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

Skip to comments.

Powell Says C.I.A. Was Misled About Weapons
The New York Times ^ | 5/17/04 | DAVID E. SANGER

Posted on 05/17/2004 5:33:58 AM PDT by JohnGalt

WASHINGTON, May 16 — Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said for the first time on Sunday that he now believes that the Central Intelligence Agency was deliberately misled about evidence that Saddam Hussein was developing unconventional weapons.

He also said, in his comments on the NBC News program "Meet the Press," that he regrets citing evidence that Iraq had mobile biological laboratories in his presentation to the United Nations on Feb. 5, 2003.

The assertion about the mobile labs was one of the most dramatic pieces of the presentation, which was intended to make public the Bush administration's best case for invading Iraq. For days before his speech, Mr. Powell sat in a conference room at the C.I.A., examining the sources for each charge he planned to make.

But on Sunday, Mr. Powell argued that the C.I.A. itself was misled, and that in turn he was, too. "Unfortunately, that multiple sourcing over time has turned out not to be accurate," Mr. Powell said, going farther than he did on April 2 when he conceded that the intelligence was not "that solid."

On Sunday, Mr. Powell hinted at widespread reports of fabrications by an engineer who provided much of the most critical information about the labs. Intelligence officials have since found that the engineer was linked to the Iraqi National Congress, an exile group that was pressing President Bush to unseat Mr. Hussein.

"It turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading," Mr. Powell said in the interview, broadcast from Jordan. "And for that, I am disappointed and I regret it."

That was a sharp contrast to comments four months ago by Vice President Dick Cheney, who said the administration still believed that the trailers were part of a program of unconventional weapons, and added that he "would deem that conclusive evidence" that Mr. Hussein in fact had such programs.

Taken with past admissions of error by the administration or its intelligence agencies, Mr. Powell's statement on Sunday leaves little room for the administration to argue that Mr. Hussein's stockpiles of unconventional weapons posed any real and imminent threat.

"Basically, Powell now believes that the Iraqis had chemical weapons, and that was it," said an official close to him. "And he is out there publicly saying this now because he doesn't want a legacy as the man who made up stories to provide the president with cover to go to war."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Extended News
KEYWORDS: feathers; powell; prewarintelligence; tar; treason
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 next last
To: JohnGalt

Gee ..doesnt that kinda make it "their" fault for being "mislead" since they are the "spy" agency
that is responsible for not being duped.....

But Mr. Powell knew that......

Let's play pin the tail on the CIA

imo


21 posted on 05/17/2004 6:15:24 AM PDT by joesnuffy (Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LS

I am of the opinion that if Clinton said there were WMDs in Iraq, then there were no WMDs in Iraq, but leaving that aside, what do you make of the case of those who let Chalabi dupe the intelligence gathering procedures?


22 posted on 05/17/2004 6:17:57 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Chalabi Republicans: Soft on Treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
"The hard part now is to organize some solid Iraqi power so as to not wake up in a few months and discover Al-Sadr or any other local tinpot dictator has established himself as a new Saddam. "

Actually, the hard part is showing the peoples of the Muddle East exactly what representative government means. They, by and large, have no real clue. They are a people who have more or less willingly been subjugated to a variety of dictatorial thugs of one stripe or another for thousands of years - to the point where many of them view democracy as "the right to vote for whom we've been told to vote." In a theocracy such as the repressed Shiites first proposed under Al Sistani, Sistani would issue an edict telling his followers for whom to vote - and then they would be "free" to do just that - vote for whom they'd been told to vote. Only with the fledgling local elections that have been taking place unreported by the Media, can these people begin to understand what a representative government is all about.

That's because the two major forms of government in the ME are primarily either tyranny or lawless anarchy. The Arab doesn't easily fall into the middle ground.

Michael

23 posted on 05/17/2004 6:19:14 AM PDT by Wright is right! (It's amazing how fun times when you're having flies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend
Yah, it was that consensual. The UN said he had them based on their own inspectors kicked out after 1998, so that info was VERY recent (remember, all this started in 2002).

