CJ About Those WMDs
November 9th, 2005 by CJ
Contrary to ongoing reports by mainstream media outlets, WMDs have been found in Iraq, so reports New York Times best-selling author Richard Miniter in his new book, Disinformation.
Consider these shocking facts:
• Found: 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
• Found: 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons
• Found: Roadside bomb loaded with sarin gas
• Found: 1,000 radioactive materials–ideal for radioactive dirty bombs
• Found: 17 chemical warheads–some containing cyclosarin, a nerve agent five times more powerful than sarin
This is only a partial list of the deadly weapons Miniter reveals in his new book, Disinformation. Miniter systematically dissects the "No-WMD Myth" (how it started, and why it continues), as well as 21 other War-on-Terror myths perpetuated by the media.
I've talked many times about the fact that we're finding stuff in Iraq. Unfortunately, by virtue of my job, I won't be able to talk about it for about another 71 years unless it's declassified before then. The media's war on Bush and attempts to derail real progress in the Middle East have kept much of the public information about successes out of our homes and consciousness.
Let the left begin their assault. I'm sure that this GOOD news will be attacked instead of embraced as a success since it doesn't fit into their agenda.
There is a link to the book on my sidebar.
More proof HERE (hattip to Lyric).
Funny you say that because way back when (don't ask – 2 years ago or more?) when the search for WMD was on, there was a network news story about a ship in the Gulf filled with weapons. It apparently was not one of our ships. There was only one story about it, on one night only. If that story was true, I wouldn't be surprised if someone lost a job for reporting that!
I wonder who's ship it was, who's weapons they were and what happened to all of it, if indeed there was truth to the story – and that is the key word I guess 'if'.
Miniter is another wingnut paid to tell lies. He's published in the Moonie cult-owned Washington Times and the far-right-wing American Spectator, and has been a frequent guest on FauxNews. The 1.77 tons of low-level enriched uranium was undistubed since the first gulf war; the roadside bomb was left over from the first gulf war; the "1,000 radioactive materials" are almost certainly the kinds of devices readily available to consumers the world over. There are "radioactive materials" in wristwatches and smoke detectors, among other things.
The Liar-in-Chief led the U.S. into war on the basis of cooked up "intelligence." He told us that the U.S. knew where the WMD was, but none of it was ever found. Miniter's book is a joke, taken seriously only as a propaganda tool by right-wingers ready to be duped by this sort of shoddy crapola.
Wow, how could I have guessed it would be Wilson that doubted this? Of course. So, if it's written about how lies were told, orders were made, the war was illegal, etc, then it's news and worthy a read. But when it's evidenced that we have found what we're looking for it's "propaganda" and "paid lies." I think I see how the game is played now.
Again, the lefties can't admit that American has done something right. Maybe that's why they're on the "left" of what "right!"
Where did Wilson get his info from Moore?
Funny, Schadenfreude did a detailed report on "The Case for WMD," including links to several mainstream media. So does this mean that the media is lying or Schadenfreude is lying?
schadenfreude.../000243.html
Check it out – he shows where he got all of his info.
PS – just because something is "left over" from a previous war, doesn't make it less dangerous. And how's about the other stuff?
CJ, the evidence is phony in that the book purposely misrepresents facts.
Could you possibly be a little more specific on how he misrepresented the facts?
Look at my posting #2 in this thread.
"CJ, the evidence is phony in that the book purposely misrepresents facts."
Wilson, of course it does. Because it doesn't support your assertion that we didn't find anything. On the other hand, if his book was about how we found NOTHING, then it would be completely true because it's what you want to believe.
Lyric, interesting read and yet another compilation of evidence to support my arguments. But, before Wilson gets to it, I'm sure that it was all lies and propaganda. He'll also assert that Bush probably paid him to write that stuff.
Since I know what we found, and these two authors know what we found, I don't have to be convinced. I'm smarter than the rocks I kicked around in the desert.
I've listened to Miniter several times now, and I have his book "Shadow War". I think Miniter is very credible; moreso than many journalists out there.
Why, of course #11. He's telling you what you want to hear. He must be great.
Wilson:
Say your premise is correct, then are you doubting CJ's word? CJ himself is saying he knows what was found WHILE HE WAS IN IRAQ.
He's not the only one, #12. But no matter what he says, you won't listen. Because you don't like what he has to tell you.
#13, CJ has made blanket assertions that "we're finding stuff." Well guess what? I find stuff at the grocery store. Given the U.S. government's well established track record of lying about every single aspect of the Iraq War, CJ will have to provide more evidence before anyone other than the wingnut-o-sphere believes him.
Wilson, that's just it. Every time I present evidence you dismiss it, so I won't be proving anything else to you on this topic.
You're not presenting any evidence. You're presenting some wingnut's assertions and calling them evidence. Let's take a look at one item on Podhoretz's list, the 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium. This implies nuclear bomb materials, and on some of the wingnut websites that's what people are calling it.
