• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Defense Intelligence Agency Experts Conclude Iraqi Trailers were for Hydrogen Production, not Bio Weapons

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
But don't worry, thier is no way that it can absolutely be proved that these trailers "were not" used to make bioweapons however unlikely based on the actual evidence we have...so we can still claim them as evidence.

I mean McGyver could make a nuclear reactor out of duct tape, cardboard, and his swiss army knife, so who knows.
 

Czar

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
28,510
0
0
but didnt bush say that they had found eveidence of chemical and biological production after they found the trailers?
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
No Bush said we found the trailers . . . if he did say we found actual weapons then he just misspoke. You liberals need to stop rewriting history . . .
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
You people just don't get it. Prove to me that these trailers were not to be used for bioweapons production? You can't can you. I don't care what these so called "experts" say. You can't prove otherwise.
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Remember the aluminum tubes. The Department of Energy, the DIA, and the IAEA all had thier so called experts say that the tubes were unsuitable for Nuclear enrichment, but were excactly right for rockets unless the Iraqis were the stupidest most inneficient people in the world.

BUT CAN YOU PROVE THAT JUST MAYBE THEY BOUGHT THE WRONG TYPES OF TUBES WITH THE INTENT OF COMPLETELY MELTING THEM DOWN AND REDOING THEM INTO THE RIGHT TYPE???? CAN YOU PROVE OTHERWISE??? SO THEN IT IS STILL NOT OUT OF THE RANGE OF POSSIBILITY..
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
If you can't prove the weren't for weapons use. Then please kindly STFU.
 
Feb 3, 2001
5,156
0
0
Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
You liberals need to stop rewriting history . . .
Listen, can you take a second and look up the word "Liberal" in the dictionary? See, I realize that those who today call themselves "Liberals" are really anything BUT Liberals (mostly they're Socialists) but seeing's I consider myself to be an *actual* Liberal (You know, by DICTIONARY definition....) it grates on my nerves. Not picking on you, people commonly fail to understand what Liberal or Conservative actually MEAN these days, but I think you'll be surprised at the dictionary definition :)

You really should read Virginia Postrel's book "The Future and its Enemies."

Jason
 

CaptnKirk

Lifer
Jul 25, 2002
10,054
0
71
Of course the trailers were in fact the weapons.
Hook them up to a truck and drive them over people.
People killed by being crushed when they are run over.
Trailers are effective weapon, clean them up & refuel the trucks.
Go out and find more people to run over, reusable weaponry.
 

BaliBabyDoc

Lifer
Jan 20, 2001
10,737
0
0
DragonMasterAlex,
I'm kidding . . . liberal and conservative are essentially meaningless terms in American politics. They have little explicit meaning beyond a given political wanks agenda for the moment. Anyway, it doesn't matter what DIA or State says about the trailers b/c the liberation of Iraq was performed for just reasons under implicit authorization by the UN. You liberals need to stop rewriting history . . .
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.


 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
I remember posting about the State department experts problems with the bioweapons assertion, and someone telling me that the State Department was not an intel agency, and they would wait until the DIA came back and said they weren't. Who was that?
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
The only piece of the puzzle missing is the WMD Bush used as his excuse for invading Iraq.

Although it's not really a missing piece since it never existed.

 

tnitsuj

Diamond Member
May 22, 2003
5,446
0
76
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

A truck with a hydrogen tank would have been far more practical for filling up ballons. Hydrogen gas is easily obtained the oil refining process. And for that it does not make sense to have these trailers use from ineffecient hydrogen production. As I said, I dont think all the peices of puzzle are available at this point.
 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

A truck with a hydrogen tank would have been far more practical for filling up ballons. Hydrogen gas is easily obtained the oil refining process. And for that it does not make sense to have these trailers use from ineffecient hydrogen production. As I said, I dont think all the peices of puzzle are available at this point.

This would have required them to return to the refinery for refilling. The trailers found were designed for the production of hydrogen which would have been much more efficient.
 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

A truck with a hydrogen tank would have been far more practical for filling up ballons. Hydrogen gas is easily obtained the oil refining process. And for that it does not make sense to have these trailers use from ineffecient hydrogen production. As I said, I dont think all the peices of puzzle are available at this point.

This would have required them to return to the refinery for refilling. The trailers found were designed for the production of hydrogen which would have been much more efficient.
You can fill up quite a few ballons with a hydrogen tank that is 45 feet long and 12 feet tall....

 

BOBDN

Banned
May 21, 2002
2,579
0
0
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

A truck with a hydrogen tank would have been far more practical for filling up ballons. Hydrogen gas is easily obtained the oil refining process. And for that it does not make sense to have these trailers use from ineffecient hydrogen production. As I said, I dont think all the peices of puzzle are available at this point.

This would have required them to return to the refinery for refilling. The trailers found were designed for the production of hydrogen which would have been much more efficient.
You can fill up quite a few ballons with a hydrogen tank that is 45 feet long and 12 feet tall....
Or one balloon that is 45 feet long and 12 feet tall.

 

charrison

Lifer
Oct 13, 1999
17,033
1
81
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: BOBDN
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
Originally posted by: tnitsuj
Originally posted by: charrison
But it had not previously been known that a majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons.

"The team has decided that in their minds, there could be another use, for inefficient hydrogen production, most likely for balloons," a Defense Department official said.
How sure are they?
Nice selective reading there. They didn't say they were unsure that the trailers were used for Hydrogen production.

They seem to be pretty sure that the trailers were for making hydrogen. What they are unsure of is the use for said hydrogen.

"The majority of the Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering team had come to disagree with the central finding of the white paper: that the trailers were used for making biological weapons. "

That seems pretty sure. Especially since two independant agencies have now come to this conclusion.

I will take the unnamed source from the DIA saying these things could inefficiently make hydrogen gas. But why would these even be needed with Iraq's oil refining capability? There still seems to be some peices of the puzzle missing.
Well seeing as how they were mobile, that does fit in with the idea of using them to fill balloons for target pratice as opposed to having big tankers full of compressed hydrogen rolling around..but I am not an expert on such matters.

You do also realize that as you harp on innefficiency of hydrogen procution, the lack of steam sterlization equipment means that no matter how inefficient they would be for producing hydrogen, they would be orders of magnitude more inneficient and dangerous for producing bioweapons?? The explanation given by the CIA was that they used chemical sterilization (WAY more difficult, expensive, and dangerous, read inefficient) or they hadn't found that other trailer yet.

A few more pieces of the puzzle missing thier indeed. Of ocurse you ahd no problem with those much larger missing pieces of the puzzle when things supported your viewpoint.

I tend to believe it when independant technical experts from the DIA and State with presumably no political agenda say that something wasn't used for a particular purpose which seems to the be consensus. The technical evidence is pointing away from the bioweapons theory which has been louydly trumpeted by the politics to support thier cause. It appears the only way these trailers or the alumninum tubes were used for weapons production would be if the Iraqs were complete idiots who did things 100% the oposite of the way anyone else did it. Of course you can believe that if it fits your politics and paranoia.

A truck with a hydrogen tank would have been far more practical for filling up ballons. Hydrogen gas is easily obtained the oil refining process. And for that it does not make sense to have these trailers use from ineffecient hydrogen production. As I said, I dont think all the peices of puzzle are available at this point.

This would have required them to return to the refinery for refilling. The trailers found were designed for the production of hydrogen which would have been much more efficient.
You can fill up quite a few ballons with a hydrogen tank that is 45 feet long and 12 feet tall....
Or one balloon that is 45 feet long and 12 feet tall.
I really did not think you were that stupid, but I stand corrected.
 

DealMonkey

Lifer
Nov 25, 2001
13,137
1
0
This is pathetic. Obviously these trailers are not the evidence of WMD that Bush pointed to. I recall an interview where he declared that "...we already found the WMD in Iraq..." and pointed to the trailers. Absolutely pathetic. He may as well just point to a camel with a rocket strapped to its ass and call it an unmanned drone capable of delivering biological weapons.

MSNBC

In early June, two strangely outfitted trailers were discovered that seemed to fit the description of the ?mobile biological weapons labs? Powell accused the Iraqis of operating in a February speech to the U.N. Security Council. No weapons material was found in the trailers, however, and within two weeks, unnamed U.S. intelligence officials had told the Washington Post that the administration suppressed analysts? reports that concluded the trailers were likely to have been just what the Iraqis claimed they were: support trailers used to inflate weather balloons.
 

freegeeks

Diamond Member
May 7, 2001
5,460
1
71
you are all f*cking whining commies. What is up with you liberals??

yes we haven't found any WMD, so what, we liberated the Iraqis and gave them democracy.
you guys are a disgrace for "the land of the free and the honey"

move to france
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY