So it looks like Saddam did have WMD's after all

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
I'm not sure what bothers me more. The fact Saddam did have them, or the fact they have mostly disappeared. While I certainly dont like the idea of Saddam having them I think the idea that they are on the loose is even worse.

It does however give even more proof to the idea that those sitting around chanting "Buch lied, people died" are nothing more then blind fools.

Text

Shattering Conventional Wisdom About Saddam's WMD's
By John Loftus
FrontPageMagazine.com | Friday, November 16, 2007

Finally, there are some definitive answers to the mystery of the missing WMD. Civilian volunteers, mostly retired intelligence officers belonging to the non-partisan IntelligenceSummit.org, have been poring over the secret archives captured from Saddam Hussein. The inescapable conclusion is this: Saddam really did have WMD after all, but not in the way the Bush administration believed. A 9,000 word research paper with citations to each captured document has been posted online at LoftusReport.com, along with translations of the captured Iraqi documents, courtesy of Mr. Ryan Mauro and his friends.

This Iraqi document research has been supplemented with satellite photographs and dozens of interviews, among them David Gaubatz who risked radiation exposure to locate Saddam?s underwater WMD warehouses , and John Shaw, whose brilliant detective work solved the puzzle of where the WMD went. Both have contributed substantially to solving one of the most difficult mysteries of our decade.

The absolutists on either side of the WMD debate will be more than a bit chagrinned at these disclosures. The documents show a much more complex history than previously suspected. The "Bush lied, people died" chorus has insisted that Saddam had no WMD whatsoever after 1991 - and thus that WMD was no good reason for the war. The Neocon diehards insist that, as in Raiders of the Lost Ark, the treasure-trove is still out there somewhere, buried under the sand dunes of Iraq. Each side is more than a little bit wrong about Saddam's WMD, and each side is only a little bit right about what happened to it.

The gist of the new evidence is this: roughly one quarter of Saddam's WMD was destroyed under UN pressure during the early to mid 1990's. Saddam sold approximately another quarter of his weapons stockpile to his Arab neighbors during the mid to late 1990's. The Russians insisted on removing another quarter in the last few months before the war. The last remaining WMD, the contents of Saddam's nuclear weapons labs, were still inside Iraq on the day when the coalition forces arrived in 2003. His nuclear weapons equipment was hidden in enormous underwater warehouses beneath the Euphrates River. Saddam?s entire nuclear inventory was later stolen from these warehouses right out from under the Americans? noses. The theft of the unguarded Iraqi nuclear stockpile is perhaps, the worst scandal of the war, suggesting a level of extreme incompetence and gross dereliction of duty that makes the Hurricane Katrina debacle look like a model of efficiency.

Without pointing fingers at the Americans, the Israeli government now believes that Saddam Hussein?s nuclear stockpiles have ended up in weapons dumps in Syria. Debkafile, a somewhat reliable private Israeli intelligence service, has recently published a report claiming that the Syrians were importing North Korean plutonium to be mixed with Saddam?s enriched uranium. Allegedly, the Syrians were close to completing a warhead factory next to Saddam?s WMD dump in Deir al Zour, Syria to produce hundreds, if not thousands, of super toxic ?dirty bombs? that would pollute wherever they landed in Israel for the next several thousands of years. Debka alleged that it was this combination factory/WMD dump site which was the target of the recent Israeli air strike in Deir al Zour province..

Senior sources in the Israeli government have privately confirmed to me that the recent New York Times articles and satellite photographs about the Israeli raid on an alleged Syrian nuclear target in Al Tabitha, Syria were of the completely wrong location. Armed with this knowledge, I searched Google Earth satellite photos for the rest of the province of Deir al Zour for a site that would match the unofficial Israeli descriptions: camouflaged black factory building, next to a military ammunition dump, between an airport and an orchard. There is a clear match in only one location, Longitude 35 degrees, 16 minutes 49.31 seconds North, Latitude 40 degrees, 3 minutes, 29.97 seconds East. Analysts and members of the public are invited to determine for themselves whether this was indeed the weapons dump for Saddam?s WMD.

Photos of this complex taken after the Israel raid appear to show that all of the buildings, earthern blast berms, bunkers, roads, even the acres of blackened topsoil, have all been dug up and removed. All that remains are what appear to be smoothed over bomb craters. Of course, that is not of itself definitive proof, but it is extremely suspicious.

