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

Skip to comments.

White House denies report on Iraq WMD
Reuters.com ^ | April 12, 2006 | Steve Holland

Posted on 04/13/2006 7:28:58 AM PDT by YaYa123

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The White House on Wednesday angrily denied a newspaper report that suggested President George W. Bush in 2003 declared the existence of mobile biological weapons laboratories in Iraq while knowing it was not true.

"It's reckless reporting. Everybody should be agitated about it," White House spokesman McClellan told reporters of The Washington Post report.

On May 29, 2003, Bush hailed the capture of two trailers in Iraq as mobile biological laboratories and declared, "We have found the weapons of mass destruction."

Two days earlier, on May 27, 2003, the Pentagon confirmed on Wednesday, a Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) team faxed its preliminary report on the mobile labs. This report concluded the trailers had nothing to do with biological weapons, the Post said.

McClellan said Bush made his statement based on the combined conclusions of the CIA and DIA that were given to him in a May 28 white paper.

That white paper reflected the intelligence community's position at the time that the mobile units were biological weapons laboratories.

(Excerpt) Read more at today.reuters.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 200304; 20030527; 20030528; breakingyesterday; dia; jobywarrick; mcclellan; mobilelabs; wmd; wmdmobiletrailers; wp
Not often Reuter's has a story favorable to the Bush administration, and it's even rarer when a US intelligence official clears up MSM lies.
1 posted on 04/13/2006 7:28:59 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

BS MSM reporting.

These mobile labs were present in Iraq for many many years and many different intelligence agencies reported them.


2 posted on 04/13/2006 7:34:54 AM PDT by silverleaf (Fasten your seat belts- it's going to be a BUMPY ride.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

I don't think the story is favorable. It is just the facts. They happen to be favorable.


3 posted on 04/13/2006 7:37:34 AM PDT by pas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pas

I agree totally, and thanks for making the distinction.


4 posted on 04/13/2006 7:38:39 AM PDT by YaYa123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: YaYa123

Well, you were both right. Even when the facts are there, it's not often organizations like Reuters will report them--or if they do, it's buried so deep most people don't read about them.


5 posted on 04/13/2006 7:48:55 AM PDT by MizSterious (Anonymous sources often means "the voices in my head told me.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

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