More important, NOT ONE of the major alliance members---not even France or Germany---said he DIDN'T have them! And it was totally in their interest to say he didn't. No, everyone said up front or tacitly that he had them.

24 posted on 05/17/2004 6:19:30 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

I should have known you'd post this.

#1. I'm so glad you weren't around in WWII.

#2. Without going back to re-read the transcript, I don't think that Powell said that someone "deliberately" lied.

#3. I know how you'll respond - you are the only true conservative, anyone who supports the war is a traitor, etc. It never changes.

#4. Every country in the world thought Saddam had a WMD program.

#5. Powell has never retracted that satellite photos show convoys of trucks leaving Iraq going to Syria.

#6. The chemicals found in Jordan's thwarted WMD attack last month are believed to come from Syria via Iraq.

#7. How many minds have you changed this year? One, maybe?

#8. We didn't go to war based just on WMD. We also went because of Saddam's long standing relationship with Osama bin Laden, a relationship that goes back over a decade.

#9. Saddam at least knew 9/11 was coming but you probably believe ole OBL was just gossiping with Saddam when he warned him.

Less than two months before 9/11/01, the state-controlled Iraqi newspaper “Al-Nasiriya” carried a column headlined, “American, an Obsession called Osama Bin Ladin.” (July 21, 2001)

In the piece, Baath Party writer Naeem Abd Muhalhal predicted that bin Laden would attack the US “with the seriousness of the Bedouin of the desert about the way he will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House.”

The same state-approved column also insisted that bin Laden “will strike America on the arm that is already hurting,” and that the US “will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs” – an apparent reference to the Sinatra classic, “New York, New York”.

10. Other links between Saddam and Osama Bin Laden can be found here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1127451/posts

11. Saddam could have avoided all this if he'd only been more cooperative with the UN.

12. Powell has never retracted this:

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said his pre-war testimony to the U.N. Security Council about Iraq's alleged mobile, biological weapons labs was based on information that appears not to be "solid."

Powell's speech before the Security Council on February, 5, 2003 --detailing possible weapons of mass destruction in Iraq -- was a major event in the Bush administration's effort to justify a war and win international support.

Powell said Friday his testimony about Iraq and mobile biological weapons labs was based on the best intelligence available, but "now it appears not to be the case that it was that solid," Powell said.

The following are the key points of Powell's February 5 testimony to the U.N. Security Council:


Recorded conversations: Powell played what he said was a tape of a colonel and brigadier general of Iraq's elite Republican Guard discussing hiding a vehicle before U.N. inspectors arrived to search a site.

Powell said the conversation indicated the Iraqi officials knew inspectors were coming and what they would be looking for. One official is heard to say: "We have this modified vehicle. What do we say if one of them sees it?" The other official says: "I'll come to see you in the morning. I'm worried. You all have something left."

The other official then says: "We evacuated everything. We don't have anything left."

Powell said this indicates the Iraqis hid or destroyed banned materials. He said the vehicle came from a company "well known to have been involved in prohibited weapons systems activity."


Satellite images of "active chemical munitions bunkers": Powell then showed satellite photos that he said indicated the presence of "active chemical munitions bunkers" disguised from inspectors.

The first photo showed was from a weapons munitions facility, which Powell said was one of 65 such facilities in Iraq. He said the photo contained "sure signs that the bunkers are storing chemical munitions," including a decontamination truck and special security.

Powell showed later photos from the same facility that he said showed the bunkers had been "sanitized" before U.N. inspectors arrived. He also showed satellite photos he said indicated that earth was moved and graded to hide evidence at a chemical production site called Al-Musayyib.


Scientists banned from interviews: Powell said Saddam had personally barred Iraqi scientists from participating in interviews with U.N. inspectors and forced them "to sign documents acknowledging that divulging information is punishable by death."

"The regime only allows interviews with inspectors in the presence of an Iraqi official, a minder," Powell said.

