The Bush Admin. Never Lied To Justify the Invasion of Iraq.

[MikeK]

Why was Saddam continuously provoking the US, if it wasn't in his best interest to do so? Why did he go out of his way to make everyone think he had WMD's if he had none?

It was necessary for him to do so. Because if Iran, his historical enemy, had known how defenseless he actually was they would unhesitatingly have invaded Iraq. His bluff served to enhance Bush's deception. He had little choice.

Hussein's "interference" with the UN Inspectors, and his "mother of all battles" rhetoric, were efforts to conceal ultimate awareness that he had no substantial weaponry.

Then the U.S. led invasion was the fault of Saddam Hussein.

If a known murderer yells that he has a gun and is not afraid to use it then it is his fault when the police shoot him dead.

That would be true if the Bush gang didn't know better, but they did.

They did because George Tenet and Colin Powell had cause to know. Tenet was the intelligence filter, which included internal Iraqi sources, and Powell had prevailed over destruction of the Iraqi military and its entire infrastructure via Operation Desert Storm. And the way that was done exists as the most shameful exercise of overwhelming military power in modern history -- exceeding some of the worst battlefield conduct of the Nazi Wehrmacht and the Japanese Imperial Army.

 

[Dayton3]

It was necessary for him to do so. Because if Iran, his historical enemy, had known how defenseless he actually was they would unhesitatingly have invaded Iraq. His bluff served to enhance Bush's deception. He had little choice.

Hussein's "interference" with the UN Inspectors, and his "mother of all battles" rhetoric, were efforts to conceal ultimate awareness that he had no substantial weaponry.

Then the U.S. led invasion was the fault of Saddam Hussein.

If a known murderer yells that he has a gun and is not afraid to use it then it is his fault when the police shoot him dead.

That would be true if the Bush gang didn't know better, but they did.

They did because George Tenet and Colin Powell had cause to know. Tenet was the intelligence filter, which included internal Iraqi sources, and Powell had prevailed over destruction of the Iraqi military and its entire infrastructure via Operation Desert Storm. And the way that was done exists as the most shameful exercise of overwhelming military power in modern history -- exceeding some of the worst battlefield conduct of the Nazi Wehrmacht and the Japanese Imperial Army.

What do you mean by that? The U.S. military went out of their way to avoid excessive fatalities to the Iraqi military in Desert Storm.

We should've kept the fighting going another two days and utterly destroyed the Republican Guard.

And remember it was George Tenet who insisted to President Bush, face to face that the evidence in favor of WMDs was a "slam dunk".

 

[Billo_Really]

What do you mean by that? The U.S. military went out of their way to avoid excessive fatalities to the Iraqi military in Desert Storm.

You're so full of shit!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogFZlRiTHuw]Wikileaks - Collateral murder in Iraq by US helicopter (short video) - YouTube[/ame]

 

[MikeK]

What do you mean by that? The U.S. military went out of their way to avoid excessive fatalities to the Iraqi military in Desert Storm.

Really?

Here's what I mean by that:

The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on "The Highway of Death"

The Death of an Iraqi soldier, Highway of Death, 1991

We should've kept the fighting going another two days and utterly destroyed the Republican Guard.

Why?

Hussein's military, which consisted mainly of poorly trained conscripts and reservists were defeated and were retreating back to Iraq. What happened on the infamous Highway of Death was a shameful massacre.

Even Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City Bomber, mentioned it in his final manifesto, in which he said it changed his idea of what America was about. He was there and there is plenty more critical testimony by U.S. soldiers who were there if you care to research it.

And remember it was George Tenet who insisted to President Bush, face to face that the evidence in favor of WMDs was a "slam dunk".

George Tenet's "slam dunk" comment referred to the relative ease of invading Iraq. He was saying what his master, Bush, wanted him to say.

George Tenet is a cockroach. That about sums it up where that greasy bastard is concerned.

Here's what some CIA Officers think of him: An Open Letter to George Tenet | Common Dreams

Applying Tenet as a supportive element for your position is like listing Jeffrey Dahmer as a personal reference. Bad choice.