Okay, then if that's the case then why did it take the U.S. military WEEKS after the blitzgrieg to get to Iraq's nuclear facility? Wouldn't you think it would have been one of the first places to secure? After all, your Liar-in-Chief had listed "WMD" as the big reason for this adventure. Wouldn't he have wanted to grab the fissile material right away, or at least post someone to guard it?
commondreams....30;s03/0803- 01.htm
And if Iraq had had 1.77 tons of weapons-grade enriched uranium, then why the need to buy more from Niger, as the Bush people falsely claimed? It doesn't take much "HEU" (highly enriched uranium) to make a nuke. The "little boy" bomb dropped on Hiroshima, for example, contained 60 kg of highly-enriched U-235.
en.wikipedia....i/Little_Boy
Therefore, I think we can safely assume that the "1.77 metric tons of uranium" seized in Iraq was not weapons-grade material, but instead was something else. And in fact is WAS something else. It was low-level enriched uranium + 500 tons of natural uranium, i.e., yellowcake.
casi.org.uk/d...s/2…3/ msg02939.html
Now, if Iraq already had 500 tons of yellowcake then why were they supposedly trying to buy more from Niger, as Bush falsely claimed in his state of the union speech? And what is low-level uranium used for?
Neither Bush nor any of his spokesliars ever explained the Niger accusation other than continuing to lie about it. As for low-level enriched uranium, it's used in civilian nuclear power plants. What was Iraq's profile on that front?
Iraq built three nuclear reactors. One was destroyed by Israel in an attack in 1981. The other two were shut down after the first Gulf War. The uranium supplies were sealed by the International Atomic Energy Agency, and they remained sealed U.S. invasion, at which point they were left unguarded for nearly a month.
Of course, Podheretz's article mentions none of this, nor do any other wingnuts on the Web. This is because it interferes with their ability to do what they do best, which is to lie about every single subject they discuss. Fortunately, the American public is finally waking up to the lying.
Earth the C.J.: You can't just keep on rattling off the lies and think people will swallow them. We're onto you.
Correcting two bad links in the post above:
commondreams..../0803-01.htm
casi.org.uk/d...sg02939.html
"You’re not presenting any evidence. You’re presenting some wingnut’s assertions and calling them evidence."
So, I'm a wingnut now? Because much of the evidence I've presented has been first person accounts, while yours have been links to other people.
"You can’t just keep on rattling off the lies and think people will swallow them."
But, I guess you can?
The comments on this topic are hereby closed. You're not listening anyway and I'd like to move on.
If comments are closed, why is there still a posting box here?
…For what it's worth, Wilson, I found your posts pretty persuasive. Miniter got my attention with "1.77 tons of enriched uranium," but the natural next question is "Why didn't Bush proclaim that as WMD?" and it looks like you have a good answer for that.
First of all it's easy to say, "why did they seek yellowcake when they had 1.77 tons of low-grade?
Basic physics, let me enlighten your education in simple terms: low grade uranium requires alot of purification to become high/weapons grade, a process Iraq didn't have or was in the process of obtaining thru the black market. It is cheaper to buy yellowcake on the black market, but Saddam would have to deal with a certain Russian mafia, something he found distasteful. Seeking yellow cake from Niger, was more expensive, but probable since they(sic) are Muslims.
Bush claiming 1.77 tons of low-grade uranium as WMDs is like the your local police calling 1.77 tons of fertilizer(ammonium nitrate) a deadly weapon. Alone, it's just fertilizer, modified and used in Oklahoma, it took out the Murrah Federal building.
Drgeeforce, first off, it wasn't Bush making those claims. But, let's use the liberal paranoid argument that Bush planted these people and assume it WAS his message. Yes, if all we had found was 1.77 tons of uranium I may buy this argument with ammonium nitrate. But, that wasn't all that was found. If all that was found was ONE chemical lab, I may be able to buy it.
What's happening here is the anti-Bush agenda again picking and choosing what they're going to argue about to tear him down. I realize that what people like you would rather have had happen was that all these components were put together and were actually used on us while we were in Iraq. More dead soldiers equals happy left.
Thankfully, we have an administration (finally!) that won't wait for that to happen. Bottom line is that the uranium wasn't the ONLY thing found, as you insinuate by ignoring all other evidence.
When I was in Russia, my father had a farm and he made his own metaltools. He had extensive knowledge of metallurgy and skills to make exotic alloys and what would be considered then, high-tech metals. He was considered a threat, not because he made guns or weapons, but had the creativity and potential to create new things never before seen. He disappeared when I was 4 and 28 years later he was released from prison. Like you, they did not wait for him to make a weapon, they felt threatened because they did not know and acted, rather than gather all the information necessary. My blame is not the administration, but the persons responsible for gathering the proper information to arrive at a just conclusion. All the evidence you aforementioned are just pieces of the puzzle yet unfinished.
It is the wiseman who thinks first before acting. Let us not be governed by our emotions. Let us restore the intelligentsia and make rational decisions like the only superpower of the world should do.
Drgreeforce, now you're talking!! Although, you almost make it sound like Saddam was no more dangerous than your father. I don't think that would be true.
Wilson, the least credible factor here of any is you. Some others who know you better spelled it out. Sadly there are a lot of clones of you running about, otherwise Jerry Springer would run out of guests.