Re: Liar Liar Pants On Fire Dept: Moller

Fred the Red Shirt <fredfighter@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 7, 5:44 am, Mark Hickey <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Fred the Red Shirt <fredfigh...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Sep 6, 1:35 am, Mark Hickey <m...@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/documents/cluster6mar.pdf

I think it's kinda funny that the best you can find in the report
supports my position (that no one could verify that Iraq had actually
destroyed their WMDs and the production facilities, other than those
that we destroyed or the minority that there was actual evidence for
the destruction).

False.

The report leaves no doubt whatsoever that the
production facilities were destroyed.

From the UNMOVIC document (talking about the Iraqi ban on inspectors
from '98 through 2002:

"Four years without inspection is a significant period. Given the
history of Iraq?s proscribed weapons programmes (see Appendix),
Iraq potentially could have made considerable advancements in that
time, particularly in the biological and chemical fields. For
example, within a period of about three years, Iraq built most of
its chemical weapons plant at Al Muthanna and went into
large-scale production of a variety of CW agents and munitions.
And it took just two years to build its BW production plant at Al
Hakam and produce over 27,000 litres of BW agent. Plants of such
a size would of course be easy to detect, but they could also be
disguised as dual purpose plants now producing some civilian
product. In fact, that is exactly how Iraq presented its BW
production facilities to UNSCOM inspectors from 1991 to 1995.
Smaller plants and underground or mobile facilities would be
harder to detect.

UNMOVIC has received many reports suggesting that Iraq has been
engaged in a range of proscribed activities during the absence of
inspectors. The information has been of a variety of types, from
general assertions to detailed and precise intelligence. Some of
it has been presented publicly, much of it has not. It has
included overhead imagery, reports from defectors and other
sources such as communications intercepts."

Lingering doubts that some fifteen-year old materials
might not have been destroyed at the time and place
reported to UNSCOM years earlier are mitigated by
the short shelf-life of Iraqi WMD.

Bzzzzt... but thanks for playing:

"Based on all the available evidence, the strong presumption is that
about 10,000 litres of anthrax was not destroyed and may still
exist. As a liquid suspension, anthrax spores produced 15 years
ago could still be viable today if properly stored. Iraq
experimented with the drying of anthrax simulants and if anthrax
had been dried, then it could be stored indefinitely."

And that's just one example. There are a LOT more in the document...
but this post is gonna get long enough without guilding the lily.

Which WAS the whole point, after all.

Indeed. That Iraq was not a threat to the US, was
exacltly the point. In fact, Irraq was not a credible
threatto any of its neighbors either.

Kuwait and Iran must be so pleased that hundreds of thousands of
people didn't die in Iraqi invasions, as are the Kurds who just
realized that they really weren't gassed to death. And that little
thing about writing checks for the benefit of suicide bombers'
families - I'm sure Israel didn't have any negative reactions to that
- kinda like we really don't get all that upset when Iraq tried to
assassinate GHWB.

I mean, it's not like the guy wasn't a sadistic vehemently anti-US
dictator with a history of producing and using WMDs or anything,
right?

I think those who've actually read the entire report have seen what
they need to see,

Rather, you see what you want to see.

I see what's there. I'm not sure what you see.

and now realize that the whole "Bush lied" mantra is
just another wild fabrication when it comes to the disposition of
Iraq's WMDs prior to the invasion. Virtually every intelligence
agency in the civilized world came to the same conclusions as
UNMOVIC...

Really? How did you become privy to the conclusions reached
by EVERY intelligence agency in the world?

I have contacts. ;-) And I said "civilized world" - that narrows it
down considerably. Again, from the UNMOVIC document:

"As mentioned above, UNMOVIC has received intelligence report from a
number of governments. Below are a few examples with some
indications of the use UNMOVIC has made of the information,
although, for obvious operational reasons, not all of the details
are disclosed."

The document then goes on to describe the intel UNMOVIC received in
regard to:

Mobile BW agent production facilities
Underground Facilities
Unmanned Aerial Vehicles

In 1995, Saddam Hussein's son -in law, Hussein
Kamel al-Majid, who directed Iraq's clandestine
weapons program defected. He claimed that Iraq
had destroyed all of its WMD stockpiles. Later
he was persuaded to return to Iraq, where he was
executed.

Wrong again. Not only did he not say that they had destroyed all the
WMDs, his testimony directly caused Iraq to be forced to admit lots of
new WMD programs they'd previously denied. From the document:

"Lieutenant-General Hussein Kamal?s defection also precipitated new
disclosures by Iraq concerning its WMD programmes, particularly in
the biological field. Subsequently, in 1996 and 1997, Iraq
provided new biological, chemical and missile declarations
describing its proscribed programmes. UNSCOM continued its
attempts to verify these new declarations, until the end of
inspections in December 1998. Its conclusion, at that time, was
that there remained many significant outstanding issues, and these
were described in a report to the Security Council, S/1999/94 of
29 January 1999, and in the report of the Amorim Panel of 30 March
1999 (S/1999/356)."

So y'see, as hard as it may be to believe, Iraq actually has a history
of lying about its WMD programs. Go figger.

Some years before the 2003 invasion, Iraqi Foreign Minister
Naji Sabri became a mole for US intelligence. He confirmed
what al-Majid had said--Iraq had no WMD.

I don't recall the name, but would ask why you would trust the Iraqi
Foreign Minister over the UNMOVIC report. Oh, and if he "said what
al-Majid had said", he would have spilled the beans on previously
secret WMD programs.

The US also had a third source, code-names 'curveball',
an Iraqi exile living in Germany. Curveball claimed to have
worked in the Iraqi BW program and to have intimate knowledge
of the Iraqi CW program. Despite the evidence that he had
not left Germany for fifteen years and the fact that German
intelligence had characterized him as a 'crazy drunk'

He was only one source. In a regime like Saddam's there aren't all
that many opportunities to get information... he was good at enforcing
absolute loyalty, if nothing else. Heck, the Germans missed the
build-up for the invasion at Normandy - how much harder do you suppose
it is to get credible information about producing and hiding WMDs in
an area the size of California?

The October, 2002 NIE on Iraq, or to be more accurate, the
declassified portions of it, rely entirely on Curveball and
ignore the other two sources.

I already showed that the information provided by your "first source"
was 180 degrees out of synch with what you claim, and that your
"second source" was an Iraqi government official (do ya' suppose the
Iraqis would have bought anything Rumsfield told 'em?).

Why do YOU suppose that is?

Because you're getting your history from a tainted source.

that there was no reason to believe or trust that Iraq had
in fact destroyed their WMDs and production capabilities
(as clearly> evidenced by the quotes you provide from the
report below).

The report leaves no doubt as to the destruction of production
facilities and makes it clear that unresolved issues are
SPECULATIVE .

Duh. As in "we couldn't find the stuff, but we have every reason to
believe it exists". The report clearly acknowledges that they do know
what Iraq destroyed that there was ACTUAL EVIDENCE for - but are left
trying to prove a negative on the rest.

I'll let the report speak for itself - I don't really have anything
else to add.

Before you go, could you please point to the part of report that
supports your earlier claim that the report that blows my clain of
unfettered access with UNMOVIC out of the air?

OK, you asked for it... just some examples:

"For the period 1998 to present, UNMOVIC now faces the same
situation in all three disciplines that UNSCOM and the IAEA faced
in 1991 regarding biological and nuclear weapons issues. There are
no leads, such as stocks of proscribed items, or WMD production
facilities for UNMOVIC to inspect. Instead, UNMOVIC must verify
the absence of any new activities or proscribed items, new or
retained. The onus is clearly on Iraq to provide the requisite
information or devise other ways in which UNMOVIC can gain
confidence that Iraq?s declarations are correct and comprehensive.
At the same time, UNMOVIC will avail itself of intelligence
reports, supplier information, selective searches for documents
and material, aerial imagery from satellites and different
aircraft platforms, interviews, remote monitoring with video and
other sensors, etc. to gain information that could be used to
evaluate various aspects of Iraq?s declarations."

"Although there have been some inconsistencies and discrepancies in
Iraq?s semi-annual declarations, the largest failing is the lack
of information on suppliers. UNMOVIC has noted in the biological
area about 40 cases where insufficient information is provided on
the supplier, and in the chemical area, about 70. In the missile
area however there are almost 500 examples of imports where the
supplier has been inadequately identified. On many occasions the
imports are simply referred to as coming from the ?local market?
or from ?Iraq? when it is clear that the items actually
originated from overseas. In such cases, the actual supplier and
country of origin have not been identified. Items have included
gyroscopes, chemicals and laboratory equipment. There is evidence
to indicate that many of components for Iraq?s declared RPVs and
missiles originated from overseas and the supplier has been
inadequately identified."

"Iraq lists less than 132 ?experts, specialists, and technicians,?
to use Iraq?s term, as having worked in the entire chemical
weapons programme. UNMOVIC databases, on the other hand,
indicate that over 325 individuals were engaged in chemical
weapons related research or had responsible positions associated
with agent production at the Muthanna State Establishment
alone."

"Based on the above considerations, UNMOVIC has developed some ideas
of the type of information that could assist. UNMOVIC
suggestions of required Iraqi actions include:

? Fully declare the names of individuals who have been associated
with Iraq?s proscribed programmes.
? Provide the employment records, from 1998 to present, of the
above individuals.
? Facilitate the granting of interviews in private to UNMOVIC by
individuals identified by UNMOVIC as being relevant to the
resolution of disarmament issues in Iraq.
? Provide complete supplier information for items Iraq has declared
purchased from the ?local market?. Most such items have been
clearly identified through inspections as foreign made and have
not been processed through the UN export/import mechanism. The
information to be provided should include the full name and
address of the foreign supplier(s) and all intermediary
persons, banks, companies, government institutions, etc., both
Iraqi and foreign, involved.
? Provide full cooperation in the establishment by UNMOVIC of a
system of road/rail traffic monitoring in Iraq and facilitate
its implementation.
? Explain, with credible evidence, the purposes for which the
various RPV/UAV platforms were created and provide the full
names, Iraqi and foreign, of all organizations, institutions
etc., and the associated persons involved.

Also, please refer us to the parts that cast doubt on the conclusion
that the Iraqi production facilities were destroyed and not rebuilt?

You're a glutton for punishment.

:it took just two years to build its BW production plant at Al Hakam
and produce over 27,000 litres of BW agent. Plants of such a
size would of course be easy to detect, but they could also be
disguised as dual purpose plants now producing some civilian
product. In fact, that is exactly how Iraq presented its BW
production facilities to UNSCOM inspectors from 1991 to 1995.
Smaller plants and underground or mobile facilities would be
harder to detect.
UNMOVIC has received many reports suggesting that Iraq has been
engaged in a range of proscribed activities during the absence
of inspectors. The information has been of a variety of types,
from general assertions to detailed and precise intelligence.
Some of it has been presented publicly, much of it has not. It
has included overhead imagery, reports from defectors and
other sources such as communications intercepts.

"Several governments have provided UNMOVIC with information
relating to truck-mounted BW agent production facilities. The
reports, which are reasonably consistent, refer to a series
of usually three large articulated trucks that together
comprise a complete, but small, biological factory."

"Like mobile facilities, any dedicated underground CW or BW
facility could also have been dismantled prior to
inspection. UNMOVIC does not dismiss the possibility that
such facilities exist and will continue to investigate
reports as appropriate. Given the vast number of potential
underground ?sites? capable of hosting CW or BW production
or storage facilities in Iraq, inspections in this area will
have to be dynamic and rely on specific intelligence
information."

"There are a number of chemical and biological facilities or
production units that could be used for both proscribed and
non-proscribed purposes. In order to verify and monitor the
status of such facilities, information such as original
documents concerning budgets, the employment of certain
individuals, planning, imports and log books of key items
of equipment should be provided to UNMOVIC."

Mark "facts is facts" Hickey

The fact is that you have not presented evidence that Iraq
was a threat.

Ummmm, we must be reading two entirely different documents, then.

I trust the above answers your questions. I sincerely hope that you
now understand the realities of mid-2003 better than the spin-meisters
want you to. You were pretty much singing out of the party handbook
there, which is sad. To have a meaningful political discussion, you
have to start from the basis of absolute, cold, cliinical fact and not
from bumper sticker slogans.

Mark "always start by reading the documents" Hickey
.

Relevant Pages

  • Everything is fine just dont look behind the screen
    ... Missing Oil Using an average of $50 a barrel, the report said the ... including the possibility that Iraq ... has been consistently overstating its oil production. ...
    (soc.culture.filipino)
  • Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, US Study Says
    ... Billions in Oil Missing in Iraq, ... American government report. ... been consistently overstating its oil production. ...
    (soc.culture.iraq)
  • Re: Phase II Report on the use of intelligence leading up to the Iraq War to be released.
    ... detailed critique of the Bush administration's claims in the buildup ... to war with Iraq, congressional officials said. ... President Bush and other administration officials that proved to be ... But officials say the report reaches a mixed verdict on the key ...
    (sci.military.naval)
  • OT - Six Questions on 9/11
    ... As 9/11, and the report of the commission charged to investigate it, ... more about the feckless invasion of Iraq, ... occupation of Afghanistan, the report suggests, without explicitly so ... running a major war in which he was a participant. ...
    (alt.sports.basketball.nba.la-lakers)
  • all doubt removed
    ... CAMPAIGN, following 9/11, to get us to invade Iraq, was based on propaganda, ... Saddam Hussein had no relationship with al Qaeda, ... The report, one of two newly declassified reports released by the Senate ... were issued as Bush seeks to address flagging public support for the Iraq ...
    (alt.politics)