 

[georgephillip]

What do you mean by that? The U.S. military went out of their way to avoid excessive fatalities to the Iraqi military in Desert Storm.

Really?

Here's what I mean by that:

The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on "The Highway of Death"

The Death of an Iraqi soldier, Highway of Death, 1991

We should've kept the fighting going another two days and utterly destroyed the Republican Guard.

Why?

Hussein's military, which consisted mainly of poorly trained conscripts and reservists were defeated and were retreating back to Iraq. What happened on the infamous Highway of Death was a shameful massacre.

Even Timothy McVeigh, the Oklahoma City Bomber, mentioned it in his final manifesto, in which he said it changed his idea of what America was about. He was there and there is plenty more critical testimony by U.S. soldiers who were there if you care to research it.

And remember it was George Tenet who insisted to President Bush, face to face that the evidence in favor of WMDs was a "slam dunk".

George Tenet's "slam dunk" comment referred to the relative ease of invading Iraq. He was saying what his master, Bush, wanted him to say.

George Tenet is a cockroach. That about sums it up where that greasy bastard is concerned.

Here's what some CIA Officers think of him: An Open Letter to George Tenet | Common Dreams

Applying Tenet as a supportive element for your position is like listing Jeffrey Dahmer as a personal reference. Bad choice.

Gulf War Crimes:

"Iraq accepted UN Resolution 660 and offered to withdraw from Kuwait through Soviet mediation on February 21, 1991. A statement made by George Bush on February 27, 1991, that no quarter would be given to remaining Iraqi soldiers violates even the U.S. Field Manual of 1956.

"The 1907 Hague Convention governing land warfare also makes it illegal to declare that no quarter will be given to withdrawing soldiers.

"On February 26,199 I, the following dispatch was filed from the deck of the U.S.S. Ranger, under the byline of Randall Richard of the Providence Journal:

Air strikes against Iraqi troops retreating from Kuwait were being launched so feverishly from this carrier today that pilots said they took whatever bombs happened to be closest to the flight deck. The crews, working to the strains of the Lone Ranger theme, often passed up the projectile of choice . . . because it took too long to load.

"New York Times reporter Maureen Dowd wrote, 'With the Iraqi leader facing military defeat, Mr. Bush decided that he would rather gamble on a violent and potentially unpopular ground war than risk the alternative: an imperfect settlement hammered out by the Soviets and Iraqis that world opinion might accept as tolerable.'

"In short, rather than accept the offer of Iraq to surrender and leave the field of battle, Bush and the U.S. military strategists decided simply to kill as many Iraqis as they possibly could while the chance lasted."

The Massacre of Withdrawing Soldiers on "The Highway of Death"

 

[Dayton3]

It was later established that very few Iraqis were killed on the Highway of Death (so called). Once the roads were blocked by destroyed vehicles, most Iraqi soldiers fled before follow up airstrikes arrived.

At any rate, it is not a war crime to kill retreating enemy soldiers.

 

[Dayton3]

[
George Tenet's "slam dunk" comment referred to the relative ease of invading Iraq. He was saying what his master, Bush, wanted him to say.

.

Wrong. And it makes no sense.

President Bush was asking SPECIFICALLY about WMD evidence when Tenet made his "slam dunk" comment.

Bush had no reason to ask a question about invasion plans or et cetera to Tenet.

I'll agree Tenet was a cockroach but President Bush was NOT his master. He was a Clinton appointee who was in his position before Bush ever ran for the presidency.

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do? Tenet was a Clinton appointee with no reason to lie or suck up to Bush.
The only answer I’ve ever been given is that Bush should’ve looked at the intelligence sources himself. This is completely ridiculous. A president does not go around interviewing Iraqi dissidents.
President Bush would’ve been foolish not to take the positive declarations of the CIA Director at face value.

2) Lying about WMDs in Iraq makes no logical sense. We’re supposed to believe that the Bush admin. Lied to justify an invasion…that would inevitably reveal that lie to the world.
The ONLY explanation I’ve heard regarding this from the “Bush lied” people is that “they figured the war would be so popular that no one would care”. Which is ridiculous beyond belief.

Were there WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion? Almost certainly not. But the CIA Director said there were and any president would be foolish not to act on that claim.

If your oncologist insists that you have cancer do you ask to see the lab reports yourself and interview the lab techs? Of course not! Probably you schedule surgery or chemo whichever that same doctor recommends.
Were mistakes made during the occupation of Iraq that cost thousands of American lives? Most certainly. But that is another issue that has nothing to do about the legitimacy of the invasion.

Did the Bush admin. Emphasize the stronger parts of their argument in favor of invading? Of course they did! This is what you do when making a case to a jury or to the American people. You have no obligation to argue both sides. There were plenty of opponents of the invasion to argue the other side.

Either way, there is ZERO evidence that the Bush Admin. ever deliberately and knowingly promoted false information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

 

[edthecynic]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do?

Here is how the Lying BushWhacker lied by omission.

Tenet told Congress in February 2001 that Iraq was "probably" pursuing chemical and biological weapons programs but that the CIA had no direct evidence that Iraq had actually obtained such weapons. However, such caveats as "may" and "probably" were removed from intelligence reports by key members of the Bush administration immediately after 9/11 when discussing Iraq.

 

[edthecynic]

If you repeat a lie not knowing it is a lie, does that make you a liar too?

Yes, it makes you a stupid lying gossip.

A liar is someone who tells lies. Period. A lie to be a lie has to be deliberate, but the TELLER of a lie is a liar whether they know they are lying or not. If they know it they are a premeditated liar and if they don't they are a gossip.

 

[edthecynic]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.

President Bush addresses the nation as the Iraq war
begins in March 2003.

"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.

The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations.

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

Assuming all that is true, (and I do not concede that) what of it?

Do you have evidence that anyone in the Bush admin. KNOWINGLY passed on information they KNEW was false?

If they didn't know it was false they did not lie.

3/28/02 Pakistani forces capture Al Qaeda "operations chief " Abu Zubaydah and CIA ferrets him away to underground interrogation facility in Thailand. Bush told he's mentally unstable and really only Al Qaeda's travel agent.

4/9/02 Bush calls Zubaydah one of "top operating officials of Al Qaeda, plotting…murder." Later asks Tenet, "I said he was important; you're not going to let me lose face on this are you?…Do some of those harsh methods really work?" Zubaydah is then tortured and speaks of all variety of plots.

 

[Kosh]

I see the far left will not admit that Obama is failure and will still peddle all the far left propaganda they can to cover for their programmed behavior.

 

[Dayton3]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.

President Bush addresses the nation as the Iraq war
begins in March 2003.

"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.

The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations.

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

Assuming all that is true, (and I do not concede that) what of it?

Do you have evidence that anyone in the Bush admin. KNOWINGLY passed on information they KNEW was false?

If they didn't know it was false they did not lie.

3/28/02 Pakistani forces capture Al Qaeda "operations chief " Abu Zubaydah and CIA ferrets him away to underground interrogation facility in Thailand. Bush told he's mentally unstable and really only Al Qaeda's travel agent.

4/9/02 Bush calls Zubaydah one of "top operating officials of Al Qaeda, plotting…murder." Later asks Tenet, "I said he was important; you're not going to let me lose face on this are you?…Do some of those harsh methods really work?" Zubaydah is then tortured and speaks of all variety of plots.

I call that artful embellishment.

Hardly a lie and in any case unrelated to he question of invading Iraq.

 

[Camp]

It was later established that very few Iraqis were killed on the Highway of Death (so called). Once the roads were blocked by destroyed vehicles, most Iraqi soldiers fled before follow up airstrikes arrived.

At any rate, it is not a war crime to kill retreating enemy soldiers.

Who showed us that? Oh, I forgot, you don't show sources or links. You just make random shit up.

 

[edthecynic]

Assuming all that is true, (and I do not concede that) what of it?

Do you have evidence that anyone in the Bush admin. KNOWINGLY passed on information they KNEW was false?

If they didn't know it was false they did not lie.

3/28/02 Pakistani forces capture Al Qaeda "operations chief " Abu Zubaydah and CIA ferrets him away to underground interrogation facility in Thailand. Bush told he's mentally unstable and really only Al Qaeda's travel agent.

4/9/02 Bush calls Zubaydah one of "top operating officials of Al Qaeda, plotting…murder." Later asks Tenet, "I said he was important; you're not going to let me lose face on this are you?…Do some of those harsh methods really work?" Zubaydah is then tortured and speaks of all variety of plots.

I call that artful embellishment.

Hardly a lie and in any case unrelated to he question of invading Iraq.

An honest person would call it a lie.

Abu Zubaydah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Exploitation of Abu Zubaydah's perceived value[edit]
President Bush personally used Abu Zubaydah’s perceived “value” as a detainee to justify the use of the CIA's harsher interrogation techniques[133] as well as Abu Zubaydah’s detention in secret CIA prisons around the world.[134]

In a speech in 2006, President Bush claimed that Abu Zubaydah revealed useful intelligence when enhanced interrogation was used, including identification of two important suspects and information that allegedly helped foil a terrorist attack on American soil.[133] These claims directly conflict with the reports of the F.B.I. agents who first interrogated Abu Zubaydah. He gave them the names before torture was used, and the third piece of information came from other sources. who had been receiving crucial pieces of information from him without the use of harsher techniques,[12][61][62] as well as other government officials.[15][88]

Iraq War (2003)[edit]
The Bush administration relied on some of Zybaydah's claims in justifying the invasion of Iraq. U.S. officials stated that the allegations that Iraq and al-Qaeda were linked in the training of people on chemical weapons came from Abu Zubaydah.[135][136][137] The officials noted there was no independent verification of his claims.[135][136]

The U.S. Government included statements made by Abu Zubaydah in regards to al Qaeda’s ability to obtain a dirty bomb to show a link between Iraq and al Qaeda.[138] According to a Senate Intelligence Committee report of 2004, Abu Zubaydah said "he had heard that an important al Qaeda associate, Abu Musab al Zarqawi, and others had good relationships with Iraqi intelligence."[139] But the year before in June 2003, Abu Zubaydah and Khalid Sheikh Mohammed were reported as saying there was no link between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda.[140][141]

In the Senate Armed Services Committee 2008 report on the abuses of detainees, the Bush administration was described as having applied pressure to interrogators to find a link between Iraq and Al-Qaeda prior to the Iraq War.[142] Major Paul Burney, a psychiatrist with the United States Army, said to the committee, "while we were [at Guantanamo] a large part of the time we were focused on trying to establish a link between Al Qaeda and Iraq and we were not being successful."[142][143] He said that higher-ups were "frustrated" and applied "more and more pressure to resort to measures that might produce more immediate results."[142][143][144]

Colonel Lawrence B. Wilkerson, the former chief of staff for former Secretary of State Colin Powell has said:

"Likewise, what I have learned is that as the administration authorized harsh interrogation in April and May of 2002—well before the Justice Department had rendered any legal opinion—its principal priority for intelligence was not aimed at pre-empting another terrorist attack on the U.S. but discovering a smoking gun linking Iraq and al-Qa'ida.

