Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Weapons of Mass Destruction Found
http://www.ebookstand.com/m/bryanrussell/ ^ | Bryan Russell

Posted on 04/09/2006 9:31:44 PM PDT by hildy123

About Our Book: In direct contrast to the popular phrase, "no weapons of mass destruction have been found," this text presented overwhelming evidence that weapons of mass destruction (WMD) have been found in Iraq. Chemical weapons, a biological warfare program, and key components of a nuclear weapons program were discovered by coalition forces as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom. Both mustard and nerve agents were used against U.S. troops in Iraq in 2003. Over 50 chemical munitions have been captured in Iraq since the 2003 invasion. In addition to the captured chemical munitions that could kill over 100,000 people, cyanide blocks and active cyanide production labs have been found in Iraq. As a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom, coalition forces discovered biological weapons feed stock in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist to include the most toxic substance known to man. The feedstock when combined with growth media could be used to produce massive quantities of biological agents within weeks. An active production line for Bacillus subtilis was discovered in 2003 that Iraqi scientists confirmed could be converted to an anthrax production line in less than a week. In addition to the declared dual-use facilities that could be quickly converted to make biological weapons, coalition forces found numerous undeclared biological labs in the Baghdad area as well as mobile labs, some of which were buried with expensive equipment and documents on how to make anthrax inside. In spite of UN sanctions and inspections, Iraq managed to preserve key components of its nuclear program to include maintaining stockpiles of undeclared enriched uranium, maintaining uranium enrichment technology, and continuing research to develop a nuclear weapon. Nuclear material to include yellowcake and enriched uranium were found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion. As a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom, centrifuge parts and an ion implantation program to preserve EMIS technology both of which are used to enrich uranium were discovered in Iraq. This book will allow you to review the details of the types and quantities of Weapons of Mass Destruction Found in Iraq as a result of Operation Iraqi Freedom. It includes pictures of U.S. troops capturing nuclear, biological and chemical weapons in Iraq in 2003 and 2004 and details the weapons found to date.

Foundwmd@yahoo.com


TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: chemicalweapons; howaboutaparagraph; iraq; iraqwmd; saddam; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last
To: hildy123

As far as the Left is concerned, that we didn't find WMD 5 minutes after we entered Iraq, everything from that point on is a lie. The Left never did and never will want to know the truth about ANYTHING that upsets them.


21 posted on 04/09/2006 11:51:14 PM PDT by SeaBiscuit (God Bless America and All who protect and preserve this Great Nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeaBiscuit

["Both mustard and nerve agents were used against U.S. troops in Iraq in 2003."]

Okay, maybe you can explain.....when and where were Mustard and Nerve agents used against US soldiers in (Iraq) 2003?

LIBO



22 posted on 04/10/2006 12:24:57 AM PDT by LjubivojeRadosavljevic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: LjubivojeRadosavljevic

Well, try buying the book and find out yourself. The burden of proof is now on the Libs. If they can disprove this book, then let’s get it on and put up the facts. I am currently in Iraq and I have spoke to two Marines who have seen WMD’s. I, myself work in environmental clean up. Trust me you would pooooop if you knew what was here at one time and is continuing to be found close to the Syrian boarder. That’s about all I can say. I know Bryan and he is good at his research.


23 posted on 04/10/2006 12:56:19 AM PDT by hildy123 (Bring back Patton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: hildy123

Thanks for the response. I will look into this matter.

LIBO


24 posted on 04/10/2006 1:15:34 AM PDT by LjubivojeRadosavljevic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Comment #25 Removed by Moderator

To: goodnesswins

bttt


26 posted on 04/10/2006 4:15:00 AM PDT by joe fonebone (Vote YES! on Lake Iran......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: bluefish
"Yet the lie is now truth. It was told often enough that "factual" nature of the mantra has settled with the American public. The damage is done, so it doesn't matter how much new evidence comes forth."

