« Milblogger is Going to Iraq | Main | More Revelations From Those Iraqi Documents »

"Saddam's Shopping List"

There have been quite a few newly translated Iraqi documents released over the past couple of weeks. I have not posted anything about them because I have not had time to go through them and figure out what, if anything, was significant about them. The document that Ed Morrisey links today, however, is easy enough for even the most rabid Bush hater to understand. Since the contents of the document refer to the 2002-2003 time period, the information contained therein is much more relevant than some other documents that reference material possessed by Saddam many years ago. The document is what Morrisey refers to as Saddam's shopping list and on it are listed some banned precursors to nerve gas that Iraq should not have been possessing or seeking to possess.

Sodium cyanide is an important precursor to WMD, especially the nerve gas tabun, which many suspect was the weapon used in Halabja. We have worked with France and Germany to stop North Korea from acquiring it in 2003 and 2004. The fact that it shows up on Saddam's shopping list as late as for 2003 shows that the Iraqis still used it for some purpose -- and the regime was not supposed to have any of it.

The list of chemicals may have more connection to weapons programs, but certainly the repeated inclusion of sodium cyanide has to point to nefarious intent.

Update: While there are some dual uses for the chemical, including electroplating, this was a chemical Iraq was not supposed to have. There are several new posts up at Captain's Quarters about other recently translated documents. I will post links to them above.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference "Saddam's Shopping List":

» Stop The ACLU linked with New Iraqi Document (ISGP-2003-00300134-x)

Comments (64)

39 months in and still</... (Below threshold)
Lee:

39 months in and still no WMDs. You guys are looking really dumb at this point, literally grasping at straws.

None, Lee?None at ... (Below threshold)

None, Lee?

None at all?

39 months in and Lee... (Below threshold)
John Irving:

39 months in and Lee looks as foolish as every, ignoring every revelation of the kind of threat Saddam was and what he wanted to become.

They say ignorance is bliss, so Lee must be on ecstatic individual.

Not to mention that people ... (Below threshold)

Not to mention that people of all political stripes ought to be interested in what translated Iraqi documents say about any number of things, such as WMD, agents abroad, payments to terrorists, training camp records, execution records,......

Sodium cyanide could be used for extraction of gold from ore, although Iraq does not mine much, if any, gold. Or, in small quantities, it's a garden-variety poison. Certain chemical plating processes use it, too, but I doubt they'd have a legitimate need for that pre-war.

First, WMD has been found i... (Below threshold)
Lorie Byrd:

First, WMD has been found in Iraq, as those who have paid attention are aware. What has not been found are the large stockpiles we expected to be there. By "we" I mean Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Ted Kennedy, the U.N., France, Germany and everyone else in the world that voiced an opinion on the topic prior to 2003. So when you say "you guys" are looking dumb then I suppose "you guys" would include the ones mentioned above. I have pages of quotes from those Democrats who declared Saddam to be a danger possessing WMD in all the years running up to the invasion, and some, including Bill Clinton, even after the invasion. I have posted a dozen or so of them in past posts and columns. Do I need to post them again?

"Do I need to post them ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Do I need to post them again?"

I'm sorry, I thought we were looking for WMDs, not Bill Clinton quotes... LoveAmerica usually covers the "blame Bill Clinton" beat, doesn't she?

No, Lorie, just produce the WMDs that George Bush said were there and I will be happy.

"I'm sorry, I thought we... (Below threshold)

"I'm sorry, I thought we were looking for WMDs,"

Actually, we were looking for a WMD program, and we've found quite a lot of it (compared to the zero they were allowed under the inspection guidelines). We also found some of the ways they hid their ongoing program from inspectors, and have some strong indications of where the products of that program went.

Unlike Lee, I am not a Sadd... (Below threshold)
jaymaster:

Unlike Lee, I am not a Saddam apologist. Hell, I'd put a bullet in Saddam's head myself if I had the chance.

But I have to agree with the one commenter at Ed's. That looks like a list of plating chemicals. They would have a multitude of uses in legitimate businesses, from electronics to jewelry.

At a previous employer, we literally bought sodium cyanide by the train load. And the plant was located about 25 yards up hill from a major cities water supply, but that's another story.

Some of those chemicals are nasty stuff, for sure, and they could be used for improvised poisons. But compared to the real weapons grade stuff we knew he had, this stuff wouldn't even be in the same league.

There are good reasons to ban this stuff as part of an economic sanction program. Plating is critical to many industries, especially military, and substitutes are almost impossible to find. If this stuff was banned as part of the UN effort, and Saddam was trying to buy some on the black market, then that is probably a valid enough reason to throw him in jail.

Bottom line, I suspect these chemicals would be much more valuable to him for their industrial uses, rather than using them as components of weapons themselves.


Plating chemicals?... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Plating chemicals?

But didn't Bill Clinton say plating chemicals qualified as WMDs?

LoveAmerica? Help us out here...

We won't have a complete pi... (Below threshold)

We won't have a complete picture for a while. Lots of documents need to be translated. And who knows what was sent to Syria.

Bottom line, I suspect t... (Below threshold)

Bottom line, I suspect these chemicals would be much more valuable to him for their industrial uses, rather than using them as components of weapons themselves.

If we were talking about a normal country, not run by a crazy asshole dictator, you might have a point.

How much plating material do you need for a not-that-large missile factory (which is what the Dhu-al-Faqqar plant was)? For that matter, how much was in the shopping list above? If it's a few hundred pounds, then maybe it's relatively innocent, but if it's in ton lots, you're getting into the "let's order a bunch of chemicals for 'plating' and throw the rest away."

Like i said -- desperate.</... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Like i said -- desperate.

Lee, Since the lie ... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Lee,
Since the lie about the link about Saddam and AlQ has been debunked, are you trying to cling to the other myth that Saddam doesn't want to have WMDs?

We can get you definitive p... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

We can get you definitive proof of WMD, but it may mean finding where they went. Then, we should definintely go into Lebanon, Syria.

Do you really think Hussein didn't have WMD before the several month's lead time spent in the U.N. we gave him before going in?

If you trust him on that score, I have a bridge in Brooklyn for you.

Lee, darling:jayma... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

Lee, darling:

jaymaster thinks Saddam was in control of an industrialized nation when he says "Bottom line, I suspect these chemicals would be much more valuable to him for their industrial uses, rather than using them as components of weapons themselves."

Sanctions led to collapse of infrastructure. Saddam couldn't even manage a traffic signal system in Baghdad let alone a plating factory for Yugo door handles.

Are you in estrus?

Check out <a href="http://w... (Below threshold)

Check out another document Capt. Ed just posted. Seems Saddam's Iraq trusted CNN most to get their propaganda out to the world!

"Do you really think Hus... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Do you really think Hussein didn't have WMD before the several month's lead time spent in the U.N. we gave him before going in?"