"The official Iraqi organization charged with facilitating inspections announced, announced publicly and announced ominously that, 'Nobody is ready to leave Iraq to be interviewed.' "

He said this was a violation of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, which requires Iraq to abandon its alleged weapons of mass destruction programs and disarm.


Mobile biological weapons labs: Calling the discovery "most worrisome," Powell said U.S. intelligence indicated Iraq had production facilities for biological weapons "on wheels and on rails."

"The trucks and train cars are easily moved and are designed to evade detection by inspectors," Powell said. "In a matter of months, they can produce a quantity of biological poison equal to the entire amount that Iraq claimed to have produced in the years prior to the Gulf War."

Powell said the evidence included firsthand accounts from four sources -- among them, an Iraqi chemical engineer who supervised one of the facilities and an Iraqi civil engineer "in a position to know the details of the program."


Nerve gas unaccounted for: Powell said Iraq failed to account for its stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons, including four tons of the nerve gas VX. He said a single drop of VX can kill a human being.

"We have evidence these weapons existed," Powell said. "What we don't have is evidence from Iraq that they have been destroyed or where they are."

He said Iraq denied it had ever weaponized VX, and that U.N. inspectors had presented information on January 27, 2003 that conflicts with the Iraqi account of its VX program.


Nuclear efforts continue: "We have no indication that Saddam Hussein has ever abandoned his nuclear weapons program," Powell told the council. "On the contrary, we have more than a decade of proof that he remains determined to acquire nuclear weapons."

Powell said Iraq had continued efforts to develop nuclear weapons and missiles capable of striking targets at a distance of up to 1,200 kilometers (745 miles).

He said Saddam has "a cadre of nuclear scientists with the expertise, and he has a bomb design," but lacks the fissile material needed for a nuclear explosion.

Powell said that in an effort to develop fissile material, Saddam "has made repeated covert attempts to acquire high-specification aluminum tubes from 11 different countries, even after inspections resumed."

Powell said Iraq had "no business" obtaining such tubes, even if they were for use in conventional rocket programs as Iraq and some experts have claimed.


Links to terrorism: Powell asserted that Iraq has had high-level, long-standing contacts with the al Qaeda terrorist network. He said al Qaeda fugitives from Afghanistan have found safe haven in northern Iraq and al Qaeda associates are operating in Baghdad.

Powell also said an al Qaeda fugitive linked to the October killing of U.S. diplomat Laurence Foley in Jordan has found "safe haven" in Iraq and has plotted attacks in Europe.

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/US/04/03/powell.iraq/


25 posted on 05/17/2004 6:21:41 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

Well, the WMDs have everything to do with the fact that EVERY country in the world said (regardless of what Chalabi did or said) that Saddam had WMDs. EVERY ONE. It is significant that even the French and the Germans and the Russians, who did NOT want the war, NEVER ONCE produced any evidence that Saddam did not have WMDs. Translation: even they knew he had them at one point prior after 1998 and prior to 2002.


26 posted on 05/17/2004 6:22:01 AM PDT by LS (CNN is the Amtrak of news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LS

Well, perhaps. Lincoln said you could fool everybody once, and somebody everytime, but not everybody everytime, IIRC. Maybe the WMD question belonged to the 1st case ?

The hard part with human intelligence is that it's always tainted, either by the agents' own interests or because of prejudice, or even because of CYA procedures. I suppose most prepare three assessments of any situation, and give to their political masters whichever they feel the political leaders want to hear.

What strikes me here is that Powell really was at the forefront of the WMD story, he defended the case talons and claws, and he probably is one of the most exposed people, should the WMD story prove false. So, I'm quite impressed at the risks he takes saying "I was misled, and thus I misled you". Would he take such risks if he had no serious reason to doubt the WMD story ? I know I wouldn't.


27 posted on 05/17/2004 6:22:43 AM PDT by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LS; JohnGalt

Denmark also said Iraq had WMD. Every country in the world said Saddam had WMD.

http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1120566/posts


28 posted on 05/17/2004 6:23:05 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LS

So bsically you are disinterested in the treason question, hence my tagline.


29 posted on 05/17/2004 6:23:12 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Chalabi Republicans: Soft on Treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Peach

Chalabi and the people who cover or distract from his subversion of our nation's institutions are soft on treason.

That is my only point.


30 posted on 05/17/2004 6:23:53 AM PDT by JohnGalt (Chalabi Republicans: Soft on Treason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

THE CHALABI SMEAR (State Dept. Helps Al Sadr's Cause)
NRO ^ | MAY. 4, 2004: | David Frum



Really, if the CIA and State Department fought this country’s enemies with even one-half the ferocity with which they have waged war on Ahmed Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress, the United States would be a vastly safer place. Yesterday, the agencies launched their latest offensive against this leader they so detest: They leaked Mark Hosenball of Newsweek a story claiming that Chalabi has betrayed US interests to the Iranians.

“U.S. intelligence agencies have recently raised concerns that Chalabi has become too close to Iran's theocratic rulers. NEWSWEEK has learned that top Bush administration officials have been briefed on intelligence indicating that Chalabi and some of his top aides have supplied Iran with ‘sensitive’ information on the American occupation in Iraq. U.S. officials say that electronic intercepts of discussions between Iranian leaders indicate that Chalabi and his entourage told Iranian contacts about American political plans in Iraq. There are also indications that Chalabi has provided details of U.S. security operations. According to one U.S. government source, some of the information Chalabi turned over to Iran could ‘get people killed.’ (A Chalabi aide calls the allegations ‘absolutely false.’)”

You have to give credit where credit is due: This is an audacious accusation. Audacious because it demands that the State Department’s and CIA’s cheering sections in the media perform a cult-like reversal of belief in everything they were saying about Iraq, Iran, and Chalabi himself up until now.

But those of us with memories that extend back beyond the past 24 hours will have some questions for Newsweek and its sources:

ITEM: Up until now we were supposed to believe that the INC produced no useful intelligence – that it dealt only in fantasies and lies. Now suddenly the INC is accused of being in possession of accurate and valuable sensitive information. How did Chalabi go from know-nothing to valuable intelligence asset overnight?

ITEM: A government source says that the security information Chalabi may or may not have provided could “get people killed.” Get them killed by whom? Up until now, the CIA and State Department have resolutely refused to acknowledge that Iran might be supporting the insurgency in Iraq. Now they are willing to admit reality – but only in order to use it against what they perceive as the real threat: Chalabi.

ITEM: Chalabi has been caught talking on the phone to the Iranians. But wait – hasn’t the State Department been arguing for months that the US should talk to the Iranians about Iraq? In testimony to Congress in October 2003, State number 2 Richard Armitage explicitly disavowed regime change in Iran and called for discussions with Iran on “appropriate” issues. In January 2004, Secretary of State Powell openly called for “dialogue” – and the Bush administration offered to send Elizabeth Dole and a member of the president’s own family to deliver earthquake aid to Iran. (The British sent Prince Charles.) Since then, the hinting and suggesting have grown ever more explicit. What, pray, is the difference between the policy Chalabi is pursuing and that which his State Department critics want the US to pursue?

ITEM: Chalabi is now accused of playing a “double game” in Iraqi politics, an offense for which he must forfeit all rights to a role in Iraq’s future. This “no double game” rule is a new and impressive standard for judging our allies in the Arab Middle East. Question: Will that same standard apply to those former Republican Guard generals whom the State Department is now so assiduously promoting? Will it apply to the former Baathists that Lakhdar Brahimi wishes to include in the provisional Iraqi government? Will it apply to Lakhdar Brahimi himself? Will it apply to the Saudi royal family? Will it apply to the Iranians? Or is it only Ahmed Chalabi who must swear undeviating loyalty to the US policy-of-the-day in Iraq?

ITEM: Salon magazine last night published a lengthy attack on Chalabi by John Dizard. In it, former Chalabi business partner Marc Zell calls Chalabi a “treacherous, spineless turncoat,” for failing to deliver on Chalabi’s alleged promises to open Iraq to trade with Israel. I don’t know that these promises were ever made – and if made, I wonder whether Chalabi ever suggested that they would rank first on a new Iraqi government’s list of priorities. But never mind that: Chalabi has not exercised executive power in Iraq for even a single day. How exactly was it ever possible that he would carry out any promise about anything to anyone?