Not true. Americans hate it when it can be proved that they were lied to. Just let a compendium of evidence be mounted, push the story hard, and the results will forever stain the dims and their lying liars!!!

LLS
27 posted on 04/10/2006 5:15:46 AM PDT by LibLieSlayer (Preserve America... kill terrorists... destroy dims!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hildy123

bump


28 posted on 04/10/2006 5:23:53 AM PDT by Skooz (Chastity prays for me, piety sings............Modesty hides my thighs in her wings......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bluefish
re :Perhaps there was a reason for this. If so, can somebody please explain?

Just of the top of my head, maybe there is no mention from the white house on WMD, because we have lost them.

If they are out there we have no idea where they are, or who controls them, so it looks as if it suits both sides to not talk about WMD.

29 posted on 04/10/2006 5:32:38 AM PDT by tonycavanagh (We got plenty of doomsayers where are the truth sayers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: bluefish

"The question that weighs on my mind remains. Why did Bush allow the "no weapons were found" lie continue to be told."


I think its because before the invasion Bush and co told us that Saddam had "as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent" and "upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents". What have we found? "Over 50 chemical munitions"? How far past their shelflife were the weapons that we found? How effective were they? Bush would've been ridiculed if one of his pre-war speeches saying "Saddam has tons of weapons" was played back to back with a post-war speech saying "We found the weapons; he had a lunch-box packed full of the stuff!".

The fact is that what has been found was a tiny fraction of what we were told was there. What we have found would justify invading my neighbor's barn, but probably not someone else's country.


30 posted on 04/10/2006 5:48:29 AM PDT by binnster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hildy123
From what I know that's been told to me in confidence from a full bird Spec Ops that has spent quite a bit of time in Iraq, the "cover-up" in the Lib media and "oops" "we really didn't find any WMD's" from the Bush admin., coupled what is being continuously found month to month, is that the US now has quite a bit of info, documented proof, that implicates a number of certain UN member European nations (allies?) and 2 of Iraq's next door neighbors were in serious violation of several UN sanctions of "dealings" with Iraq after the 1991 Gulf War right up to the 2003 "political rearrangement" of Iraq.

So, in all honesty, the administration, CFR folks, Trilateral Commission members, and the Bildeburg members, have agreed to the need of the cover-ups as not to scare the general public (world that is) as to threaten global economic business, and most importantly cover their butts from a political viewpoint.

31 posted on 04/10/2006 5:49:08 AM PDT by RSmithOpt (Liberalism: Highway to Hell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bluefish

The reason that we say we didn't find any WMDs is that we did.

To minimize the propaganda power of Saddam, Bush is willing to allow it to be said that we didn't find anything.

All the nuclear stuff Libya surrendered after Iraq had fallen was Saddam's, from a secret nuclear facility inside a mountain in Libya where 10,000 Iraqis worked on WMD's.

As soon as Quadaffi figured out Saddam done for, he decided to give up what he was hiding for him, because he knew we would be coming to get it (And him) later.

It's all about saving face with the arabs, we are beating them but not rubbing it in to the point where they get angry and get organized on a whole different scale.

President Bush is keeping them just confused enough to remain splintered and divided.


32 posted on 04/10/2006 5:52:54 AM PDT by usmcobra (Those that are incited to violence by the sight of OUR flag are the enemies of this nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: battlegearboat

He just pointed to the REAL enemy...


33 posted on 04/10/2006 5:55:08 AM PDT by johnny7 (ďNah, I ainít Jewish, I just donít dig on swine, thatís all.Ē)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: hildy123

"The burden of proof is now on the Libs. If they can disprove this book, then let’s get it on and put up the facts."


The facts are all out there. Take this quote:

"Nuclear material to include yellowcake and enriched uranium were found in Iraq after the 2003 invasion."

That is so demonstrably false that I actually laughed when I read it. The yellowcake and enriched uranium that was found in Iraq was not touted as a "find" by the administration because we already knew it was there legally - it was tagged, sealed and monitored by the IAEA:

"The visit was agreed after weeks of pleading by the IAEA, which has kept the radiological materials at the site safely under UN seal for 12 years" - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3009082.stm

The invasion, and subsequent looting, actually led to the possibility of this stuff falling into the wrong hands, so it's little wonder that it's kept quiet. Seriously, how can this book be taken seriously if it contains such obvious misinformation?


34 posted on 04/10/2006 6:03:16 AM PDT by binnster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: bluefish

Or put another way Bush isn't going to tell the world Saddam had a Full House when we bluffed him with three of a kind into folding.


35 posted on 04/10/2006 6:05:34 AM PDT by usmcobra (Those that are incited to violence by the sight of OUR flag are the enemies of this nation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: eastforker

"Cuz if we found them we would have to point our finger in the direction they came from and we are not quite ready to confront Russia or China at this moment."

I was thinking the same thing at one time but I am not so sure anymore. Sorry I can't come up with a solid reason either. I speculate Bush just does the right thing but is disconnected to the American public. Just because Americans were happy with his explanation that we are at war and will not reveal all the details doesn't mean he shouldn't bother quantifying the justifications to go to war.

This is the only speculative reason I could think of, that he is not thinking about the future of the party and only focused on the here and now. It's like the immigration thing. He let this fester for several months and not went public about the guest worker/registation program. I think this is a good way to go (flame away) but allowed himself to look like he could care less.


36 posted on 04/10/2006 6:23:03 AM PDT by iThinkBig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve

"In my humble opinion, people don't care about truth anymore. They believe so strongly in their case that nothing can persuade them otherwise. Therefore they are susectible to every tin foil lie that comes down the pike. Bush lied about WMDs. Right. What a 'slap your mother in the face' God Damn Lie that is. Iraq was a WMD dump as well as a haven for terrorists. You know, I don't care if the MSM carries this. They have their own agenda of trying to harpoon the president. I believe and that is enough for me..."

I agree. What is a shame is that many Americans will not remember Bush Jr. with respect, kind of like Bush Sr. Like father like son when it comes to allowing the Dems to crucify them and not go public with response immediately. I will remember the Bush's as some of the best President's ever for having to make incredible tough (and accurate)decisions concerning life or death but they still need to remember that their is a Republican party that needs to win elections in the future.


37 posted on 04/10/2006 6:26:21 AM PDT by iThinkBig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LibLieSlayer

"Not true. Americans hate it when it can be proved that they were lied to. Just let a compendium of evidence be mounted, push the story hard, and the results will forever stain the dims and their lying liars!!!

LLS"

I agree. One thing I do notice about the Republicans is they like to wait for election year to hit the Dems in the jaw with the truth. It's about timing.


38 posted on 04/10/2006 6:28:37 AM PDT by iThinkBig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: usmcobra

"It's all about saving face with the arabs, we are beating them but not rubbing it in to the point where they get angry and get organized on a whole different scale.

President Bush is keeping them just confused enough to remain splintered and divided."

That could be, good point.


39 posted on 04/10/2006 6:30:29 AM PDT by iThinkBig
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: bluefish

"The question that weighs on my mind remains. Why did Bush allow the "no weapons were found" lie continue to be told."

I will tell you why. Think of the liberal mantra of No WMD found. Now think of the liberal mantra, "How do we know that we found all of the WMD? Because of Bush invading Iraq, Al Queada might now have WMD."

Which scenario would you rather have? On one hand, the WMD was probably secured by the Russians and out of country. On the other hand, terrorists could have possession of enough WMD to destroy a city.

In my opinion, taking out Saddam and fighting a war on terror pretty much got Bush reelected despite the no WMD claim. I am not sure if it would have been the same result after the libs and the world consemned Bush for allowing Al Queda to possess WMD.


40 posted on 04/10/2006 6:37:26 AM PDT by EQAndyBuzz (To Serve Man......It's a cookbook!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-82 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson