Fire!

"Dave Smith" wrote in message
...
John Wheaton wrote:

Another commonly stated err, but why let facts enter into your rant at
this
late date. Every major Intel Agency in the entire World believed that
WMDs
were there, and a number of Iraqi General Officers and Mossad continue to
maintain that the WMDs were there and that they were moved as the
invation
started.

No. Not every major intelligence agency thought that.

Here is a vast array from the UN to Weapons Inspectors to Iraqi General
Officers to prominate Democrats, some of which were on the Intel Committee
and would have access to ALL of the Intel that the President saw.

Liberals also choose to ignore United Nations Resolution 144I, which clearly
established that Iraq had WMD. That resolution was approved unanimously by
the UN member nations. http://canadafreepress.com/2006/lillpop110506.htm

"Every serious intelligence service thought Saddam still had WMD, and the
same consensus existed across the entire U.S. intelligence community."
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110005342

"But the greatest discrepancy between the administration's public
statementsand the intelligence community's judgments concerned not WMD
(there was indeed a broad consensus that such programs existed),"
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/200603...r-in-iraq.html

"As Pollack is a former CIA analyst who specialized in Persian Gulf military
issues, many reporters no doubt took these as first-hand assessments. Yet in
a post-war interview, when asked to defend his claims about Iraq's arsenal,
Pollack demurred (NPR Weekend All Things Considered, 5/24/03): "That was the
consensus of opinion among the intelligence community."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1150

A number of great stories are cataloged here
http://www.aijac.org.au/updates/Jan-04/290104.html

Here are more

http://www.investors.com/editorial/I...issue=20060221

http://www.americanthinker.com/comme...mments_id=4465

http://www.nysun.com/article/27183

http://www.nysun.com/article/27110

http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs...2/-1/COLUMNIST

http://www.2la.org/syria/wmd.html

http://www.nysun.com/article/26514

http://www.nysun.com/article/26514?page_no=1

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/..._commande.html

Herewith a substantial collection of quotes from responsible professionals
about Saddam Hussein and WMD in Iraq:

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate,
air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to
the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction
programs."-From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara
A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998.

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last
visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has
reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological,
chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War
status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is
doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-
range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."-From a
December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, &
Tom Lantos among others.

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between
Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to
dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit
monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has
developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological
capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear
weapons capabilities"-From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and
Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002.

"Saddam's goal . is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining
and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we
must not and we will not let him succeed."-Madeline Albright, 1998.

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some
day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10
times since 1983"-National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998.

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all
weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its
agreement."-Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are
confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and
biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to
build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence
reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet
achieved nuclear capability."-Robert Byrd, October 2002.

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat. Yes, he has chemical
and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United
States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were
before September 11th of 2001. He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing
nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he
were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would
face greatly increased risks as would we."-Wesley Clark on September 26,
2002.

"What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with
the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in
the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past
four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has
continued armament programs."-Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat
Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use
them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and
all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened
tomorrow."-Bill Clinton in 1998.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that
Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons
stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also
given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members,
though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible
events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked,
Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and
chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he
succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security
landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American
security."-Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002.

"I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in
1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a
warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those
trucks out."-Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003.

"Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass
destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them
against his own people."-Tom Daschle in 1998.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our
allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam
Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available
means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already
used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build
more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons,
and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."-John
Edwards, Oct 10, 2002.

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security.
It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a
clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination
to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."-John
Edwards, Oct 10, 2002.

"I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of
mass destruction."-Dick Gephardt in September of 2002.

"Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we
should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to
weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction
has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will
continue for as long as Saddam is in power."-Al Gore, 2002.

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam
Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for
the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."-Bob Graham,
December 2002.

"Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive
his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction."-Jim Jeffords,
October 8, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."-Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002.

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he
is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction
cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed."-Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority
to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe
that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real
and grave threat to our security."-John F. Kerry, Oct 2002.

"The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but
as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and
particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed
to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons.
He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing
the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass
destruction and the issue of proliferation."-John Kerry, October 9, 2002.

"(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator,
leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He
presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone
to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America's response to his
continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction.
That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has
spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and
disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is
real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian
Gulf War."-John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a
threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates
of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the
means of delivering them."-Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002.

"Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological
weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the
United States."-Joe Lieberman, August, 2002.

"Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, United Nations
inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities
that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate
that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no
reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued
biological and chemical weapons. Inspectors have said that Iraq's claims
about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq
used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish
population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past,
there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt
that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass
destruction."-Patty Murray, October 9, 2002.

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the
proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave
importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the
development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to
countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection
process."-Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998.

"Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible
intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still
has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium
perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic
missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these
deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX
substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored
in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains
significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly
reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production."-Ex-Un Weapons
Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively
to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the
next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to
enriched uranium from foreign sources-something that is not that difficult
in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated
the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass
destruction."-John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002.

"Saddam's existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very
real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both
against Iraq's enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop
delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring
these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle
East."-John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002.

"Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration's policy towards
Iraq, I don't think there can be any question about Saddam's conduct. He has
systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every
significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his
chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has
refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of
international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying
time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United
Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are
simply the facts."-Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002.

As the record clearly shows, if G.W. Bush lied about WMD, he had plenty of
company! http://canadafreepress.com/2006/lillpop110506.htm

"The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.

13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and
1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this
period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical
agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."

Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocusn...wsID=354&sID=6



CNN: How did Hussein intend to use the weapon, once it was completed?

HAMZA: Saddam has a whole range of weapons of mass destruction, nuclear,
biological and chemical. According to German intelligence estimates, we
expect him to have three nuclear weapons by 2005. So, the window will close
by 2005, and we expect him then to be a lot more aggressive with his
neighbors and encouraging terrorism, and using biological weapons. Now he's
using them through surrogates like al Qaeda, but we expect he'll use them
more aggressively then.

Dr. Khidhir Hamza, former Iraqi Nuclear Scientist for 20 years
Interviewed on CNN
October 22, 2001
http://www.cnn.com/2001/COMMUNITY/10/22/hamza.cnna/







Those that did were
swayed by "intelligence" provided by the US, and the administration has
admitted that they acted on the basis of faulty intelligence. One of the
Iraqi generals who was supposed to have provided information defected
years
before the invasion. Let us not forget that the Mossad, while effective in
accomplishing what it wants, is not beyond lying to help Israeli
interests.

On Oct 31, 12:38 pm, "Jochen Kriegerowski" jochen-kriegerow...@t-
online.de wrote:
"memiki" schrieb

......it's not necessary to call the President an "idiot"

It's not very polite to call *anyone* an idiot. But by doing so
you don't damage anything but your own reputation, because
people might have thought you were a polite person up to
that very moment. Whoever that 'anyone' might be.

There are more appropriate expressions to characterize a
person's competence or character. And using these is not
damaging to a nation either.

Jochen

Jochen -- It has been my experience with several posters to this forum
that "politeness" is not their first priority.

Miki

Ike -- Have you posted anything from the "Fire" thread to your other
newsgroups? I don't recall seeing the names of five posters here
before, so they could be either first-time posters or don't post
often. They are from out of the country, and it appears they belong to
some of the same usenet groups as you do.

MIki

"Ed Jay" wrote in message
...
John Wheaton scribed:


"Ed Jay" wrote in message
. ..
John Wheaton scribed:


"Peter D" [email protected] wrote in message
...
Do you know, Miki, that this is the sort of reasoning used to silence
opposition to Hitler in the early 30s? I'm always cautious of anyone
who
would seek to silence others on the basis that their speech is
"unpatriotic" or "abuses freedom of speech".

Liberal Icon FDR also put newspapermen and other dissenters in
detention.
Are you going to compare him to Hitler as well?

FDR has nothing to do with Bush.

Very true as Bush has not locked up dissidents, or set up internment camps
as FDR did.

Nothing that FDR may have done excuses Bush. Stoopid argument, John.

Hey, William the Conqueror invaded England. Bush didn't. I guess that
makes
Bush a good guy in your book, huh? That makes as much sense as your
argument. :-)

How dissent was handled was the subject and Bush was being compared to
Hitler who imprisoned and executed dissenters. Not much of a comparison
there so I provided an example of a liberal Democrat Icon that went much
farther than Bush by directly silencing dissenters by imprisoning them.

TheNewsGuy(Mike) wrote:
memiki wrote:
...
Excuse me.... but what do you mean by "you guys"....;

I think he means the idiots who are STILL supporting this outlandishly
corrupt and incompetent administration.

The REAL idiots are the ones who are giving moral support to the terrorists BY attacking this
administration.

Hatunen wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:50:46 -0800, Icono Clast
wrote:

But neither I nor the Dixie Chicks insulted the Office of the
Presidency. I have the greatest of respect for it, as I'm sure most
people on the planet do, even if held by the likes of the incumbent.

The greatest insult to the office of the President is the
incumbent.

The terrorists just love it when assholes like you make posts like that.

On Oct 31, 9:04 pm, "John Wheaton" wrote:

"Every serious intelligence service thought Saddam still had WMD, and the
same consensus existed across the entire U.S. intelligence

What a sad oxymoron.

I'm curious why no "intelligence" has ever argued the obvious
(at least to me)... that dictators generally are _not_
suicidal and do not do things that can get themselves
dethroned. The same argument applies to North Korea, etc..
Too many war-mongers.

On Oct 31, 10:05 am, Hatunen wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:50:46 -0800, Icono Clast
wrote:

But neither I nor the Dixie Chicks insulted the Office of the
Presidency. I have the greatest of respect for it, as I'm sure most
people on the planet do, even if held by the likes of the incumbent.

The greatest insult to the office of the President is the
incumbent.

--
You cannot separate the President from the Office of the President.
If you insult the President, you insult the Office of the
Presidency........you are just fooling yourself.......

Miki

wrote in message
ups.com...

I'm curious why no "intelligence" has ever argued the obvious
(at least to me)... that dictators generally are _not_
suicidal and do not do things that can get themselves
dethroned.

Ah but they do. Saddam refused to allow inspectors unfettered access, or
settle the where abouts of "thousands of tonnes" of chemical weapons whne it
was made quite clear that he would be deposed.

The same argument applies to North Korea, etc..
Too many war-mongers.


Ah you mention war-mongers so you do remember Saddam invading Iran and
Kuwait.

On Oct 31, 9:38 pm, "sharx35" wrote:
Hatunen wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 04:50:46 -0800, Icono Clast
wrote:

But neither I nor the Dixie Chicks insulted the Office of the
Presidency. I have the greatest of respect for it, as I'm sure most
people on the planet do, even if held by the likes of the incumbent.

The greatest insult to the office of the President is the
incumbent.

The terrorists just love it when assholes like you make posts like that.

Forgive me, Ike, for saying.......but you are being
hypocritical.........the President IS the Office of the Presidency;
otherwise, it is just a room with a desk.. I reiterate that your
hateful words are disgusting and harmful to the country and to the men
and women fighting for us. Nothing seems to stop you from spewing
poison to the world where we are already out of favor. My hope and
wish are that when you feel the need to attack the Administration you
do so as a mature adult.

Miki