Ahmed Chalabi no doubt has many faults. I have never been easy in my mind about the collapse of the bank he ran in Jordan back in 1989. (Although the charges that Chalabi himself stole money from the bank are not very convincing either.) But I do know this: Chalabi is one of the very few genuine liberal democrats to be found at the head of any substantial political organization anywhere in the Arab world. He is not consumed by paranoid fantasies, he understands and admires the American system, and he is willing to work with the United States if the United States will work for him. He risked his life through the 1990s to topple Saddam Hussein, which is more than can be said about any of State's or CIA's preferred candidates for power in Iraq. Compared to anybody other possible leader of Iraq – compared to just about every other political leader in the Arab world – the imperfect Ahmed Chalabi is nonetheless a James bleeping Madison.

And maybe that’s exactly why he is so very unpopular with so many of the local thugs and tyrants who unfortunately command the attention of America’s spies and diplomats.



31 posted on 05/17/2004 6:25:24 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

Saddam's WMD Have Been Found
InSight Magazine ^ | April 26, 2004 | Kenneth R. Timmerman


New evidence out of Iraq suggests that the U.S. effort to track down Saddam Hussein's missing weapons of mass destruction (WMD) is having better success than is being reported. Key assertions by the intelligence community that were widely judged in the media and by critics of President George W. Bush as having been false are turning out to have been true after all. But this stunning news has received little attention from the major media, and the president's critics continue to insist that "no weapons" have been found.

In virtually every case - chemical, biological, nuclear and ballistic missiles - the United States has found the weapons and the programs that the Iraqi dictator successfully concealed for 12 years from U.N. weapons inspectors.

The Iraq Survey Group (ISG), whose intelligence analysts are managed by Charles Duelfer, a former State Department official and deputy chief of the U.N.-led arms-inspection teams, has found "hundreds of cases of activities that were prohibited" under U.N. Security Council resolutions, a senior administration official tells Insight. "There is a long list of charges made by the U.S. that have been confirmed, but none of this seems to mean anything because the weapons that were unaccounted for by the United Nations remain unaccounted for."

Both Duelfer and his predecessor, David Kay, reported to Congress that the evidence they had found on the ground in Iraq showed Saddam's regime was in "material violation" of U.N. Security Council Resolution 1441, the last of 17 resolutions that promised "serious consequences" if Iraq did not make a complete disclosure of its weapons programs and dismantle them in a verifiable manner. The United States cited Iraq's refusal to comply with these demands as one justification for going to war.

Both Duelfer and Kay found that Iraq had "a clandestine network of laboratories and safe houses with equipment that was suitable to continuing its prohibited chemical- and biological-weapons [BW] programs," the official said. "They found a prison laboratory where we suspect they tested biological weapons on human subjects." They found equipment for "uranium-enrichment centrifuges" whose only plausible use was as part of a clandestine nuclear-weapons program. In all these cases, "Iraqi scientists had been told before the war not to declare their activities to the U.N. inspectors," the official said.

But while the president's critics and the media might plausibly hide behind ambiguity and a lack of sensational-

looking finds for not reporting some discoveries, in the case of Saddam's ballistic-missile programs they have no excuse for their silence. "Where were the missiles? We found them," another senior administration official told Insight.

"Saddam Hussein's prohibited missile programs are as close to a slam dunk as you will ever find for violating United Nations resolutions," the first official said. Both senior administration officials spoke to Insight on condition that neither their name nor their agency be identified, but their accounts of what the United States has found in Iraq coincided in every major area.

When former weapons inspector Kay reported to Congress in January that the United States had found "no stockpiles" of forbidden weapons in Iraq, his conclusions made front-page news. But when he detailed what the ISG had found in testimony before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence last October, few took notice. Among Kay's revelations, which officials tell Insight have been amplified in subsequent inspections in recent weeks:



A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and "that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N." Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn't have a biological-weapons program?