So furious was this effort that on one particular detainee, even when the interrogation team had reported to Cheney's office that their detainee "was compliant" (meaning the team recommended no more torture), the VP's office ordered them to continue the enhanced methods. The detainee had not revealed any al-Qa'ida-Baghdad contacts yet. This ceased only after Ibn al-Shaykh al-Libi, under waterboarding in Egypt, "revealed" such contacts. Of course later we learned that al-Libi revealed these contacts only to get the torture to stop."[143]
Military Commissions Act (2006)[edit]
President Bush referred to Abu Zubaydah in a speech to Congress September 2006 requesting a bill to authorize military commissions, following the US Supreme Court ruling in Hamdan v. Rumsfeld (2006) that held the tribunals as formulated by the executive branch were unconstitutional. Congress rapidly passed legislation that was signed by the president.[145]

Less than one month after Abu Zubaydah’s capture, Justice Department officials said Abu Zubaydah was "a near-ideal candidate for a tribunal trial.”[146] Several months later in 2002, US officials said there was “no rush” to try Abu Zubaydah via military commission.[147]

The U.S. Government has not yet charged Abu Zubaydah.

Domestic spying program[edit]
According to reporting in 2005, the Bush administration used Abu Zubaydah’s capture as justification to accelerate development of its domestic spying program to allow quick action on the phone numbers and addresses seized.[148] The NSA expanded its surveillance beyond the numbers seized during Zubaydah’s capture.[149] The spying program was later revamped in order to make it comply to legal opinion.[12]

 

[Theowl32]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do? Tenet was a Clinton appointee with no reason to lie or suck up to Bush.
The only answer I’ve ever been given is that Bush should’ve looked at the intelligence sources himself. This is completely ridiculous. A president does not go around interviewing Iraqi dissidents.
President Bush would’ve been foolish not to take the positive declarations of the CIA Director at face value.

2) Lying about WMDs in Iraq makes no logical sense. We’re supposed to believe that the Bush admin. Lied to justify an invasion…that would inevitably reveal that lie to the world.
The ONLY explanation I’ve heard regarding this from the “Bush lied” people is that “they figured the war would be so popular that no one would care”. Which is ridiculous beyond belief.

Were there WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion? Almost certainly not. But the CIA Director said there were and any president would be foolish not to act on that claim.

If your oncologist insists that you have cancer do you ask to see the lab reports yourself and interview the lab techs? Of course not! Probably you schedule surgery or chemo whichever that same doctor recommends.
Were mistakes made during the occupation of Iraq that cost thousands of American lives? Most certainly. But that is another issue that has nothing to do about the legitimacy of the invasion.

Did the Bush admin. Emphasize the stronger parts of their argument in favor of invading? Of course they did! This is what you do when making a case to a jury or to the American people. You have no obligation to argue both sides. There were plenty of opponents of the invasion to argue the other side.

Either way, there is ZERO evidence that the Bush Admin. ever deliberately and knowingly promoted false information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Bush Lied About Weapons of Mass Destruction (W.M.D.).

Bush Lied About "Attempts to Purchase" Yellow Cake Uranium in His State of The Union Speech.

Bush Lied About Biological Weapons.

Bush Lied About Chemical Weapons.

Your the liar, and not a very good one.

I need to post these again, cause this moron is a typical brainwashed hack. We have posted this a million times, but let me do it again and watch their classic double talk.





Who signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs before Bush took office?




What did the UN find according to their independent council? (UNSCOM) Glad you asked.

Saddam Hussein's Weapons Of Mass Destruction | Gunning For Saddam | FRONTLINE | PBS

Between 1991 and 1998 the IAEA conducted more than 1500 inspections. IAEA released a report in 1997, with updates in 1998 and 1999, which it believes offers a technically coherent picture of Iraq's nuclear program.

In summary, the IAEA report says that following the August 1990 invasion of Kuwait, Iraq launched a "crash program" to develop a nuclear weapon quickly by extracting weapons grade material from safe-guarded research reactor fuel. This project, if it had continued uninterrupted by the war, might have succeeded in producing a deliverable weapon by the end of 1992.[1]

The IAEA inspections revealed seven nuclear-related sites in Iraq. [2] The IAEA reports that all sensitive nuclear materials were removed, and that facilities and equipment were dismantled or destroyed. Activities uncovered and destroyed included:

an industrial scale complex for Electromagnetic Isotope Separation (EMIS), a process for producing enriched uranium. The complex was designed for the installation of 90 separators; before the Gulf War, eight were functional. If all separators had been installed, the plant could have produced 15 kg of highly enriched uranium per year, possibly enough for one nuclear weapon.

a large scale manufacturing and testing facility--the Al Furat Project--designed for the production of centrifuges, used in another method of uranium enrichment.

facilities and equipment for the production of weapons components.

computer simulations of nuclear weapons detonations

storage of large quantities of HMX high explosive used in nuclear weapons.

According to former U.N. inspector David Kay, Iraq spent over $10 billion during the 1980s in an attempt to enrich uranium and build a nuclear weapon. However, the Agency concludes that as of December, 1998, "There were no indications to suggest that Iraq was successful in its attempt to produce nuclear weapons," or "that there remains in Iraq any physical capability for the production of amounts of weapons-usable nuclear material of any practical significance." However, the IAEA did find that "Iraq was at, or close to, the threshold of success in such areas as the production of [highly enriched uranium] ... and the fabrication of the explosive package for a nuclear weapon." Despite the fact that the facilities and nuclear material had been destroyed or removed, as early as 1996 the IAEA concluded that "the know-how and expertise acquired by Iraqi scientists and engineers could provide an adequate base for reconstituting a nuclear-weapons-oriented program."

Nuclear physicist and Iraqi defector Khidhir Hamza agrees. He told FRONTLINE that Iraq did not relinquish certain critical components of the nuclear program to the inspectors, and that it retains the expertise necessary to build a nuclear weapon. He believes that Iraq may have one completed within the next couple of years.

Note: IAEA was allowed back into Iraq in January 2000 and again in January 2001. But its inspectors were blocked from full access inspections.


IRAQ'S BIOLOGICAL WEAPONS (BW) PROGRAM

Between 1991 and 1998, UN inspectors conducted more than 70 inspections into Iraq's biological warfare activities. In its 1999 final report to the U.N. Security Council, UNSCOM noted that Iraq's biological warfare program was "among the most secretive of its programs of weapons of mass destruction." It said that Iraq "took active steps" to conceal the program, including "inadequate disclosures, unilateral destruction, and concealment activities." Therefore, the Commission concluded, "it has not been possible to verify" Iraq's statements about the extent and nature of its biological weapons program.

A 58 page annex to the final report describes what the Commission was able to learn about the BW program, despite Iraq's concealment activities, and documents discrepancies between what Iraq claimed to have developed, or destroyed, and the physical evidence. Some of the findings include:

Extensive BW program: Iraq had an extensive BW program from 1973 until at least 1991. In mid-1995, Iraq admitted that it had weaponized BW agents, but claimed that the entire BW program had been in "obliterated" in 1991 and that all BW weapons had been destroyed and all bulk BW agents had been deactivated. The Commission found, however, that the evidence produced in support of this claim was not credible, and that Iraq "retained suitable growth media, BW facilities, production equipment, teams of expert personnel, and the essential technical knowledge" after 1991.

Bulk production: In July, 1995, Iraq acknowledged that between 1988 and 1991, it had produced two BW agents in bulk: botulinum toxin and Bacillus anthracis spores (anthrax). Iraq reported 19,180 liters of botulinum toxin (10-20 fold concentrated) and 8445 liters of Bacillus anthracis spores (10 fold concentrated).

UNSCOM found, however, that "bulk warfare agent production appears to be considerably understated," given the resources available to Iraq's BW program, including growth media and fermenter capacity. The Commission said that the production rate of Botulinum toxin could be as much as double the stated amount, and 3 times greater than that stated for Bacillus anthracis spores.

Iraq claimed that it unilaterally destroyed more than 7500 liters of the Botulinum toxin and 3412 liters of Bacillus anthracis spores in 1991; UNSCOM noted that there was not evidence to support quantities claimed to be destroyed. The report concludes "the Commission has no confidence that all bulk agents have been destroyed... and that a BW capability does not exist in Iraq."

Iraq also claims to have produced lesser quantities of clostridium perfringens spores, ricin, and wheat cover smut.

BW Warheads: Iraq claimed to have produced 25 Al-Hussein missile warheads and filled them with BW agents. The Commission found that there was no credible evidence to show that only 25 missiles were produced and filled. Iraq declared that the 25 missiles were unilaterally destroyed; the Commission found enough physical evidence to account for the declared quantities of BW warheads, but the location of the remnants were inconsistent with Iraq's story.

BW bombs: Iraq declared that 200 R-400 aerial bombs were manufactured for BW purposes, but acknowledged that the numbers of bombs filled with particular agents (100 with botulinum toxin, 50 with bacillus anthracis spores, and 7 with aflatoxin) were "guesses." UNSCOM did find evidence of the destruction of some BW bombs at the site declared by Iraq, but found that the remnants account for less than one third of the bombs Iraq claims to have destroyed. In addition, UNSCOM found evidence of R-400A bombs carrying BW at an airfield where no BW weapons were declared.

Aircraft drop tanks: Iraq claimed that it produced 4 aircraft drop tanks to disseminate BW agents, and was developing a pilotless aircraft that could carry the tanks, holding either BW or chemical weapons, and release the toxins at a preset time. UNSCOM found that there was no evidence corroborate that only 4 were produced, and noted that interviews indicated that 12 were planned. Remnants of only three destroyed tanks were recovered. UNSCOM also rejected the evidence offered by Iraq--a letter thanking the project workers--that the pilotless aircraft project was shut down.

Aerosol Generators: Iraq developed aerosol generators for the dispersal of BW agents by modifying helicopter-borne commercial chemical insecticide disseminators. Although Iraq claimed the devices were ineffective, UNSCOM received documentation that they were successfully field tested. Interview evidence suggests that there were 12 devices produced; none were destroyed by UNSCOM.

Remaining Bacterial Growth Media: UNSCOM determined that there remained substantial bacterial growth media imported into Iraq which remains unaccounted for: 460 kg. of casien; 80 kg. of thioglocollate broth; 520 kg. of yeast extract; and 1100 kg of peptone. The report says that "the amounts that are 'missing' are significant, and would be sufficient to produce quantities of agent comparable to that already declared by Iraq."


IRAQ'S CHEMICAL WEAPONS (CW) PROGRAM

UNSCOM was more successful in its pursuit of Iraq's CW program largely because Iraq was more cooperative with its disclosures. The final report notes that a "significant number" of chemical weapons, their components, and related equipment were destroyed under UNSCOM supervision between 1991 and 1997. In addition, the report found:

Extensive CW program: Iraq acknowledged that it carried out a large scale CW program between 1982 and 1990. It claims that more than 50% of its chemical weapons stocks were consumed during the 1980s, and that the majority of its production facilities were destroyed by aerial bombing during the Gulf War.

Bulk CW agents: Iraq said that it produced 3,859 tons of CW agents during the entire implementation of its CW program, and that 3,315 tons of these agents were weaponized. Agents produced in large quantities included mustard, tabun, and sarin.

According to Iraq, 80% of the weaponized CW agents were consumed between 1982 and 1988. In addition, they claim to have unilaterally discarded 130 tons of non-weaponized CW agents during the 1980s. UNSCOM found that these numbers could not be verified.

After the Gulf War, Iraq claimed that it had 412.5 tons of CW agents remaining. Four hundred eleven tons were destroyed under UNSCOM supervision; 1.5 tons of the CW agent VX remain unaccounted for.

Special Munitions: Iraq claimed that between 1982 and 1988, 100,000 munitions filled with CW agents were consumed or disposed of. UNSCOM found that this number could not be verified.

After the Gulf war, Iraq declared that there remained over 56,000 special munitions which could carry either CW or BW agents (22,000 filled, 34,000 unfilled). These munitions are all accounted for. They were either destroyed or converted for conventional weapons purposes.

Iraq claimed that there were 42,000 special munitions destroyed in the Gulf War. UNSCOM was unable to verify that number, and found that the destruction of 2,000 unfilled munitions remains uncertain, and 550 filled munitions remain unaccounted for.

Iraq claimed that it unilaterally destroyed 29,000 special munitions; UNSCOM found that of these, 100 filled munitions remain unaccounted for.
-------------------------------

I do not have the time to highlight all of important parts.

Liberals keep getting destroyed by truth.

 

[Theowl32]

Let us know when a legit government or the UN files war crimes against Bush for the OBVIOUS lies that they claim exist.

LOL.

I never did get the answer the other day. Why didn't Obama conduct an independent investigation LIKE ALL MORON LIBERALS were expecting him to do? Especially when he had that super majority?

I will tell you what never occurs to these know it all academic types who know nothing about logistics. It never occurs to any of them that perhaps there is intel that we will never know about and Obama became privy to only after he became president.

Hence the reasons he did not conduct an investigation, the reason he never closed down GTMO and the reason he carried out drone strikes on terrorists that they claimed did not exist.

However, of course since Obama needs to placate is perpetually naive moronic base, he lies to them nonstop. Especially in election years where the democrats expands and edifies their stupid base who can never be convinced of anything.

The funny thing is how they really believe they always know more than the intel that none of us are privy to. It is hilarious watching them squirm and scratch while they cannot explain why Bush was not investigated like they thought when Obama took office.

 

[rightwinger]

Let us know when a legit government or the UN files war crimes against Bush for the OBVIOUS lies that they claim exist.

LOL.

I never did get the answer the other day. Why didn't Obama conduct an independent investigation LIKE ALL MORON LIBERALS were expecting him to do? Especially when he had that super majority?

I will tell you what never occurs to these know it all academic types who know nothing about logistics. It never occurs to any of them that perhaps there is intel that we will never know about and Obama became privy to only after he became president.

Hence the reasons he did not conduct an investigation, the reason he never closed down GTMO and the reason he carried out drone strikes on terrorists that they claimed did not exist.

However, of course since Obama needs to placate is perpetually naive moronic base, he lies to them nonstop. Especially in election years where the democrats expands and edifies their stupid base who can never be convinced of anything.

The funny thing is how they really believe they always know more than the intel that none of us are privy to. It is hilarious watching them squirm and scratch while they cannot explain why Bush was not investigated like they thought when Obama took office.

The reason Democrats did not bring the Bush administration up on charges was because they did not want to drag the country through the mud. Unlike Republicans who kept a Whitewater investigation going for seven years or impeached over a blowjob, Democrats realize what these investigations do to the country

 

[Peach]

Let us know when a legit government or the UN files war crimes against Bush for the OBVIOUS lies that they claim exist.

LOL.

I never did get the answer the other day. Why didn't Obama conduct an independent investigation LIKE ALL MORON LIBERALS were expecting him to do? Especially when he had that super majority?

I will tell you what never occurs to these know it all academic types who know nothing about logistics. It never occurs to any of them that perhaps there is intel that we will never know about and Obama became privy to only after he became president.

Hence the reasons he did not conduct an investigation, the reason he never closed down GTMO and the reason he carried out drone strikes on terrorists that they claimed did not exist.

However, of course since Obama needs to placate is perpetually naive moronic base, he lies to them nonstop. Especially in election years where the democrats expands and edifies their stupid base who can never be convinced of anything.

The funny thing is how they really believe they always know more than the intel that none of us are privy to. It is hilarious watching them squirm and scratch while they cannot explain why Bush was not investigated like they thought when Obama took office.

The reason Democrats did not bring the Bush administration up on charges was because they did not want to drag the country through the mud. Unlike Republicans who kept a Whitewater investigation going for seven years or impeached over a blowjob, Democrats realize what these investigations do to the country

Neither here nor there now. We did go in, and the Hunt For the Man Who Threatened Poppy is again today's nightmare.........or so it seems.

 

[Camp]

Wikileaks: Obama Administration Secretly Worked To Prevent Prosecution of War Crimes By The Bush Administration | JONATHAN TURLEY