Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

The Sunday Telegraph (UK) ^ | 1/25/04 | Con Coughlin

[LS]

Wrongo. There is no, and I repeat, NO evidence that Saddam ever "destroyed" anything. There is UN evidence from 2002 and David Kay's evidence that just the contrary is the case . . . that he DIDN'T destroy everything.

Where are they? Ask Kay. He resigned because he's convinced they were moved into SYRIA. Course, no one bothers to mention that. They only note that he "resigned."

And when I'm talking about Germany's, France's, Britain's, Russia's, etc. INTEL SERVICES, I'm talking about what they were saying in 2001, 2002, and 2003. You are clueless. Read what the INTEL services said.

[LandofLincoln]

AT THE TIME THEY THOUGHT IT WAS WMDs

[American in Israel]

"These allegations have been raised many times in the past by Israeli officials, which proves that they are false."

I suspect that one of the places in Syria went up in smoke when Israel did that deep air strike inside Syria on the "Terrorist camp". I found it curious that the Syrians put barriers up all around the camp and did not allow anybody within a kilometer of the camp. All the long range camera shots showed a deserted camp with no life. One would think that the place would have been crawling with people searching through the ruins.

My guess is a large stockpile of nerve gas was trashed that day.

[Dog Gone]

I hope you're right.

[RandallFlagg]

My guess is a large stockpile of nerve gas was trashed that day.

Or something worse

[MosesKnows]

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief

How does one judge the sincerity of a news service?

This news service's headline reports "Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria". The first paragraph then reports that "David Kay, the former head of the coalition's hunt for Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, yesterday claimed that part of Saddam Hussein's secret weapons programme was hidden in Syria." What became of the WMD referred to in the headline?

[RandallFlagg]

From the unclassified portion of David Kay's report in October, you can find these two small excerpts:

Umm. Unclassified?? Do you think that there's stuff we don't know yet that Kay and the CIA hasn't told anyone yet?

Yeah. So do I.

[stickywillie]

A certain valley in Syria was pointed out as being the repository of the WMDs. Sounds like a nice October surprise.

[G2R]

I just listened to an interview with Dr. Kay in which he disputed the characterizations made by the news services (and, in this thread) that he has somehow alleged that Iraqi WMD are in Syria. In response to a direct question about that, he said that while there is ample evidence that there was movement between Iraq and Syria before the war, we SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW (his words) what was moved. He did not claim that the movement constituted WMD or WMD related materials. From his perspective, the movement could just as easily have been cash as military hardware -- especially since the Syrians have been uncooperative in disclosing the nature of the traffic.

In the same interview, he reiterated his position that he did not believe that Iraq had resumed production of chemical or biological weapons. In his own words: I don't think they exist.

That was categorical. He didn't say that he thought they exist in Syria. He said flat out that he thinks they simply didn't exist.

[Dog]

AI....can you post a map of Syria where that air strike took place.I would love to match it up against a map that Syrian defector said the WMD are being hidden.

Also you can't destroy anthrax and VX with a high explosive it doesn't burn hot enough.

[Tricorn]

No, a more accurate analogy would be this: You've been successfully defending your house with a revolver against knife-weilding hoodlums for years. Now you're being attacked by machinegun and cannon-toting robbers. Your gun, while very effective against knives, is useless. Rather than lose your gun, you give it to your neighbor and go into hiding. Once the danger has cleared, you come out, reacquire the gun and continue to lord it over the local knife people.

Shipping the WMD off to Syria makes perfect sense. (Remember the Iraqi air force during the first Gulf War? Same thing here. In fact, as far as analogies goes, this is a far better one than the knife-gun scenario.)

[jpl]

In response to a direct question about that, he said that while there is ample evidence that there was movement between Iraq and Syria before the war, we SIMPLY DO NOT KNOW (his words) what was moved.

Quit true, but I think it's probably safe to assume that Iraq wasn't desperately trying to get rid of old Parcheesi sets and Cabbage Patch Kids.

[nuffsenuff]

1. Because Saddam Hussein was more interested in saving his own skin than saving his country. He did not care if the US killed every Iraqi as long as he could somehow survive and come back to regain power.

2. Saddam Hussein believed that the US' tolerance for "pain" (US Casualities) was low. He was convinced that the naysayers in the US could be used to cause us to withdraw from Iraq. We'd done it before... i.e. Somalia. All the evidence points to this... He didn't fight to the death. He went into hiding and began his plan B. Insurgence. Plan A was France successfully undermining US resolve to invade and that plan obviously failed.

[RandallFlagg]

Link?

[the Real fifi]

Nothing has underscored the carelessness of this Administration more than watching them handle this...I think they were right about the WMD, but they let the first Kay report be misreported, didn't handle his exit interviews, allowed him to speak to Reuters(for chrissake) which characteristically misreported it. Then, Rice, Powell and Cheney spoke, each seemingly giving different accounts. DAMN!

[TheDon]

...THOUGHT... that's what I remember too. Perhaps the most dangerous thing they could have been exporting in trucks at the time. Perhaps we will find out eventually.