What weapons, there are no weapons
Sorry about the weapons, boys
Search for Banned Arms In Iraq Ended Last Month
Critical September Report to Be Final Word
By Dafna Linzer
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 12, 2005; Page A01
The hunt for biological, chemical and nuclear weapons in Iraq has come to an end nearly two years after President Bush ordered U.S. troops to disarm Saddam Hussein. The top CIA weapons hunter is home, and analysts are back at Langley.
In interviews, officials who served with the Iraq Survey Group (ISG) said the violence in Iraq, coupled with a lack of new information, led them to fold up the effort shortly before Christmas.
Four months after Charles A. Duelfer, who led the weapons hunt in 2004, submitted an interim report to Congress that contradicted nearly every prewar assertion about Iraq made by top Bush administration officials, a senior intelligence official said the findings will stand as the ISG's final conclusions and will be published this spring.
President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials asserted before the U.S. invasion in March 2003 that Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear weapons program, had chemical and biological weapons, and maintained links to al Qaeda affiliates to whom it might give such weapons to use against the United States.
Bush has expressed disappointment that no weapons or weapons programs were found, but the White House has been reluctant to call off the hunt, holding out the possibility that weapons were moved out of Iraq before the war or are well hidden somewhere inside the country. But the intelligence official said that possibility is very small.
Duelfer is back in Washington, finishing some addenda to his September report before it is reprinted.
Satellite photos show that entire facilities have been dismantled, possibly by scrap dealers who sold off parts and equipment to buyers around the world.
"The September 30 report is really pretty much the picture," the intelligence official said.
"We've talked to so many people that someone would have said something. We received nothing that contradicts the picture we've put forward. It's possible there is a supply someplace, but what is much more likely is that [as time goes by] we will find a greater substantiation of the picture that we've already put forward."
Congress allotted hundreds of millions of dollars for the weapons hunt, and there has been no public accounting of the money. A spokesman for the Pentagon's Defense Intelligence Agency said the entire budget and the expenditures would remain classified.
An open letter to Ken Pollack
Dear Mr. Pollack,
It isn't every day an armchair analyst can help send 1357 decent Americans and 100,000 decent and mostly innocent Iraqis to an early grave. I mean, it takes work to promote a policy of death so dilligently and so profitably.
So here's a simple question: where the fuck are the weapons? You said they had them. They didn't and a lot of people are dead. In imperial Japan, that would have required hara kiri. But in Washington, I guess that means a new book on Iran, so more Americans can die.
Don't you get tired of being a cheerleader for death? I know you call it a policy issue, but real people are dying. They're blowing up tanks with the explosives we didn't even bother to guard. You sit at a desk, wipe the blood from your hands and well, go about your day. Which I assume doesn't include a trip to Walter Reed to see the teenaged cripples your words help create.
The Washington Post had a charming story, in an aside about Ward 57, a stop for many after their part in the war your so confidently recommended ended in a flash of blinding light and shrapnel, there was a few lines about a three year old crawling after his legless mother. Why aren't you waking up in fear every night. Your words helped create sleepless nights for thousands of young men and women, shattered beyond belief by the war you helped promote like a boxing match.
Well, now there are no weapons. And a lot of shattered, ruined families here, in the UK, in Ukraine, in Iraq. And, like Streicher's screetching about the Jews, you can go down in history as a great propaganist. You swore that Saddam was a danger. To what? His own people? Hell, we're killing them as fast as we can. We're now gonna unleash death squads to make them love us. At least in Saddam's Iraq, you could walk down the street without a hijab and the fear of being raped.
No one could or would defend Saddam's rule in Iraq. But is the hell we've unleashed even marginally better. Sure, let's talk about elections. How many Iraqis and Americans will die to play out Bush's farce? In the charnel house we've turned Iraq into, how many people will die for "the vote". A vote for candidates who cannot even campaign.
But that crappy book you wrote forsaw none of this. As you played armchair general and hoked up a profile of Saddam the insane, you didn't see what was coming, what a good historian could have predicted. Why mutter something about Bush screwing up. You provided him the intellectual cover to screw up. You convinced the chattering classes to support this fiasco.
Now, with Landsthul filled with ruined kids and the lines clogged with heartsick parents, where have you been? Pimping a new book on Iran. Are you sending more people to die? Does that not bother you, as you make lofty pronouncements paid for with the blood of others? Or do they count at all, the maimed and the dead?
YOu said there were weapons, there are none. In a just world, you should be haunted by that every night of the rest of your life.
posted by Steve @ 9:02:00 AM