It should be noted that the American interrogators had accurate information about a possible Deir al Zour location shortly after the war, but ignored it:

"An Iraqi dissident going by the name of "Abu Abdallah" claims that on March 10, 2003, 50 trucks arrived in Deir Al-Zour, Syria after being loaded in Baghdad. ?Abdallah approached his friend who was hesitant to confirm the WMD shipment, but did after Abdallah explained what his sources informed him of. The friend told him not to tell anyone about the shipment."

These interrogation reports should be re-evaluated in light of the recently opened Iraqi secret archives, which we submit are the best evidence. But the captured document evidence should not be overstated. It must be emphasized that there is no one captured Saddam document which mentions both the possession of WMD and the movement to Syria.

Moreover, many of Saddam's own tapes and documents concerning chemical and biological weapons are ambiguous. When read together as a mosaic whole, Saddam's secret files certainly make a persuasive case of massive WMD acquisition right up to a few months before the war. Not only was he buying banned precursors for nerve gas, he was ordering the chemicals to make Zyklon B, the Nazis favorite gas at Auschwitz. However odious and well documented his purchases in 2002, there is no direct evidence of any CW or BW actually remaining inside Iraq on the day the war started in 2003. As stated in more detail in my full report, the British, Ukrainian and American secret services all believed that the Russians had organized a last minute evacuation of CW and BW stockpiles from Baghdad to Syria.

We know from Saddam?s documents that huge quantities of CW and BW were in fact produced, and there is no record of their destruction. But absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Therefore, at least as to chemical and biological weapons, the evidence is compelling, but not conclusive. There is no one individual document or audiotape that contains a smoking gun.

There is no ambiguity, however, about captured tape ISGQ-2003-M0007379, in which Saddam is briefed on his secret nuclear weapons project. This meeting clearly took place in 2002 or afterwards: almost a decade after the State Department claimed that Saddam had abandoned his nuclear weapons research.

Moreover the tape describes a laser enrichment process for uranium that had never been known by the UN inspectors to even exist in Iraq, and Saddam's nuclear briefers on the tape were Iraqi scientists who had never been on any weapons inspector?s list. The tape explicitly discusses how civilian plasma research could be used as a cover for military plasma research necessary to build a hydrogen bomb.

When this tape came to the attention of the International Intelligence Summit, a non-profit, non-partisan educational forum focusing on global intelligence affairs, the organization asked the NSA to verify the voiceprints of Saddam and his cronies, invited a certified translator to present Saddam?s nuclear tapes to the public, and then invited leading intelligence analysts to comment.

At the direct request of the Summit, President Bush promptly overruled his national intelligence adviser, John Negroponte, a career State Department man, and ordered that the rest of the captured Saddam tapes and documents be reviewed as rapidly as possible. The Intelligence Summit asked that Saddam's tapes and documents be posted on a public website so that Arabic-speaking volunteers could help with the translation and analysis.

At first, the public website seemed like a good idea. Another document was quickly discovered, dated November 2002, describing an expensive plan to remove radioactive contamination from an isotope production building. The document cites the return of UNMOVIC inspectors as the reason for cleaning up the evidence of radioactivity. This is not far from a smoking gun: there were not supposed to be any nuclear production plants in Iraq in 2002.

Then a barrage of near-smoking guns opened up. Document after document from Saddam's files was posted unread on the public website, each one describing how to make a nuclear bomb in more detail than the last. These documents, dated just before the war, show that Saddam had accumulated just about every secret there was for the construction of nuclear weapons. The Iraqi intelligence files contain so much accurate information on the atom bomb that the translators? public website had to be closed for reasons of national security.

If Saddam had nuclear weapons facilities, where was he hiding them? Iraqi informants showed US investigators where Saddam had constructed huge underwater storage facilities beneath the Euphrates River. The tunnel entrances were still sealed with tons of concrete. The US investigators who approached the sealed entrances were later determined to have been exposed to radiation. Incredibly, their reports were lost in the postwar confusion, and Saddam?s underground nuclear storage sites were left unguarded for the next three years. Still, the eyewitness testimony about the sealed underwater warehouses matched with radiation exposure is strong circumstantial evidence that some amount of radioactive material was still present in Iraq on the day the war began.

Our volunteer researchers discovered the actual movement order from the Iraqi high command ordering all the remaining special equipment to be moved into the underground sites only a few weeks before the onset of the war. The date of the movement order suggests that President Bush, who clearly knew nothing of the specifics of the underground nuclear sites, or even that a nuclear weapons program still existed in Iraq, may have been accidentally correct about the main point of the war: the discovery of Saddam?s secret nuclear program, even in hindsight, arguably provides sufficient legal justification for the previous use of force.

Saddam?s nuclear documents compel any reasonable person to the conclusion that, more probably than not, there were in fact nuclear WMD sites, components, and programs hidden inside Iraq at the time the Coalition forces invaded. In view of these newly discovered documents, it can be concluded, more probably than not, that Saddam did have a nuclear weapons program in 2001-2002, and that it is reasonably certain that he would have continued his efforts towards making a nuclear bomb in 2003 had he not been stopped by the Coalition forces. Four years after the war began, we still do not have all the answers, but we have many of them. Ninety percent of the Saddam files have never been read, let alone translated. It is time to utterly reject the conventional wisdom that there were no WMD in Iraq and look to the best evidence: Saddam?s own files on WMD. The truth is what it is, the documents speak for themselves.

John Loftus is President of IntelligenceSummit.org, which is entirely free of government funding, and depends solely upon private contributions for its support. The full research paper on Iraqi WMD, along with the supporting documents and photographs can be found at www.LoftusReport.com
 

Sacrilege

Senior member
Sep 6, 2007
647
0
0
WTF.... The Russians removed Saddam's weapons.... Saddam sold WMDs to his Arab neighbors (pray tell who, Kuwait maybe?).... Syria was making dirty bombs with the remnants of Saddam's NUCLEAR program? Debkafile is a reliable source?

Give it a rest already. These claims rank up there with British artillery training weather balloon trucks, aka mobile weapon labs.
 

Sacrilege

Senior member
Sep 6, 2007
647
0
0
John Loftus is President of IntelligenceSummit.org, which is entirely free of government funding, and depends solely upon private contributions for its support.

LOL, is that a good or a bad thing. I guess under the Bush admin that is good, because with gov't funding the claims would be even more ridiculous.
 

Harvey

Administrator<br>Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
35,052
30
86
Originally posted by: Specop 007
I'm not sure what bothers me more. The fact Saddam did have them, or the fact they have mostly disappeared.

Bullshit! The author didn't say Saddam HAD WMD's. He's just speculating. It's also been reported that Saddam's own military was bullshitting Saddam with phony reports about what was happening with their alleged WMD programs. The key lines:

Four years after the war began, we still do not have all the answers, but we have many of them. Ninety percent of the Saddam files have never been read, let alone translated. It is time to utterly reject the conventional wisdom that there were no WMD in Iraq and look to the best evidence: Saddam?s own files on WMD. The truth is what it is, the documents speak for themselves.

Considering how many other experts have stated that Saddam had no WMD's, it's several long jumps from what the author says to your conclusion of "the fact Saddam did have them."
 

heyheybooboo

Diamond Member
Jun 29, 2007
6,278
0
0
I would never question the credibility of an individual, John Loftus, who was fired by Fox News :shocked:

 

techs

Lifer
Sep 26, 2000
28,561
4
0
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
I would never question the credibility of an individual, John Loftus, who was fired by Fox News :shocked:

Wow. That website makes newsmax look like the NY Times.
I guess if you are so brainwashed that you can't handle the truth you can always surf the web and find a website that will agree with your theories. No matter how wacky or deluded they may be.
So give it a rest Specop 007. This thread is as worthless as the "world is really flat" posts.
 

Specop 007

Diamond Member
Jan 31, 2005
9,454
0
0
Originally posted by: techs
Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
I would never question the credibility of an individual, John Loftus, who was fired by Fox News :shocked:

Wow. That website makes newsmax look like the NY Times.
I guess if you are so brainwashed that you can't handle the truth you can always surf the web and find a website that will agree with your theories. No matter how wacky or deluded they may be.
So give it a rest Specop 007. This thread is as worthless as the "world is really flat" posts.

You damned heathen, I'll see you dead!!

Everyone knows the world if flat!

:p

Sorry, I couldnt resist that. :eek:
 

Jhhnn

IN MEMORIAM
Nov 11, 1999
62,365
14,681
136
Putting out such trash is one thing, actually believing it is another...

Barnum knew the truth- there's a sucker born every minute...

Given the increase in the world's population and the success of the neocon message, make that every 10 seconds...
 

umbrella39

Lifer
Jun 11, 2004
13,819
1,126
126
LMAO. This kinds of threads though rare anymore always make for a good laugh. Thanks OP! :thumbsup:

"It does however give even more proof to the idea that those sitting around chanting "Buch lied, people died" are nothing more then blind fools."

Someone with their head so far up their ass has no room to call others blind.
 

daveymark

Lifer
Sep 15, 2003
10,576
1
0
Originally posted by: Sacrilege
John Loftus is President of IntelligenceSummit.org, which is entirely free of government funding, and depends solely upon private contributions for its support.

LOL, is that a good or a bad thing. I guess under the Bush admin that is good, because with gov't funding the claims would be even more ridiculous.

the left won't believe it unless it's funded by moveon

everything else is just neocon biased propaganda
 

ChunkiMunki

Senior member
Dec 21, 2001
449
0
0
whether he did or didn't, in hindsight it was and still is a tremendous mistake taking hussein out. it might have been easier dealing with one dictator than scores of insurgent groups bent on killing Americans.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
84,060
48,070
136
Wow, that website has a lot of crazy in it. My favorite so far is the front page story asking "Why are liberals running interference for those who attack us?". Either that or the video segment on "Jimmy Carter's war against the Jews".
 

Moonbeam

Elite Member
Nov 24, 1999
72,435
6,091
126
So if one day you go over to your neighbor's house and kill him for no reason and the cops discover he was planning to kill you, are you absolved of murder if favor of self defense?
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,113
925
126
Let's not overlook the fact that Saddam was the WMD. Look how many people, over the years, died at his hand, as well as at those of his sons.
Somewhere along the way, he needed to be dealt with. That's not saying I believe in the war we're in.
 

ChunkiMunki

Senior member
Dec 21, 2001
449
0
0
was it really the US resposibility for regime change? or the iraqis? there are and plenty worse than hussein. what a complete waste with no end in sight. "mission accomplished" indeed.
 

compuwiz1

Admin Emeritus Elite Member
Oct 9, 1999
27,113
925
126
Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
was it really the US resposibility for regime change? or the iraqis? there are and plenty worse than hussein. what a complete waste with no end in sight. "mission accomplished" indeed.

Not necessarily a US responsibility, but eventually someone would have caused the end to the horror show that was Saddam Hussein.

Can you imagine your daughters being raped and your sons being murdered there, only you can't go to the police because the rapists and the murderers are the police? I call those elements WMDs.

 

tomywishbone

Golden Member
Oct 24, 2006
1,401
0
0
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
was it really the US resposibility for regime change? or the iraqis? there are and plenty worse than hussein. what a complete waste with no end in sight. "mission accomplished" indeed.

Not necessarily a US responsibility, but eventually someone would have caused the end to the horror show that was Saddam Hussein.

Can you imagine your daughters being raped and your sons being murdered there, only you can't go to the police because the rapists and the murderers are the police? I call those elements WMDs.

Yes, imagine that.

Item #1
Item #2
Item #3
Item #4
Item #5
Item #6
Item #7
Item #8

 

JD50

Lifer
Sep 4, 2005
11,640
2,034
126
Originally posted by: tomywishbone
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
was it really the US resposibility for regime change? or the iraqis? there are and plenty worse than hussein. what a complete waste with no end in sight. "mission accomplished" indeed.

Not necessarily a US responsibility, but eventually someone would have caused the end to the horror show that was Saddam Hussein.

Can you imagine your daughters being raped and your sons being murdered there, only you can't go to the police because the rapists and the murderers are the police? I call those elements WMDs.

Ya, imagine that.

Item #1
Item #2
Item #3
Item #4

You just proved his point, perfectly. Did you notice that in each of those articles are the words "convicted"?
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,502
1
81
To justify invading Iraq, IIRC, Bush et al said that Iraq had WMD and was an imminent threat to the US. I may be wrong but I think I remember they said they knew where the WMDs were located.

Where are the WMDs?
 

Pabster

Lifer
Apr 15, 2001
16,987
1
0
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Let's not overlook the fact that Saddam was the WMD. Look how many people, over the years, died at his hand, as well as at those of his sons.
Somewhere along the way, he needed to be dealt with. That's not saying I believe in the war we're in.

:thumbsup:
 

Red Dawn

Elite Member
Jun 4, 2001
57,530
3
0
Originally posted by: compuwiz1
Originally posted by: ChunkiMunki
was it really the US resposibility for regime change? or the iraqis? there are and plenty worse than hussein. what a complete waste with no end in sight. "mission accomplished" indeed.

Not necessarily a US responsibility, but eventually someone would have caused the end to the horror show that was Saddam Hussein.

Can you imagine your daughters being raped and your sons being murdered there, only you can't go to the police because the rapists and the murderers are the police? I call those elements WMDs.
And they were a threat to us how?

 

ChunkiMunki

Senior member
Dec 21, 2001
449
0
0
the cost is to high, in money and servicemen's lives. Saddam Hussein and sons were brutal, but no worse than any other despot regime.and Hussein's brutality didnt bother the rest of the mddle east. shoudn't the ME be applauding Hussein's overthrow? still no end in sight. not worth so many young men's lives. Bush has wasted their service and courage.