No evidence of that -- in fact, the "evidence" regarding yellow-cake uranium and mil-spec aluminum tubes turned out to be total bullsh*t -- just like this blog's claim that Saddam's WMD shopping list was found.

Desperate politician's (and their loyalist supporters) grasping at straws.

I would like to address thi... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

I would like to address this to Lee the wise one, but I will refrain. Some like to redefine what was an original reason for doing something to one that fits their agenda. We did not, and I repeat, did not go to Iraq to find WMD, we went to remove Saddam from power. Anyone who says differently is a liar. Got that Lee. A liar.

And all those trucks crossi... (Below threshold)

And all those trucks crossing the Syrian border in those months; you think you know for sure NO WMD or materials were on them?

And how do you know this? ESP? Because it's been pretty well proven the CIA and the news media don't have a clue.

Guess he's ignoring the 500... (Below threshold)
Faith+1:

Guess he's ignoring the 500 artillery shells of gas too huh? Or the other IED made out of cem warheads found previously?

No proof he had WMDs before?

Guess the Iranian soldiers and Kurds he gassed just imagined it?

It's clear Lee is incapable of thinking. Just repeating what talking points he's been handed. I'll join the others in just ignoring him as he is nothing but a puppet mouthing the words others tell him to say.

"Guess he's ignoring the... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Guess he's ignoring the 500 artillery shells of gas too huh?"

The five hundred 17 year-old circa 1989 artillery shells that experts say are no more dangerous than the cleaning chemicals found under the average American kitchen sink?

Yep - I'm ignoring those too. Wow - the total desperation is increasing -- not many straws left you guys -- who else wants to proclaim their blind loyalty to King George?

Lorie:There's an u... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Lorie:

There's an update on Captain's Quarters from Morrissey; the chemical list that includes sodium cyanide also has a dual-purpose use for "electroplating".

The five hundred 17 year... (Below threshold)

The five hundred 17 year-old circa 1989 artillery shells that experts say are no more dangerous than the cleaning chemicals found under the average American kitchen sink?

The ones that they "documented" as being destroyed, like all of the rest?

By the way - that "sink" must be pretty scary, since even a "deteriorated' shell has a lot of leftover nastiness inside. They found 80 year old mustard gas shells in France that still had enough toxicity to kill, and 20 years isn't enough to degrade some nerve gas chemicals. As long as the seals on the shell hold and keep the oxygen out, they're still going to be pretty nasty. And, of course, they can always reload (part of the agreement after Gulf War I was to not even possess munitions capable of carrying chemical weapons).

So, since you admit the shells exist, you also admit that Iraq violated UN sanctions... which means that your post at the top of this thread was 100% false.


Yeah, Lee, those 500 shells... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Yeah, Lee, those 500 shells Saddam pledged to destroy back in 1991 as part of the ceasefire ending the first Gulf War. Conclusive proof that he violated that aspect of that agreement -- along with all the others he violated, too.

Hey, Lee, mighty genius -- what is supposed to happen when the side that surrenders in a war breaks the terms of that surrender? Stern lectures?

J.

"There's an update on Ca... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"There's an update on Captain's Quarters from Morrissey; the chemical list that includes sodium cyanide also has a dual-purpose use for "electroplating".

Once again answering the age-old question -- "Who's Your Daddy?" Lol!

Do I need to post them a... (Below threshold)
astigafa:

Do I need to post them again?

Speaking strictly for myself, no. But there's just this weasely shift-of-message thing that occurred during the Iraq war that stands out like a monkey in your armpit.

You see, (he said), once upon a time, a terrorist fundementalist Islamic organization called "al Qaeda" (literally, "the neoconservative Islamic front, according to some scholars) hijacked a bunch of planes and knocked down the World Trade Center in NYC.

So GW got his posse up and traced 'em back to Afghanistan. Good goin', chief! This was the right move. We dropped in on the people who sponsored that terrorist fundemnetalist Islamic organization, the Taliban, and basically stomped them into the ground. This is/was/will always be a good thing, in my view.

And we're going to have to do this again, en masse, real soon. So be it. Give me a drum and I'll beat it.

While this was going on, the President and his people started saying, Well, what if those Islamic fundementalists get a hold of those WMDs we know Saddam has?

Now most of the money and most of the hijackers who pulled that abomination off were from Saudi Arabia, the rest were from Egypt. No men, no link, no help from Iraq, which that terrorist fundementalist Islamic organization had publicly identified as a potential target for its wrath. Write that down, if you can't rememer that any other way: bin Laden hated Saddam.

No one has established a link -- outside of the true believers at Wizbang and elsewhere -- between Saddam and al Qaeda. The people who have tried to do this all recognize, on some level, that launching a war in Iraq without such a connection is just the purist idiocy. All we really know for sure is that bin Laden declared that Saddam was in infidel -- which he was, of course. What would bin Laden do with an infidel, if he got his hands on one? Kill him. Murder has long been the customary public expression of Osama bin Laden's.

So: was there a supportive, fellow traveller-type link between those warm, wonderful human beings? Shit, no. Only in the minds of neoconservatives. The 9/11 commission officially declared that there was no link between AQ and SH. This was after the fact. Neoconservatives continue to manufacture their own facts on this issue.

And so without establishing such a connection, GW and his pals got busy establishing the fear that Saddam had big stacks of WMD and was going to fork them over to AQ anyway. They started to beat the drums of war over that possibility. We attacked Iraq.

No WMDs, surprise, surprise -- or at least, not in the copious commercial quantities Geo "Burning" Bush said we would find them. (During the UN inspection phase, the Bush administration continually criticised the UN inspectors for "looking in the wrong places." To put that in plain language, the Bush administration publically suggested that they knew where those weapons were. Ask yourselves this question: Did they? If not, what does this say about them?)

To reiterate: No WMDs. Damn!

At this point, a curious thing began to happen in the Republican echo chamber. Neoconservatives fanned out and tried to do a little short-term revisionist history excercise by saying -- to me, among other people -- "Hey, those liberals are trying to say that we went into Iraq to get WMDs. Isn't that stupid?" (An exact quote, by the way.)

Oh yes, what a dumb idea. Who ever mentioned WMDs? Silly.

The new, manufactured truth was supposed to be that we went into Iraq because Saddam was a bad man -- who may have had and used WMDs at one point, and may even have used them on us, sooner or later, better get him, just in case. The Bushites were simply anxious to rid the world of a very, very bad man. It was just a coincidence that there was already a war on terror; we were over there anyway, what the hell: get Saddam.

Okay. Saddam was a bad man; he is a bad man; soon, he'll be a dead man, and I personally would like to piss on his grave, if not his body lying in state. I'd like to do that now. However, his very real, very execrable badness doesn't erase a few pertinent facts:

1. For a very long time, Saddam was Our Boy in the middle east, an Arab leader the United States could trust. We gave him money, arms, and technical assistance. We did it with a smile -- knowing EXACTLY who he was and how he treated people.

2. Saddam became a bad man, from the perspective of the Bush administration (and many, many others), when he tried to grab the Kuwaiti oil fields.

3. This was WELL AFTER Saddam had used WMDs on his own people. After that particular event, the Bush I administration (which included Rummy and Dicky) increased the amount of aid we were giving him. Bad man; dumb foreign relations.

4. EVERYBODY KNOWS and has acknowledged that Saddam would have liked to have built nukes and chem bombs and God knows what all and dropped 'em on Washington -- was in fact straining to do so. All good, sober, intelligent people know this. You can post a link to some statement by the Haight Ashbury state rep or some other goniff denying this; I'm sure that's the first thing that will follow the ad hominem attacks posted hereafter.

5. The bottom line is, the idea that we DIDN'T go into Iraq to get those WMDs is just a stupid lie -- and quite a few neoconservative whackos have suggested exactly that.

6. The notion that the only way we could make sure of this was by invading the country is DEBATEABLE.

7. To launch such a war, just when we needed all the good will we could get in the Islamic world to fight al Qaeda, was a stupid act. Saddam could have been contained -- a task made easier by the global horror evoked by the 9/11 attacks.

But no. The United States, the world's only superpower, attacked and invaded a small country that had never attacked her. (The notion that the Iraqis tendency to launch missiles at our planes justified the attack is laughable. Someone's going to bring this up, so let me get this over with now: ha, ha, ha. There. I feel better.)

The war against terror, properly speaking, is a psychological and political one, a war of hearts and minds. You cannot enlist the sympathies of people who already hate your guts by attacking some of their soi-disant "brothers" without just cause -- in their eyes. But thinking of things in terms of other people's worldviews is just not done, in some circles.

Which to me says that neoconservatives are the wrong people to lead this fight. If God really loves America, the Free Love/Cheap Beer Party will sweep congress and the presidency in 2008.

Or not.

Lee,That's one per... (Below threshold)
Peter F.:

Lee,

That's one person's educated assesment of what the chemical list MIGHT be used for. Regardless of its end purpose, having/possesing that chemical was STILL in violation of UN Resolution 667 from 1991. He wasn't supposed to have any precursors for WMD, period. Even if Saddam didn't know what the end-use purpose was for the SC, he damn well should've known (or somebody in his regime should have) that something like SC would get him into hot water, and to keep close tabs on what was coming into the country. Then again, psychopaths generally don't consider such nuances as ingredients as being in violation of said resolutions.

The SC is just one piece in a huge WMD, post-invasion intel puzzle. Perhaps it is the wrong piece; perhaps not.

Arguing with Lee is useless... (Below threshold)
d_Brit:

Arguing with Lee is useless.

If undeniable evidence of Saddam having WMD's emerged, he'd simply shift his focus and drop the WMD 'talking point'.

BUT he'd never concede that point.

He's not interested in objective truth,in fact at base his position is that there is no such thing as objective truth. There is only subjective reality and his subjective reality is better than yours, because he cares...

As a matter of 'principle', he's opposed to any 'facts' (what an archaic term) that contradict his agenda.

That's because people like Lee are only interested in the world conforming to their world-view. The world is full of liberals like Lee.

Reason only counts to the degree that it confirms his feelings.

astigafa:1) I've r... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

astigafa:

1) I've repeatedly cited sources from before the Iraqi invasion that showed Bush talking about other reasons, and explicitly saying that there was no imminent threat, no hard evidence of WMDs.

2) Saddam was "our bastard," yeah, right up until he revealed his true colors and invaded Kuwait.

3) You might have conveniently forgotten it, but I recall that there were a LOT of protests about going into Afghanistan.

4) The war was NEVER against Al Qaeda. It was against militant Islam, one aspect of it being Al Qaeda. Remember (if you can) that up until 9/11, Hezbollah had killed the most Americans.

5) Saddam DID give material support to Al Qaeda, among other groups. It's well documented.

6) We supported Saddam for very pragmatic reasons: he kept the Iranians in check. At the time, you might recall a little something about our relations with Iran. Here's a hint: Their pet name for us was "The Great Satan." I think it still is.

J.

Ladies and gentlemen...... (Below threshold)

Ladies and gentlemen...

By responding, you're only giving the troll what he wants... attention.

Or, to put it another way, never try to teach a pig to sing. It wastes your time and annoys the pig.

Same thing for trying to convince a lefty of any facts. As has been pointed out, lefties don't believe in objective facts.

Yes, these 17 year old arti... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Yes, these 17 year old artillery shells

www.azstarnet.com/dailystar/news/134890.php

"WASHINGTON -- The "weapons of mass destruction" that two leading congressional Republicans reported had been found in Iraq were probably less toxic than the chemicals found under most American sinks, a former U.S. weapons-hunting team leader said.

Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., who is engaged in a tough re-election battle, and Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, said at a news conference Wednesday that unconventional weapons had been found in Iraq.

The weapons probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.

In an interview, Kay said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no longer be dangerous."

The idiots in Saddam's army probably lost track of them, and they were overlooked rather than destroyed. Reason enough to start a war?

No.

You're running out of straws.... but thanks to this post the tinfoil-hat industry is booming - don't stop now!

astigafa:Aside fro... (Below threshold)

astigafa:

Aside from pretty much everything you posted above being wrong, one thing really leaps out:

"For a very long time, Saddam was Our Boy in the middle east, an Arab leader the United States could trust. We gave him money, arms, and technical assistance."

Actually, for a very short time, we sold him some helicopters, gave him a little bit of intel versus Iran, sold him some agricultural supplies (low-grade insecticides) and then stopped. Our total "assistance" to Iraq amounted to less than one percent of his military budget for a couple of years, while the Soviet contributions were on the order of 60 percent for the same time period, and consisted of actual weapons like MiG-29s and tanks.

"Our Boy?" That's like telling a waitress in a restaurant that she's "yours" because you gave her an extra buck for a tip.

Over the same time period, we were actually on better terms with the rulers of Jordan and several other states in the area, and we've flat-out given Egypt more money than the stuff Hussein got to buy.


"No evidence of that . . ."... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

"No evidence of that . . ." It's not a criminal trial in the U.S. court system, it's a tyrant with a criminal history of seeking weapons.

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. For some they are the same, for those of us with an education and appreciation in logic (and common sense), they are not.

"The idiots in Saddam's arm... (Below threshold)

"The idiots in Saddam's army probably lost track of them, and they were overlooked rather than destroyed. Reason enough to start a war?"

Not by themselves, but when you add in that the same "experts" you cite promised us that those shells had certainly been destroyed, it blows a helluva hole in your "inspections were working' theory.

"Oops - I completely forgot about that TWENTY-FIVE TONS of artillery shells that we promised time and again were certainly, positively, destroyed..."

I feared my earlier post mi... (Below threshold)
jaymaster:

I feared my earlier post might somehow give Wee the courage to keep posting his/her deranged ranting. Unfortunately, I was correct.

But at the risk of egging her on again, let me try to clarify a bit.

These chemicals could be extremely valuable to Saddam for military purposes, but not as precursors to WMD. Building missiles, avionics, and nuclear or chemical processing equipment requires some extremely specialized components. Electroplating is a crucial step in building many of these components. Especially missiles.

Export of such components is usually well controlled, monitored, and tracked in the civilized world. So if a rogue state wants to stay under the radar (so to speak), they need to manufacture some of these components themselves.

IMO, these are more like tri-use chemicals. Yes, there are plenty of non-military applications. And there are plenty of military applications too.

But IMO, the most valuable of those military applications would not be as precursors to chemical weapons. They would have more value as industrial "tools" used in the production of specialized electrical & electronic components, and chemical and nuclear processing and handling equipment.

Sorry, "appreciation of log... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Sorry, "appreciation of logic" is what I meant.

Studying for the CFP exam.

Yes, I'm a capitalist! And proud of it (suck on this, titty boy socialists!).

"These chemicals could b... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"These chemicals could be extremely valuable to Saddam for military purposes, but not as precursors to WMD. Building missiles, avionics, and nuclear or chemical processing equipment requires some extremely specialized components. Electroplating is a crucial step in building many of these components. Especially missiles."

And sometimes a cigar is just a cigar - and a plating chemical shopping list is just a list of plating chemicals...

I believe a chemical engine... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

I believe a chemical engineer calculated that the left overs in the 500 WMD shells were just dangerous enough to destroy 'all life' in SF, Denver and Dallas, with some left over. They're no longer any danger to anyone, but the thousands that haven't been found are. Guess Lee doesn't live there or moves more than he changes his troll name. Captains Quarters has found enough documentation to stand up in court. I can't wait for the October surprise. Maybe they'll give Lee one (of the shells) for a paper weight.

Scrapiron - do you have a l... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Scrapiron - do you have a link to this propeller-head scientist's claim?

The five hundred 17 year... (Below threshold)
Red Fog:

The five hundred 17 year-old circa 1989 artillery shells that experts say are no more dangerous than the cleaning chemicals found under the average American kitchen sink?

And so those Cold War Era weapons we have are harmless because, hell, some of those silos were built in 1961 and I know a guy who converted one into a house.

Lee, your silicone implants may be the core of your dementia

No, Lorie, just produce ... (Below threshold)

No, Lorie, just produce the WMDs that George Bush said were there and I will be happy.

Lee, you have a very short memory. The Democrat Party thrives on people with short memories, so I've no doubt that you're a good little Democrat.

What you've forgotten is that it wasn't just President Bush who said the Iragis had WMDs, it was President Clinton, Al Gore, Madeline Albright, most of the Democrats in the house and senate, and Fwance, Germany and many other countries.

Here's a story on the subject from my blog and here is a more comprehensive list of quotes from the 1990s when every news organization from TIME Magazine to The White House Bulletin firmly believed Iraq to have WMDs and a WMD program.

I've heard that Gingko Biloba increases memory abilities. Perhaps you and all the other liberals out there should consider heavy doses.

Michael McCullough
Stingray: a blog for salty Christians

Silly to argue what Saddam ... (Below threshold)

Silly to argue what Saddam wanted the chemicals for. They were on the list of banned substances. The list certainly shows that for whatever reason, he had no regard for the sanctions (WOW, that's a real revelation).

Lee says that the shells ar... (Below threshold)

Lee says that the shells are old and safe.

So, Lee, why don't we ship old chemical shells to you for storage? They're safe, right? And anyone who says not is just a "propellerhead," right? Surely you have room in your basement for a few historical souveniers?

<a href="http://wi... (Below threshold)
wave man:
jaymaster at July 17, 2006 08:37 PM said:

I feared my earlier post might somehow give Wee the courage to keep posting his/her deranged ranting.

Wee. I don't care who you are, that's funny right there now. Much better than 'pucker-puss'. I make a motion that if you can't resist feeding the troll, that Wee become his new moniker. Fits.

Well done, jaymaster.

"I took explosives courses,... (Below threshold)
tom:

"I took explosives courses, poisons high level, then I pledged allegiance to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, to obey him without any questioning," Jayyousi said.

Jordanian authorities said Azmi Jayyousi was the suspected ringleader in an alleged al Qaeda plot.
Jordanian intelligence suspects Jayyousi returned from Iraq in January after a meeting with al-Zarqawi in which they allegedly plotted to hit the three targets in Amman.

In a series of raids, the Jordanians said, they seized 20 tons of chemicals and numerous explosives. Also seized were three trucks equipped with specially modified plows, apparently designed to crash through security barricades.

The first alleged target was the Jordanian intelligence headquarters. The alleged blast was intended to be a big one.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/04/26/jordan.terror/

so 'lee' where did these chemicals come from??? can you 'connect the dots'.....no, duh, because you're a liberal!!!

They may be 90-years-old an... (Below threshold)
tom:

They may be 90-years-old and look harmless but the chemical agents can be as deadly as the day they were first made. Destroying them has to take place inside a high security lab.

The scale of the problem is frightening and with toxic agents like phosgene and mustard gas, it is dangerous work.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/insideout/south/series9/week_four.shtml

libs say Saddam's shells are 'harmless', just like his mass murders are no big deal to them....but they 'care'.....yeah hahahahahhahah

Are "pucker puss" (lee lee)... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Are "pucker puss" (lee lee) and astigta both in heat? Which one of them get to be the "daddy and which one the "mommy"?

Zeldorf's right.WM... (Below threshold)
Robert:

Zeldorf's right.

WMDs wasn't the reason for the war. It was the excuse for this war.

He's also right that Rumsfeld, Cheney, wolfowitz, GW, et al are liars.

Zeldorf,
bonus points if you can admit its about oil.

If the WMDs were shipped to Syria in the run up to the war and our leaders (who were planning for war at the time) didn't notice, that's a pretty good reason for impeachment for dereliction of duty.

Robert, would that include ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Robert, would that include Ms. Plame? Wasn't she one of those in charge of tracking WMD?

Maybe if she weren't so busy worrying over her next glamour shots photo spread, she'd have helped out in that regard.

I hope you hold yourself to the same standard--that the Pres. should have known what the French, Germans, Italians, Russians, etc. didn't know as well

It's easy to arm chair quarterback when you don't have the responsibility or any accomplishments of your own.

Again, you and wee offer no proof--an allegation of conspiracy is enough to get your juices flowing--the overly aroused set--you both remind me of Andrew Sullivan.

Hysterical and empty souls.

Lee:"Sometimes a cig... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Lee:
"Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar..."

Yeah, and sometimes it's a sexual toy. Dual-use.

Now, to address some point relative to Mr Goalpost-Mover's statements.

1. It doesn't matter whether he had 500 Tons or 5 grams of sarin, ANY amount after 1992 was a direct violation of UN sanctions There is no equivocation here.

2. Vis David Kay's statement: Three years ago, he told Tom Brokaw, "We will take as long as it takes..." to present evidence of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction to the American people. He also told Brokaw that he'd discovered records showing Saddam's foreign procurement of WMD-related materials, as well as progress reports on the development of his WMD programs.  Kay also explained that Saddam had a detailed plan for moving and hiding weapons, and for destroying and concealing their documentary evidence.

Now, if Kay was telling the truth then, then the above statements would certainly be a violation of the UN sanctions in place.

I point you to the following for more analysis of Kay's statement, including the fact that the Duelfer Report relied almost completely on Saddam's scientists and officials for all their information. Yeah, that's a real trustworthy source, guys.

http://www.postchronicle.com/commentary/article_21227840.shtml


The article also posits that if 500 munitions of sarin gas can be "misplaced", and given that Saddam's regime were meticulous record-keepers (as Morrisey's documents are showing), if such a large quantity is considered "lost", then there must be a hell of a lot more that wasn't "lost".

If I have a large jar of pennies, I wouldn't notice 5 missing, but if I only have a roll of pennies, that 5 becomes much more noticable.

Furthermore, the Blix reports that there is a significant discrepancy:

" "The [Iraqi weapons report] document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi air force between 1983 and 1998, 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 tons. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for."

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/01/27/sprj.irq.excerpts/

1000 (metric) tons is 2.2 million pounds...the sarin used in the Japanese subway attack was on the order of litres, from punctured bags. It was enough to kill a dozen people, and injure 50 more. That's from a few pounds of the stuff that was released through puncture holes...multiply that by the 2 million figure...that's a whole lot of fucking death, even degraded.

And, apparently Kay hasn't read up on the toxic effect of sarin very well, it takes very little of it to effectively kill (quickly). Since it takes so little (a drop at full strength will do it) to kill a human, even a litre of degraded sarin is enough to kill many people...that certainly doesn't rank as a "household cleaner".

http://www.gulfweb.org/bigdoc/report/appgb.html

Oh, and Lee precious, here is another interesting tidbit:

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci/chem-faq/part7/preamble.html

"There are many different methods of manufacture, but the Tokyo product
appears to have been prepared using a procedure involving phosphorus
trichloride and methyl iodide. The product was impure and diluted with
acetonitrile to improve volatility."

Even the Tokyo sarin was impure, and yet still killed a dozen people.

Finally, I leave you a quote from the report itself:

"While agents degrade over time, chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal"

They're still digging up mu... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

They're still digging up mustard gas munitions in France post WW-I that have harmed the good citizens there.

You really have lost it if you can't come to grips with the seriousness of what these weapons are, especially in your boy Sadam's hands.

One more point(note the bol... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

One more point(note the bolded text CAREFULLY):

From UN Resolution 1441 (two sources):

http://archives.cnn.com/2002/US/11/08/resolution.text/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UN_Security_Council_Resolution_1441

(Decides...) (definition-To reach a decision or make a determination:)

1) That Iraq,was in material breach of the ceasefire terms presented under the terms of Resolution 687. Iraq's breaches related not only to WMDs, but also the known construction of prohibited types of missiles, the purchase and import of prohibited armaments, and the continuing refusal of Iraq to compensate Kuwait for the widespread looting conducted by its troops in 1991.
2) That the ceasefire granted under Resolution 687 was binding only insofar as Iraq was willing to hew to the terms of that ceasefire.
3) That 1441, and its deadline, represented Iraq's final opportunity to comply with disarmament requirements. In accordance with the previous Resolutions, this meant Iraq not only had to verify the existence or destruction of its remaining unaccounted-for WMD stockpiles, but also had to ensure that all equipment, plans, and materials useful for the resumption of WMD programs was likewise turned over or verified as destroyed.
4) That "...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations".

Note that WMDs were NOT the single mitigating factor.

Note that the UN nor the US were obliged to prove that Iraq had WMDs, but that Iraq was obliged to prove that it DIDN'T

This is my first time visit... (Below threshold)

This is my first time visiting your site. Nice by the way.

Sorry to start by feeding your troll.

http://iraqdocs.blogspot.com/

Maybe that will keep it busy for awhile and who knows, maybe it will learn something.

I'll stop back later and see. (I know, don't hold my breath)

I guess the only thing we c... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

I guess the only thing we can do is let Saddam out of jail and send Mad-dame Alnottobright over to see him. She can give him the Slick Willie treatment. Provide billions of dollars to help him complete a nuclear program to threaten the world with. It worked in North Korea and Iran. Thanks to Slick we paid for the weapons systems we are facing today and the technology that Israel is facing in real time today. If that wasn't enough, Slick and Algore traded the latest in Top Secret missile guidance to China for political payoffs. Now we are facing long range nuclear missiles fron N.K. Without a doubt they contain this same guidance system. Thanks to all of these slime balls. I'm glad Lee can still be proud of these losers without puking.

Astigafa,Your post... (Below threshold)
d_Brit:

Astigafa,

Your post leads me to think you may be open to reasoned argument.

Since I'm new to posting @ Wizbang, I'll briefly touch on a few pertinent points about myself.

I am a neoconservative.

I reached that intellectual position independently, never having read anything about neo-conservaticism prior to forming my views.

In fact, it was quite a while after 9/11 before I even realized that others had reached the same conclusions and that they were called neo-conservatives.

Obviously there is some individual variation in views but for the most part I am firmly in that camp. Of course, I am not Jewish and do not sharpen my fangs every night, so I realize for some that disqualifies me from being a true neoconservative ;-)

Having reached my neoconservative views independently, after long and deep reflection on the issues of Islamic terrorism I believe I can offer insights into the neoconservative rationale in the WoT. I trust reasoned debate will demonstrate conclusively that I am not a Neocon 'wacko'.

Your response will demonstrate whether 'facts' have any sway with you or if labels, and ad hominem argument are all you really possess.

5. "The bottom line is, the idea that we DIDN'T go into Iraq to get those WMDs is just a stupid lie -- and quite a few neoconservative whackos have suggested exactly that. 6. The notion that the only way we could make sure of this was by invading the country is DEBATEABLE. But no. The United States,. The people who have tried to do this all recognize, on some level, that launching a war in Iraq without such a connection is just the purist idiocy."

Yes, we did go into Iraq hoping to find WMD's and knowing that the WMD's might not be there by the time we invaded.

Yes, we knew that there might not be any WMD's but as stated previously, everyone in possession of intel believed Saddam had them, so while Bush may have been mistaken, he didn't lie in saying that he believed Saddam had WMD's.

Bush was less than frank in giving the impression that WMD's was the primary reason we were invading Iraq. That mistake has led to great difficulties in responding to criticisms.

In stating, "the world's only superpower, attacked and invaded a small country that had never attacked her" while technically accurate is a misstatement of the reality we face.