"Reference strains" of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. "We thought it was a big deal," a senior administration official said. "But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of 'starter set.'"


New research on BW-applicable agents, brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin that were not declared to the United Nations.


A line of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), or drones, "not fully declared at an undeclared production facility and an admission that they had tested one of their declared UAVs out to a range of 500 kilometers [311 miles], 350 kilometers [217 miles] beyond the permissible limit."


"Continuing covert capability to manufacture fuel propellant useful only for prohibited Scud-variant missiles, a capability that was maintained at least until the end of 2001 and that cooperating Iraqi scientists have said they were told to conceal from the U.N."


"Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] - well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates]."


In addition, through interviews with Iraqi scientists, seized documents and other evidence, the ISG learned the Iraqi government had made "clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles - probably the No Dong - 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment," Kay reported.

In testimony before Congress on March 30, Duelfer, revealed that the ISG had found evidence of a "crash program" to construct new plants capable of making chemical- and biological-warfare agents. The ISG also found a previously undeclared program to build a "high-speed rail gun," a device apparently designed for testing nuclear-weapons materials. That came in addition to 500 tons of natural uranium stockpiled at Iraq's main declared nuclear site south of Baghdad, which International Atomic Energy Agency spokesman Mark Gwozdecky acknowledged to Insight had been intended for "a clandestine nuclear-weapons program."

In taking apart Iraq's clandestine procurement network, Duelfer said his investigators had discovered that "the primary source of illicit financing for this system was oil smuggling conducted through government-to-government protocols negotiated with neighboring countries [and] from kickback payments made on contracts set up through the U.N. oil-for-food program" [see "Documents Prove U.N. Oil Corruption," April 27-May 10].

What the president's critics and the media widely have portrayed as the most dramatic failure of the U.S. case against Saddam has been the claimed failure to find "stockpiles" of chemical and biological weapons. But in a June 2003 Washington Post op-ed, former chief U.N. weapons inspector Rolf Ekeus called such criticism "a distortion and a trivialization of a major threat to international peace and security."


Lt. Gen. Amer Rashid al-Obeidi (left) and Lt. Gen. Amer Hamoodi al-Saddi (right) speak to an unidentified French intelligence officer at the Baghdad International Arms Fair in April 1989, and another French officer listens in (behind al-Saadi, facing camera)

The October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction concluded that Saddam "probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons (MT) and possibly as much as 500 MT of CW [chemical warfare] agents - much of it added in the last year." That assessment was based, in part, on conclusions contained in the final report from U.N. weapons inspectors in 1999, which highlighted discrepancies in what the Iraqis reported to the United Nations and the amount of precursor chemicals U.N. arms inspectors could document Iraq had imported but for which it no longer could account. Until now, Bush's critics say, no stockpiles of CW agents made with those precursors have been found. The snap conclusion they draw is that the administration "lied" to the American people to create a pretext for invading Iraq.

But what are "stockpiles" of CW agents supposed to look like? Was anyone seriously expecting Saddam to have left behind freshly painted warehouses packed with chemical munitions, all neatly laid out in serried rows, with labels written in English? Or did they think that a captured Saddam would guide U.S. troops to smoking vats full of nerve gas in an abandoned factory? In fact, as recent evidence made public by a former operations officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority's (CPA's) intelligence unit in Iraq shows, some of those stockpiles have been found - not all at once, and not all in nice working order - but found all the same.

Douglas Hanson was a U.S. Army cavalry reconnaissance officer for 20 years, and a veteran of Gulf War I. He was an atomic demolitions munitions security officer and a nuclear, biological and chemical defense officer. As a civilian analyst in Iraq last summer, he worked for an operations intelligence unit of the CPA in Iraq, and later, with the newly formed Ministry of Science and Technology, which was responsible for finding new, nonlethal employment for Iraqi WMD scientists.

In an interview with Insight and in an article he wrote for the online magazine AmericanThinker.com, Hanson examines reports from U.S. combat units and public information confirming that many of Iraq's CW stockpiles have indeed been found. Until now, however, journalists have devoted scant attention to this evidence, in part because it contradicts the story line they have been putting forward since the U.S.-led inspections began after the war.

But another reason for the media silence may stem from the seemingly undramatic nature of the "finds" Hanson and others have described. The materials that constitute Saddam's chemical-weapons "stockpiles" look an awful lot like pesticides, which they indeed resemble. "Pesticides are the key elements in the chemical-agent arena," Hanson says. "In fact, the general pesticide chemical formula (organophosphate) is the 'grandfather' of modern-day nerve agents."

The United Nations was fully aware that Saddam had established his chemical-weapons plants under the guise of a permitted civilian chemical-industry infrastructure. Plants inspected in the early 1990s as CW production facilities had been set up to appear as if they were producing pesticides - or in the case of a giant plant near Fallujah, chlorine, which is used to produce mustard gas.

When coalition forces entered Iraq, "huge warehouses and caches of 'commercial and agricultural' chemicals were seized and painstakingly tested by Army and Marine chemical specialists," Hanson writes. "What was surprising was how quickly the ISG refuted the findings of our ground forces and how silent they have been on the significance of these caches."

Caches of "commercial and agricultural" chemicals don't match the expectation of "stockpiles" of chemical weapons. But, in fact, that is precisely what they are. "At a very minimum," Hanson tells Insight, "they were storing the precursors to restart a chemical-warfare program very quickly." Kay and Duelfer came to a similar conclusion, telling Congress under oath that Saddam had built new facilities and stockpiled the materials to relaunch production of chemical and biological weapons at a moment's notice.

At Karbala, U.S. troops stumbled upon 55-gallon drums of pesticides at what appeared to be a very large "agricultural supply" area, Hanson says. Some of the drums were stored in a "camouflaged bunker complex" that was shown to reporters - with unpleasant results. "More than a dozen soldiers, a Knight-Ridder reporter, a CNN cameraman, and two Iraqi POWs came down with symptoms consistent with exposure to a nerve agent," Hanson says. "But later ISG tests resulted in a proclamation of negative, end of story, nothing to see here, etc., and the earlier findings and injuries dissolved into nonexistence. Left unexplained is the small matter of the obvious pains taken to disguise the cache of ostensibly legitimate pesticides. One wonders about the advantage an agricultural-commodities business gains by securing drums of pesticide in camouflaged bunkers 6 feet underground. The 'agricultural site' was also colocated with a military ammunition dump - evidently nothing more than a coincidence in the eyes of the ISG."

That wasn't the only significant find by coalition troops of probable CW stockpiles, Hanson believes. Near the northern Iraqi town of Bai'ji, where Saddam had built a chemical-weapons plant known to the United States from nearly 12 years of inspections, elements of the 4th Infantry Division found 55-gallon drums containing a substance identified through mass spectrometry analysis as cyclosarin - a nerve agent. Nearby were surface-to-surface and surface-to-air missiles, gas masks and a mobile laboratory that could have been used to mix chemicals at the site. "Of course, later tests by the experts revealed that these were only the ubiquitous pesticides that everybody was turning up," Hanson says. "It seems Iraqi soldiers were obsessed with keeping ammo dumps insect-free, according to the reading of the evidence now enshrined by the conventional wisdom that 'no WMD stockpiles have been discovered.'"

At Taji - an Iraqi weapons complex as large as the District of Columbia - U.S. combat units discovered more "pesticides" stockpiled in specially built containers, smaller in diameter but much longer than the standard 55-gallon drum. Hanson says he still recalls the military sending digital images of the canisters to his office, where his boss at the Ministry of Science and Technology translated the Arabic-language markings. "They were labeled as pesticides," he says. "Gee, you sure have got a lot of pesticides stored in ammo dumps."

Again, this January, Danish forces found 120-millimeter mortar shells filled with a mysterious liquid that initially tested positive for blister agents. But subsequent tests by the United States disputed that finding. "If it wasn't a chemical agent, what was it?" Hanson asks. "More pesticides? Dish-washing detergent? From this old soldier's perspective, I gain nothing from putting a liquid in my mortar rounds unless that stuff will do bad things to the enemy."

The discoveries Hanson describes are not dramatic. And that's the problem: Finding real stockpiles in grubby ammo dumps doesn't fit the image the media and the president's critics carefully have fed to the public of what Iraq's weapons ought to look like.

A senior administration official who has gone through the intelligence reporting from Iraq as well as the earlier reports from U.N. arms inspectors refers to another well-documented allegation. "The Iraqis admitted they had made 3.9 tons of VX," a powerful nerve gas, but claimed they had never weaponized it. The U.N. inspectors "felt they had more. But where did it go?" The Iraqis never provided any explanation of what had happened to their VX stockpiles.

What does 3.9 tons of VX look like? "It could fit in one large garage," the official says. Assuming, of course, that Saddam would assemble every bit of VX gas his scientists had produced at a single site, that still amounts to one large garage in an area the size of the state of California.

Senior administration officials stress that the investigation will continue as inspectors comb through millions of pages of documents in Iraq and attempt to interview Iraqi weapons scientists who have been trained all their professional lives to conceal their activities from the outside world.

"The conditions under which the ISG is working are not very conducive," one official said. "But this president wants the truth to come out. This is not an exercise in spinning or censoring."

For more on WMD, read "Iraqi Weapons in Syria"


32 posted on 05/17/2004 6:26:49 AM PDT by Peach
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Wright is right!
Boy, are you right. Not even in Lebanon, with its large Christian population, has a Middle-East government been honest and/or efficient. Well, let's face it, most failed in both respects.

As an affiliate to the French Defense Institute, I recently attended a lecture by French Congressman Pierre Lellouche, a real friend of the US by the way, about the Arab governments. I could sum it up in two words : Arab government are abject failures, be it politically, economically, or morally.
33 posted on 05/17/2004 6:27:34 AM PDT by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To clarify - Powell only commented on the mobile labs intelligence being wrong. He did not say "there were no WMD."


34 posted on 05/17/2004 6:29:22 AM PDT by IamConservative (A man who stands for nothing will fall for anything.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: LS

I suppose that shows you the limits of the tacit agreements, then. But I thought part of the shenanigans in the UN security council was about the veracity of the WMD threat. Wasn't Powell criticized because his assessment was a rip-off from a 1990 British term paper, and also because some of the pictures of mobile labs he showed were more than ten years old ? I'll have to look it up.


35 posted on 05/17/2004 6:29:49 AM PDT by Atlantic Friend (Cursum Perficio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Wright is right!
Iraqi citizens will respond to power, whomever has it will get their attention.
36 posted on 05/17/2004 6:35:05 AM PDT by keysguy (Vote GWB--stay the course)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

How incredibly frightening. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't that why we have a CIA? Aren't they the ones that are not supposed to get fooled by anyone? Has our intelligence machinery become so decrepit that they have taken to listening to unreliable sources as their sole means of gathering information?

Just more evidence that competence left Washington in 1988 and has not been seen since.


37 posted on 05/17/2004 6:40:33 AM PDT by NCSteve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JohnGalt

It will take smallpox being unleased in NYC to make people understand what's at stake here, and even then they will blindly deny that we were right to go after Saddam (if they're still alive, that is).


38 posted on 05/17/2004 6:40:58 AM PDT by alnick (Mrs. Heinz-Kerry's husband wants teh-rayz-ah your taxes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: alnick
The problem is there is no retention with the populace. Most have forgotten 911. News cycles are about two weeks then onto the next topic. Few put it all together anymore.
39 posted on 05/17/2004 6:46:34 AM PDT by keysguy (Vote GWB--stay the course)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Atlantic Friend

If you read David Kay's report, you'll see that there was indeed a WMD threat from Saddam.


40 posted on 05/17/2004 6:47:18 AM PDT by alnick (Mrs. Heinz-Kerry's husband wants teh-rayz-ah your taxes.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-69 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