WMD's Found In Iraq, But Dems say "Lets Cut And Run And Surrender!"
By Cepan Posted in User Blogs — Comments (18) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
Wednesday, June 21, 2006
Weapons Of Mass Destruction FOUND In Iraq, But Democrats Say "Let's Cut And Run And Surrender!"
Today it was learned in a press conference by U.S. Senator Rick Santorum and U.S. House member Pete Hoekstra that the U.S. Military has found WMD's in Iraq. These two members of Congress have been fighting for months to get these documents declassified.
The partially declassified documents show that 500 shells containing Sarin and Mustard gas were found in Iraq.
The declassified document is here http://hotair.iad.cachefly.net/images/2006-05/iraq-doc.pdf
This is a huge story, yet the libs are already saying it does not change anything since there were "only 500" and that the stuff was probably too old to be dangerous to anyone. They should be apologizing to President Bush, but never will.
This news becomes public on the very day John Kerry tries to get the U.S. Senate to vote for a total pullout of Iraq in less than a year.
On a day we learn that the Islamofacist animals who want us all dead have cut out the eyes, the private parts and the HEADS of our two brave soldiers, those on the left are STILL calling for a pullout.
The liberals would have Iraq become yet another Vietnam, Cambodia and Somolia where we pull out and leave the population to terror and mass murder.
It will take another terrorist attack here in The U.S. before the loony left sees the insanity they are spouting over and over again about Iraq and the War On Terror.
My email is already filling up with angry rants from liberal bloggers who HATE President Bush and the military. They are accusing us on the right of planning this and making this all up.
The reality is they are making up the dream of taking over the House And Senate in November.
I will predict now that they have destroyed that pipedream with their Iraq "policy" of treason and pullout.
I will say now that they will not only NOT win the House and Senate, they will lose seats they think are safe.
In Matworld the U.S. people know who the real patriots and heroes are in the country and it is not the liberals.
We support the war because this is the battle for freedom around the world.
We start to make plans to go after Iran and North Korea so we are ready when, not if, the United Nations fails to make them concede to the will of the free nations.
We ignore the John Murtha's and the Kerry's of the world who want us to LOSE this war for political gain.
This is World War IV, not a game.
It's time the Democrats realized that and help out, but I won't hold my breath.
The Democrat party is dead in the water and they have no clue what serious trouble they are in.
Time to push them over the cliff this November.
MTI
Mat Toenniessen
I guess that qualifies as the "DoD" as much as this woman qualifies as the CIA.
Santorum and Hoekstra are hyping a document that describes degraded, pre-1991 munitions that were already acknowledged by the White House's Iraq Survey Group and dismissed.
May I see exactly the dismissal and what the subject of it was and when it was? I know that there had been a "dismissal" of at least one individual find, but the fact that much of the report remains classified says they aren't exactly all that dismissive of it, are they?
Fox News' Jim Angle contacted the Defense Department who quickly disavowed Santorum and Hoekstra's claims.
So the writer is saying the DoD itself disavowed the claims ... the only claims that were made was that 500 weapons were found. Is DoD disavowing their own report and saying that 500 weapons weren't found?
A Defense Department official told Angle flatly
so the writer could hear the tone used in the discussion? Was the writer involved in the discussion?
that the munitions hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra
interesting psychological ploy here ... notice where the quotation marks start. The speaker is not REALLY quoted as saying "the munitions hyped by Santorum and Hoekstra" but it almost implies that if you aren't parsing what is written carefully.
"not the WMD's for which this country went to war."
Now the writer has completely lost me. At this point I honestly believe the writer is fabricating the quote. We didn't go to war over any specific WMD, we went to war because Saddam wouldn't allow inspections. Period. Anyone at DoD in any official capacity would know that.
Total, utter, complete and total ... crap.
When he shows up on 60 Minutes to plug his new book.
"ANONYMOUS"?
Who the hell cares.
I trust hte documents and Santorum.
Cepan
CBS found some completely real and totally non-fake top secret CIA documents that support their story. Here is a quote: "Why is teh Bushhitlerburton lying about the WMDs??? We didn't find any WMDs except the ones that Rumsfeld and Rove forced the secret prisoners to plant. They sure had a hard time doing that with all those pairs of underwear on their heads!!!111!!11one!11eleven!!"
Liberals and hippys are now searching for a new unifying mantra. "W lied and people died"? Guess that's not so true. Its kind of tough to be lying when you say "Saddam has WMD's", when Saddam indeed had WMD's. To avoid being the "liars" in this long, never-ending case of the merits of the war in Iraq, the liberals need to find a new slogan. What could it be?
"Liberals lied, W didn't"? Wishful thinking. No chance of them ever fessing up like that.
"W didn't lie and thousands of terrorists died"? Way too positive.
"W didn't lie but I hate him anyway"? Could be. I think that it captures the essence of the anti-W liberal asininity.
...you terrorist-sympathysing, pro-Saddam, defeatist.
as a source? The only reason to use the New York Times instead of Think Progress to line the bird cage is that the NYT comes on paper.
best. reply. ever.
I'm getting that tatooed on my foot. Typing out eleven was priceless!
UR Teh l33t_r0x0Rz.
cuz, you know, for a classified report that Santorum "just" got his hands on after having known about it for 2 months, I find it odd that it's apparently on blogs
What we announced was that after two and a half months of being aware of this document, we were able to get a copy of the document, and convince the intelligence community to give us a declassified version of the document.
...
HH: Now of these 500 shells that they have recovered, Senator Santorum, does the document, the unclassified version, tell you in how many batches they were discovered? Was it one? Was it 50 of 100, or one of 500?
RS: You know, I can't talk about what additionally it tells you. All I can tell you is there have been published reports on blog sites about this report...and the published reports say that 75% of these 500 or so weapons were in fact filled and usable, and very dangerous for the...if got to improper hands.
HH: Senator Santorum, can you tell us the name of the blog on which that report was featured?
RS: I will get it to you. How's that? I don't have it in front of me.
So you're telling me that it takes Rick Santorum, a US Senator, over 2 1/2 months to get a declassified version of a document outlining the findings of WMD in Iraq, but according to Rick, the report is all over the blogosphere already.
What was that about credible sources like Thnk Progress and the NYTimes?
Because leaks of classified information never happen. I suppose Santorum could've just started talking about it 2.5 months ago while it was still classified secret, but hey, he isn't a Democrat.
The leaking of classified information is reserved for True Patriots who speak-truth-to-power™ AKA liberal democrats!
seem interested in having more discussion about WMDs.
Here are the last two paragraphs:
Still, the discovery should prompt curiosity about what more digging might turn up. To date, there has been an almost pathological reluctance on the part of the U.S. intelligence community to translate and analyze 36,000 boxes of documents captured from Saddam Hussein's government. "The information released today proves that weapons of mass destruction are, in fact, in Iraq," said Senator Rick Santorum, a Pennsylvania Republican. "It is essential for the American people to understand that these weapons are in Iraq." He pointed out that during yesterday's debate on a troop withdrawal resolution, several Senate Democrats said that no WMD had been found in Iraq, a claim, Mr. Santorum said, the declassified document proves is untrue.
The tantalizing clues found in the tiny portion of the National Ground Intelligence Center's report that has been declassified should serve as a wakeup call for the Bush administration to consider releasing more material from the treasure trove of Saddam documents. The Bush White House's failure to defend and explain its Iraq policies has proven to be one of the major reasons support for the war has fallen so dramatically.
From the Radio Blogger interview:
RS: What we announced was that after two and a half months of being aware of this document, we were able to get a copy of the document, and convince the intelligence community to give us a declassified version of the document.
Two and a half months. Two and a half months Rick Santorum has spent trying to get this report and finally, just now it seems, they were able to convince the intelligence community to give them a declassified version.
But then, Ricky states something that just doesn't seem to confirm what he just said.
...HH: Now of these 500 shells that they have recovered, Senator Santorum, does the document, the unclassified version, tell you in how many batches they were discovered? Was it one? Was it 50 of 100, or one of 500?
RS: You know, I can't talk about what additionally it tells you. All I can tell you is there have been published reports on blog sites about this report...and the published reports say that 75% of these 500 or so weapons were in fact filled and usable, and very dangerous for the...if got to improper hands.
HH: Senator Santorum, can you tell us the name of the blog on which that report was featured?
RS: I will get it to you. How's that? I don't have it in front of me.
Furthermore,
HH: Now Senator, is it your impression that the classified nature of this material is in place in order to protect the information that might assist insurgents from finding additional stockpiles? Is that...
RS: There's certainly...that is clearly an element, and there are certainly parts of this report that were not released that should not be released.
And in addition,
RS: In fact, I just left the floor of the United States Senate, and asked each one of my colleagues to go up and look at it. This is a secret document. This is not a top secret document. This is a document that every member of the United States Senate has access to.
A secret document. Not top secret, but secret. So how would "some blog sites" have it already?
Rick. You mean to tell me that a US Senator such as yourself has less power to procure secret intelligence documents proving the existence of WMD in Iraq than "some blogger?"
I'd hate to be that blogger right now. If I was citing a blogger for having this information, I'd be pretty pissed off right now if Rick Santorum, in good Republican fashion, didn't lend me at least a little cronyism-style credit where it's due.
Moving right along, Senator Santorum had this to add as well:
RS: Unfortunately not. When we called the press...I will admit, we had hoped to get this document released to us earlier in the day, but we did not get it released to us until 4:30. There was a brief on it until 5:15. We had a press conference at 5:30, which as you know, is not prime time to have press conferences. But since the document was now available, declassified and available to all members, and was faxed around to several other members' offices, we thought it was important to characterize and put this in context. So we hastily called a press conference, of which...
You just got this document. Just at 4:30, too, yet...some "blog sites" had it already.
So if you want to talk about leaks, and assert this has been out there for some time, then this isn't new information.
So why all the glee?
Also consider:
Since this official's speaking for DOD, what he's saying may be as close to an official response from DOD as we're going to get. Here's what this official just emailed me:
These munitions are assessed to be pre-1991 vintage and were likely left over from previous conflicts. Given their condition and age, they have degraded. It is probable that most of these munitions could not be fired as designed. For operations security reasons, I cannot say where these munitions were found. Disclosure would place U.S. and coalition military forces at greater risk. The munitions were recovered during the course of military operations in Iraq. For operations security reasons, I can't disclose the exact number of munitions that have been found because of possible force protection implications.
Incidentally, anyone in the media or blogosphere who wants to verify the above can simply call DOD and raise the same questions. The Department will put him or her in touch with this official, too. Nothing to it.
The chemical weapons that have been recovered by US forces in Iraq were all made before the 1991 Gulf War and were too degraded for their intended use, US intelligence officials said.
Republican lawmakers have cast the disclosure that about 500 chemical weapons have been found in Iraq as evidence that Saddam Hussein had a stockpile of the weapons before the March 2003 US invasion of Iraq.
But the intelligence officials, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity, said the weapons were too degraded to have posed a threat to US forces in March 2003.
They said all chemical weapons found since 2003 were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and they had no evidence Saddam was producing or stockpiling chemical weapons after that.
When I read "posed no threat to US forces in March/03," I have to assume that if it poses no threat to our troops in the immediate vicinity of them, I don't see how these represent the "mushroom cloud" we we're all scared into believing existed and was part of the reason we needed to go to Iraq and topple Saddam.
Now I'm hearing from Fox News Military Analyst Thomas McInerery...that the US the administration was complicit in a multinational cover-up intended to protect Russia, China and France?
...And if you get in there and if you found those weapons and found the precursors, the fingerprints would go back to Russia, China and France. Now, those are the three countries that had the most conventional weapon sales to Saddam Hussein. We've done an inventory on that, so that's public. And I believe they were complicit, so I don't think the administration wants to trash three of the five members of this Security Council.
I'm to believe this adminstration, after being harangued for years now, from people, well...like myself, due to the lack of WMD's that posed a significant threat to us and countries that didn't want to go to war, like France, are suddenly going to be ignored for their part in hiding the WMD's?
Whatever happend to "with us or against us?" Isn't that why some here have already called me a Saddam loyalist, a terrorist sympathizer, etc? Because I don't agree with this adminsitration? Because I'm not "with you" and therefore must be "against you?"
I was always under the impression that it was just the liberals who claimed that Bush (sorry, not him personally - "the administration") hid the WMD's but with this little play by Santorum, this goes beyond the pale.
"With us or against us?" Like France! Those pesky Frenchmen and their pesky berets and french, er.., freedom fries! Except...when France plays a part in hiding Saddam's WMD, suddenly, the US sweeps that under the rug because they don't want to trash members of the security council.
Seems to go against the grain when it comes to rooting out the players in the GWoT, doesn't it?
Think Progress
Or you can watch it if you prefer.