You're the one who Bush disagrees with. Even Bush agrees that Saddam didn't have them.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Iraq was a sideshow for private interests using 9/11 and "national security" as a cover - if not to gain some control of the countries oil supply (I believe Halliburton was awarded a no-bid contract for fuel distribution) then for establishing a long-term military presence in the region. I really think we should stop talking about Iraq in the same breath as Al Qaeda and preventing fundamentalist terrorism (considering the factional violence that has followed Saddam's removal). Its a red herring IMO.

Best that can be hoped for now is that this shameful precedent likely won't be repeated (in say Iran or Syria). After 8 years of constant conflict - I think people will be looking for a cooler head to steer the country back onto a more even keel.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Just to refresh your memory here are some headlines about the UN inspectors. Do you see a pattern?

! Update October 2002

1998 - 2002? Are you kidding me?

Once the US flexed muscle (read: the Congress gave the President power to use military force if necessary), Saddam complied. The resolution accomplished what it was to accomplish - bring Saddam into compliance. Once he let the inspectors work and it became clear that nothing was left there to be detected, Bush called the UN to pull their boys out as he was sending our boys in. That's the pattern that you're missing, Gary.

The pattern you seem to be blind to is that Saddam had 4 years to hide his stuff. 4 years is a long time. Long enough to hide anything they want to. Satelites can't see in the dark. Things can be moved under the cover of darkness. Face it, you just want to bash Bush and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

What evidence? There ain't no evidence. Even Bush admits that. Geez.

Face it, you just want to bash Bush and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

Bash Bush?

ET is saying Saddam didn't have WMD. BUSH AGREES!

You're the one who Bush disagrees with. Even Bush agrees that Saddam didn't have them.

Exactly! Gary is the true Bush basher here calling the guy a liar.

Satelites can't see in the dark. Things can be moved under the cover of darkness.

I see. So, the theory is that he moved the mobile labs and arsenals in the dark but then he left them out in the light of day so we could get good satellite images that we can present at the UN. Yeah, that makes perfect sense.

Edited July 14, 2007 by ET-US2004

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The pattern you seem to be blind to is that Saddam had 4 years to hide his stuff. 4 years is a long time. Long enough to hide anything they want to. Satelites can't see in the dark. Things can be moved under the cover of darkness. Face it, you just want to bash Bush and no amount of evidence to the contrary will change your mind.

But you don't see... there isn't any evidence. You haven't presented any. Even David Kay whom you quoted (who is obviously more familiar with what went on than any of us) doesn't have any specifics on that - and the article you quoted is very vague on that score..

BTW here is another article quoting Mr Kay - same date as the one you quoted.

The issue of banned weapons was the central element of the US case for invading the country.

In an interview with Reuters news agency after his resignation was announced, Mr Kay said he did not believe there had been large-scale production of chemical or biological weapons in Iraq since the end of the first Gulf War in 1991.

"I don't think they existed," Mr Kay said.

"What everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production programme in the 90s."

"I think we have found probably 85% of what we're going to find."

While we're on the subject. Here's another:

David Kay, the man who led the CIA's postwar effort to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, has called on the Bush administration to "come clean with the American people" and admit it was wrong about the existence of the weapons.

In an interview with the Guardian, Mr Kay said the administration's reluctance to make that admission was delaying essential reforms of US intelligence agencies, and further undermining its credibility at home and abroad.

He welcomed the creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate prewar intelligence on Iraq, and said the wide-ranging US investigation was much more likely to get to the truth than the Butler inquiry in Britain. That, he noted, had "so many limitations it's going to be almost impossible" to come to meaningful conclusions.

Mr Kay, 63, a former nuclear weapons inspector, provoked uproar at the end of January when he told the Senate that "we were almost all wrong" about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction (WMD).

He also resigned from the Iraq Survey Group (ISG), which he was appointed by the CIA to lead in the hunt for weapons stockpiles, saying its resources had been diverted in the fight against Iraqi insurgents.

"I was more worried that we were still sending teams out to search for things that we were increasingly convinced were not there," Mr Kay said.

His call for a frank admission is an embarrassment for the White House at the start of an election year. The defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, has dismissed Mr Kay's assertion that there were no WMD at the start of the Iraq war as a "theory" that was "possible, but not likely".

In his state of the union speech in January, George Bush did not refer to his prewar claims that Iraq was an "immediate threat" but instead said the ISG had found "weapons of mass destruction-related programme activities".

Mr Kay, who was formerly a UN weapons inspector, called for the president to go further. "It's about confronting and coming clean with the American people. He should say we were mistaken and I am determined to find out why," he said.

A White House official said it was too early to draw conclusions: "The ISG is still working, and the commission on this has not even started."

However, Mr Kay said that continued evasion would create public cynicism about the administration's motives, which he believes reflected a genuine fear of WMD falling into the hands of terrorists. He also said that if the administration did not confront the Iraq intelligence fiasco head-on it would undermine its credibility with its allies in future crises "for a generation".

Mr Kay said that he had become convinced there were no WMD to be found several months ago, before presenting an interim report to Congress last October saying no stockpiles had been found, but he said the CIA and the Blair government were nervous about the impact of his conclusions.

"I think the greatest concern about the report was in London rather than in Washington. It was a different political issue in London than it was here," he said, referring to the storm around the death of his former UN colleague David Kelly.

Mr Kay said he had been expecting Dr Kelly's arrival in Iraq to help the search for biological weapons programmes, and had spoken to him shortly before his death. "He never had any doubts about Iraq's programmes," Mr Kay said.

See the first bolded part above. Would this be Rumsfeld following the time honoured tradition of trashing the messenger for not delivering the right message? And you thought it was only the "far left" (whatever that means) playing politics with this issue... Guess Bush isn't doing it either on the second bolded part.

David Kelly BTW - is the former weapons expert who turned up dead in the woods near his UK in shall we say "rather suspicious circumstances".

Edited July 14, 2007 by Number 6