There is an "Axis of Evil" that is as much an enemy of our way of life as the Nazi's and Communists were previously. To deny this is either profound ignorance, insane denial or purposeful deceit. Saddam's Iraq was part of the Axis of Evil, though at the time one of the smaller players. To portray Saddam's Iraq as 'just a small country that had never attacked us' is untruthful.

You have misstated the NeoCon argument. In fairness, NeoCon's haven't been very forthright with the American public as to the complete NeoCon rationale, so I am not surprised that you hold the view that you do.

The reasons for the 'misdirection' in the public Neocon arguments are understandable, though I have argued from prior to our invasion of Iraq that this was a fundamental strategic mistake and that it would come back to haunt us and, it has.

The reason for disingenuous was twofold, a domestic reason and an international reason. Domestically, that the NeoCon argument was 'too complex' for the American public to grasp, especially with the counter arguments that the left and the MSM would mount against it and therefore it was decided to 'simplify' the rationale in hopes that this would ensure that the Neocon strategy in the WoT would be implemented.

Internationally, that we couldn't reveal our strategy, as it would benefit those at odds with our national interests, especially with the MSM determined to undermine any confrontational strategy.

It is important to note that the NeoCons in the Bush administration sincerely believed their analysis of the Islamic terrorist danger the West faces to be correct and that only their 'solution' had a chance for success.

That of course is debatable and that debate did take place but the NeoCon's carried the argument, at least with Bush. They 'won' the debate because Bush is a 'bottom line' kind of guy. He does not like complexity and evaluates analysis and 'solutions' based in fundamental principle asking himself, does this make sense on a basic level?

Arguments as to whether this is 'smart' miss the point, it's simply one way of evaluating information with advantages and disadvantages. Its effectiveness is a matter of 'quality of execution' rather than its value per se as a method of decision making.

This said, invading Iraq for WMD's was never the primary reason in the NeoCon strategy. Nor was it the very real danger that one day, when able, Saddam would give WMD's to terrorist groups.

The primary reason(s) for the invasion of Iraq was twofold and of a long-term strategic nature; to send a very clear message to other nations that the game's 'rules' had changed. That the US was serious, that al Quada and Islamic Terrorism had, in the words of Yamamoto, once again "awoken the sleeping giant"...

AND to establish a 'beachhead' of democracy in the very heart of the Axis of Evil. NeoCons posit that in the long term, the surest way to defeat Islamic terrorism is the growth of democracy within the ME.

In order to understand the rationale driving the NeoCon strategy in the WoT it is essential to understand the NeoCon analysis of Islamic Terrorism. It is simple but hardly ever articulated clearly and directly. Woven throughout Bush's speeches are all the elements of the NeoCon rationale but Bush's great weakness is his inability to articulate the entire argument in a cohesive manner.

Here is the analysis of Islamic terrorism in a nutshell.

First the context:

Islamic Terrorism is a world-wide radical religious philosophy absolutely dedicated to the destruction of Western values and institutions. It is a 'clash of civilizations' only in that democracy and separation of church and state are seen by Islamics as a direct threat to traditional Islamic values. One that in a modern world of Television, the Internet, cultural interchange and the ability to rapidly travel to other parts of the world dooms 'first wave' Islamic societies to cultural assimilation when interacting freely with 'third wave' information societies in the West and East.

Now the structural make-up:

The phenomenon of Islamic Terrorism is threefold in nature. This is absolutely necessary for a full understanding of the threat it represents to Western values, institutions and societies.

The threefold nature of Islamic Terrorism consists of:

Various ideologically disparate terror networks. Ideologically fueled by hate-filled radical Islamic mullahs operating out of state-funded madras's. These hate filled mullah's are key and they ARE promoting an interpretation of Islam that IS inherent to the religion. ISLAM must change. It must have its reformation. It is the 'Spanish inquisition' of our times.

The Rogue nations who use these networks as 'stealth' quasi-military arms of aggression in a struggle with other nations to ensure the furtherance of their national goals.

The 'enabling' status-quo nations, who out of short-term national self-interest, block as much as possible any effective actions against the Rogue nations.

It is impossible to defeat the terror networks without defeating the rogue nations. Either dissuading them from further support, as in Libya's case or through direct overthrow and destruction of the underlying social structures that support terrorism within these nations. (As will be the case with Iran.)

It is imperative that the 'enabling' nations, primarily Russia, China, France, Germany and much of the EU be dealt with in an appropriate manner. Direct confrontation is neither desirable nor practical. We must essentially 'sideline' them through adroit diplomatic maneuvering.

It is imperative to recognize that the leadership of the enabling nations are NOT our friends.

Put colloquially, they are the type of enemy who seeks to 'stab us in the back' smiling as they do it. Never revealing the internalized hate until the knife slips in and we turn to them saying, "Et tu brute?"

Iraq was chosen because it was overall, the best place to start among the Axis of Evil nations in implanting democracy.

Not as some have simplistically believed out of a frat-boy bravado by Bush over his father's attempted assassination, though as any of us in his position would, he undoubtedly appreciates the 'icing on the cake'.

Consider the advantages Iraq offered:

No one would miss Saddam; he is a singularly unsympathetic figure.

The propaganda bonanza of 25 million people freed, a tremendously impactful reality for captive peoples across the ME.

Though clearly 'perverted', a whole generation of Iraqi's raised in a secular environment, with real separation of church and state, making the transition to democracy less problematic, raising the prospects for success from impossible to merely very difficult.

Close proximity to the other Axis of Evil nations, providing immediate and unavoidable comparison by the citizens of Iran and Syria with their social arrangements and the new Iraqi freedoms.

The resulting 'message' that a successful Iraq presents; If Shiite's, Sunni's and Kurds can govern together in relative peace, then why not in their country?

Strategic military proximity to Syria and Iran creating pressure to ameliorate their behavior.

The final two truisms that fuel NeoCon analysis:

NeoCon acceptance of the proposition that freedom is an innate human quality, a 'universal' human need, thus one that transcends any culture.

In crises situations, the choice is never between good and bad options. In a crisis, the options are very bad to even worse. By definition, it would not be a crises, if there was a good solution.

The key to understand is that invariably, choosing the short-term less-bad option leads to long-term much-worse results.

These are the realistic decision-making principles that are driving Cheney's advice and Bush's choices.

There is a method to the administration's 'madness'...

Bush's personal qualities, NeoCon silence and a leftist mind-set viscerally opposed to confrontation have led to the view that NeoCons are a secret cabal who do not have America's interests at heart. Nothing could be further from the truth.

NeoCons are simply tough-minded former liberals who in today's peace-at-any-cost liberal mind-set have sought refuge within the Republican Party.

Just like Reagan, they didn't leave the Democratic Party, the party left them.

From the Riegle Report:... (Below threshold)
KC:

From the Riegle Report:

U.S. Exports of Biological Materials to Iraq

The Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs has oversight responsibility for the Export Administration Act. Pursuant to the Act, Committee staff contacted the U.S. Department of Commerce and requested information on the export of biological materials during the years prior to the Gulf War. After receiving this information, we contacted a principal supplier of these materials to determine what, if any, materials were exported to Iraq which might have contributed to an offensive or defensive biological warfare program. Records available from the supplier for the period from 1985 until the present show that during this time, pathogenic (meaning "disease producing"), toxigenic (meaning "poisonous"), and other biological research materials were exported to Iraq pursuant to application and licensing by the U.S. Department of Commerce. Records prior to 1985 were not available, according to the supplier. These exported biological materials were not attenuated or weakened and were capable of reproduction. According to the Department of Defense's own Report to Congress on the Conduct of the Persian Gulf War, released in April 1992: "By the time of the invasion of Kuwait, Iraq had developed biological weapons. It's advanced and aggressive biological warfare program was the most advanced in the Arab world... The program probably began late in the 1970's and concentrated on the development of two agents, botulinum toxin and anthrax bacteria... Large scale production of these agents began in 1989 at four facilities in Baghdad. Delivery means for biological agents ranged from simple aerial bombs and artillery rockets to surface-to-surface missiles."

Included in the approved sales are the following biological materials (which have been considered by various nations for use in war), with their associated disease symptoms:

Bacillus Anthracis: anthrax is a disease producing bacteria identified by the Department of Defense in The Conduct of the Persian Gulf War: Final Report to Contress, as being a major component in the Iraqi biological warfare program.

Anthrax is an often fatal infectious disease due to ingestion of spores. It begins abruptly with high fever, difficulty in breathing, and chest pain. The disease eventually results in septicemia (blood poisoning), and the mortality is high. Once septicemia is advanced, antibiotic therapy may prove useless, probably because the exotoxins remain, despite the death of the bacteria.

Clostridium Botulinum: A bacterial source of botulinum toxin, which causes vomiting, constipation, thirst, general weakness, headache, fever, dizziness, double vision, dilation of the pupils and paralysis of the muscles involving swallowing. It is often fatal.

Histoplasma Capsulatum: causes a disease superfically resembling tuberculosis that may cause pneumonia, enlargement of the liver and spleen, anemia, an influenza like illness and an acute inflammatory skin disease marked by tender red nodules, usually on the shins. Reactivated infection usually involves the lungs, the brain, spinal membranes, heart, peritoneum, and the adrenals.

Brucella Melitensis: a bacteria which can cause chronic fatique, loss of appetite, profuse sweating when at rest, pain in joints and muscles, insomnia, nausea, and damage to major organs.

Clostridium Perfringens: a highly toxic bateria which causes gas gangrene. The bacteria produce toxins that move along muscle bundles in the body killing cells and producing necrotic tissue that is then favorable for further growth of the bacteria itself. Eventually, these toxins and bacteria enter the bloodstream and cause a systemic illness.

In addition, several shipments of Escherichia Coli (E. Coli) and genetic materials, as well as human and bacterial DNA, were shipped directly to the Iraq Atomic Energy Commission.

The following is a detailed listing of biological materials, provided by the American Type Culture Collection, which were exported to agencies of the government of Iraq pursuant to the issueance of an export licensed by the U.S. Commerce Department:

Date : February 8, 1985
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Agency
Materials Shipped:

Ustilago nuda (Jensen) Rostrup

Date : February 22, 1985
Sent To : Ministry of Higher Education
Materials Shipped:

Histoplasma capsulatum var. farciminosum (ATCC 32136)
Class III pathogen

Date : July 11, 1985
Sent To : Middle and Near East Regional A
Material Shipped:

Histoplasma capsulatum var. farciminosum (ATCC 32136)
Class III pathogen

Date : May 2, 1986
Sent To : Ministry of Higher Education
Materials Shipped:

1. Bacillus Anthracis Cohn (ATCC 10)
Batch # 08-20-82 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

2. Bacillus Subtilis (Ehrenberg) Cohn (ATCC 82)
Batch # 06-20-84 (2 each)

3. Clostridium botulinum Type A (ATCC 3502)
Batch # 07-07-81 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

4. Clostridium perfringens (Weillon and Zuber) Hauduroy, et al (ATCC 3624)
Batch # 10-85SV (2 each)

5. Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6051)
Batch # 12-06-84 (2 each)

6. Francisella tularensis var. tularensis Olsufiev (ATCC 6223)
Batch # 05-14-79 (2 each)
Avirulent, suitable for preparations of diagnotic antigens

7. Clostridium tetani (ATCC 9441)
Batch # 03-84 (3 each)
Highly toxigenic

8. Clostridium botulinum Type E (ATCC 9564)
Batch # 03-02-79 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

9. Clostridium tetani (ATCC 10779)
Batch # 04-24-84S (3 each)

10. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 12916)
Batch #08-14-80 (2 each)
Agglutinating type 2

11. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 13124)
Batch #07-84SV (3 each)
Type A, alpha-toxigenic, produces lecithinase C.J. Appl.

12. Bacillus Anthracis (ATCC 14185)
Batch #01-14-80 (3 each)
G.G. Wright (Fort Detrick)
V770-NP1-R. Bovine Anthrax
Class III pathogen

13. Bacillus Anthracis (ATCC 14578)
Batch #01-06-78 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

14. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 14581)
Batch #04-18-85 (2 each)

15. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 14945)
Batch #06-21-81 (2 each)

16. Clostridium botulinum Type E (ATCC 17855)
Batch # 06-21-71
Class III pathogen

17. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 19213)
Batch #3-84 (2 each)

18. Clostridium botulinum Type A (ATCC 19397)
Batch # 08-18-81 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

19. Brucella abortus Biotype 3 (ATCC 23450)
Batch # 08-02-84 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

20. Brucella abortus Biotype 9 (ATCC 23455)
Batch # 02-05-68 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

21. Brucella melitensis Biotype 1 (ATCC 23456)
Batch # 03-08-78 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

22. Brucella melitensis Biotype 3 (ATCC 23458)
Batch # 01-29-68 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

23. Clostribium botulinum Type A (ATCC 25763)
Batch # 8-83 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

24. Clostridium botulinum Type F (ATCC 35415)
Batch # 02-02-84 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

Date : August 31, 1987
Sent To : State Company for Drug Industries
Materials Shipped:

1. Saccharomyces cerevesiae (ATCC 2601)
Batch # 08-28-08 (1 each)

2. Salmonella choleraesuis subsp. choleraesuis Serotype typhi (ATCC 6539)
Batch # 06-86S (1 each)

3. Bacillus subtillus (ATCC 6633)
Batch # 10-85 (2 each)

4. Klebsiella pneumoniae subsp. pneumoniae (ATCC 10031)
Batch # 08-13-80 (1 each)

5. Escherichia coli (ATCC 10536)
Batch # 04-09-80 (1 each)

6. Bacillus cereus (11778)
Batch #05-85SV (2 each)

7. Staphylococcus epidermidis (ATCC 12228)
Batch # 11-86s (1 each)

8. Bacillus pumilus (ATCC 14884)
Batch # 09-08-80 (2 each)

Date : July 11, 1988
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped

1. Escherichia coli (ATCC 11303)
Batch # 04-875
Phase host

2. Cauliflower Mosaic Caulimovirus (ATCC 45031)
Batch # 06-14-85
Plant Virus

3. Plasmid in Agrobacterium Tumefaciens (ATCC 37349)
(Ti plasmid for co-cultivation with plant integration vectors in E. Coli)
Batch # 05-28-85

Date : April 26, 1988
Sent To: : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Hulambda4x-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57236) Phage vector
Suggest host: E coli

2. Hulambda14-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57240) Phage vector
Suggested host: E coli

3. Hulambda15, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57242) Phage vector
Suggested host: E. coli

Date : August 31, 1987
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Escherichia coli (ATCC 23846)
Batch # 07-29-83 (1 each)

2. Escherichia coli (ATCC 33694)
Batch # 05-87 (1 each)

Date : September 29, 1988
Sent To : Ministry of Trade
Materials Shipped:

1. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 240)
Batch # 05-14-63 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

2. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 938)
Batch # 1963 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

3. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 3629)
Batch # 10-23-85 (3 each)

4. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 8009)
Batch # 03-30-84 (3 each)

5. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 8705)
Batch # 06-27-62 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

6. Brucella abortus (ATCC 9014)
Batch # 05-11-66 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

7. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 10388)
Batch # 06-01-73 (3 each)

8. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 11966)
Batch #05-05-70 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

9. Clostridium botulinum Type A
Batch # 07-86 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

10. Bacillus cereus (ATCC 33018)
Batch # 04-83 (3 each)

11. Bacillus ceres (ATCC 33019)
Batch # 03-88 (3 each)

Date : January 31, 1989
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. PHPT31, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT)
Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57057)

2. Plambda500, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
pseudogene (HPRT) Chromosome(s): 5 p14-p13 (ATCC 57212)

Date : January 17, 1989
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Hulambda4x-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosomes(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57237) Phage vector;
Suggested host: E. coli

2. Hulambda14, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57540), Cloned from human lymphoblast, Phase vector
Suggested host: E. coli

3. Hulambda15, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57241) Phage vector;
Suggested host: E. coli


Additionally, the Centers for Disease Control has compiled a listing of biological materials shipped to Iraq prior to the Gulf War. The listing covers the period from October 1, 1984 (when the CDC began keeping records) through October 13, 1993. The following materials with biological warfare significance were shipped to Iraq during this period.

Date : November 28, 1989
Sent To : University of Basrah, College of
Science, Department of Biology
Materials Shipped:

1. Enterococcus faecalis

2. Enterococcus faecium

3. Enterococcus avium

4. Enterococcus raffinosus

5. Enteroccus gallinarium

6. Enterococcus durans

7. Enteroccus hirae

8. Streptococcus bovis
(etiologic)

Date : April 21, 1986
Sent To : Officers City Al-Muthanna,
Quartret 710, Street 13, Close 69, House 28/I,
Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 1 vial botulinum toxoid
(non-infectious)

Date : March 10, 1986
Sent To : Officers City Al-Muthanna,
Quartret 710, Street 13, Close 69 House 28/I,
Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 1 vial botulinum toxoid #A2
(non-infectious)

Date : June 25, 1985
Sent To : University of Baghdad, College of
Medicine, Department of Microbiology
Materials Shipped:

1. 3 years cultures
(etiologic)
Candida sp.

Date : May 21, 1985
Sent To : Basrah, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. Lyophilized arbovirus seed
(etiologic)

2. West Nile Fever Virus

Date : April 26, 1985
Sent To : Minister of Health, Ministry of
Health, Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 8 vials antigen and antisera (r. rickettsii and r. typhi) to diagnose rickettsial infections (non-infectious)

So when you say "you guy... (Below threshold)
KC:

So when you say "you guys" are looking dumb then I suppose "you guys" would include the ones mentioned above.

No. We mean right wing bloggers who, despite all evidence to the contrary, continue to grasp at straws, invoke the Clenis, and distort facts in order to justify the ongoing war to nobody but yourselves.

I couldn't care less if the Clenis himself told me they were there. If it wasn't obvious that our sources, Ba'athist opponents with axes to grind, weren't full of it to you, then I'm sorry.

But keep looking.

That was a damn fine write ... (Below threshold)

That was a damn fine write up d_Brit. Wasted effort on the troll's but still fine work.

pwned.

Getting to "deep" for me--I... (Below threshold)
jhow66:

Getting to "deep" for me--I'm leaving.

Thanks for the acknowledgem... (Below threshold)
d_Brit:

Thanks for the acknowledgement blackflag,

Yes, I'm sure you're right about the trolls.

It's still important to set the record straight and the American people do deserve a full explanation.

In order to 'stay the course' people need to understand the why of our actions.

They also need to deeply understand just how much is at stake and the true nature of who we face.

KC:The long list o... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

KC:

The long list of bios you've listed look very impressive, however:

1. These were all shipped before the Gulf War,
2. Looks like these went to medical laboratories
3. Almost all of them are pretty ineffective insofar as making them a mass weapon of destruction...at best, it would have a very limited area of damage.
4. A number of these are gene clones--not likely to be made into a weapon

Bio-weapons are pretty hard to make...the germ will degrade far faster than even chemical weapony will. Most of these look to have a fairly lengthy time of incubation, and storage is even more problematic than chemical. More likely to cause harm to the deployer than the deployee.


But, hey, it's a bunch of scary latin-greek, so let's post it anyway.

Is KC's long list to persua... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Is KC's long list to persuade us that there were WMD in Iraq?

Ok, you persuaded me! Glad we got in there an cleaned up that mess.

Mitchell:As I stat... (Below threshold)
James Cloninger:

Mitchell:

As I stated, these bios can only do a limited amount of injury, as far as number of people. Which negates the definition of MASS destruction.

KC:The long... (Below threshold)
KC:

KC:

The long list of bios you've listed look very impressive, however:

1. These were all shipped before the Gulf War,
2. Looks like these went to medical laboratories
3. Almost all of them are pretty ineffective insofar as making them a mass weapon of destruction...at best, it would have a very limited area of damage.
4. A number of these are gene clones--not likely to be made into a weapon

And every "WMD" we've "found" in Iraq is Pre-Gulf War. Or didn't you know that? Santorum does.

Read the rest of the report. In effect, every element of the list is not incriminating. But then there's the other sections of the report which "detail" how we assisted Saddam DEPLOY the WMDs ACCURATELY against the Iranians, and sat idly by as they were used on the Kurds. Keep in mind: of all the WMDs we've found so far, none post date the ones that were made before and during we started supplying the Iraqis and began facilitating their use.

Did he use them? Yes. Did we supply or sit idly by knowing what was happening? Prove that we didn't.

Blister agents? What are depleted uranium and phosphorous blasts? Are we not strong enough to use "regular" munitions?




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy