Some investigative reporting by Kenneth Timmerman has turned up some interesting information. Saddam’s WMDs were found, they were documented, and were acknowledged by both the US Government and Iraqi scientists now cooperating with the United States.

When, you ask? A long time ago. It’s ongoing. And the media doesn’t care because the magical “stockpiles” they keep asking about are not what’s being found, so it doesn’t count. Documented discoveries include:

 A prison laboratory complex that may have been used for human testing of BW agents and “that Iraqi officials working to prepare the U.N. inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the U.N.” Why was Saddam interested in testing biological-warfare agents on humans if he didn’t have a biological-weapons program?

 “Reference strains” of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. “We thought it was a big deal,” a senior administration official said. “But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of ‘starter set.'”

 “Plans and advanced design work for new long-range missiles with ranges up to at least 1,000 kilometers [621 miles] – well beyond the 150-kilometer-range limit [93 miles] imposed by the U.N. Missiles of a 1,000-kilometer range would have allowed Iraq to threaten targets throughout the Middle East, including Ankara [Turkey], Cairo [Egypt] and Abu Dhabi [United Arab Emirates].”

 “clandestine attempts between late 1999 and 2002 to obtain from North Korea technology related to 1,300-kilometer-range [807 miles] ballistic missiles – probably the No Dong – 300-kilometer-range [186 miles] antiship cruise missiles and other prohibited military equipment[.]”

And yet, it seems, even the mythical stockpiles did turn up, after a fashion:

But what are “stockpiles” of CW agents supposed to look like? Was anyone seriously expecting Saddam to have left behind freshly painted warehouses packed with chemical munitions, all neatly laid out in serried rows, with labels written in English? Or did they think that a captured Saddam would guide U.S. troops to smoking vats full of nerve gas in an abandoned factory? In fact, as recent evidence made public by a former operations officer for the Coalition Provisional Authority’s (CPA’s) intelligence unit in Iraq shows, some of those stockpiles have been found – not all at once, and not all in nice working order – but found all the same.

And what exactly did the ISG make of the chemicals discovered? Apparently the explanation that they were pesticides was accepted. As Timmerman remarks (emphasis mine):

At Karbala, U.S. troops stumbled upon 55-gallon drums of pesticides at what appeared to be a very large “agricultural supply” area, Hanson says. Some of the drums were stored in a “camouflaged bunker complex” that was shown to reporters – with unpleasant results. “More than a dozen soldiers, a Knight-Ridder reporter, a CNN cameraman, and two Iraqi POWs came down with symptoms consistent with exposure to a nerve agent,” Hanson says. “But later ISG tests resulted in a proclamation of negative, end of story, nothing to see here, etc., and the earlier findings and injuries dissolved into nonexistence. Left unexplained is the small matter of the obvious pains taken to disguise the cache of ostensibly legitimate pesticides. One wonders about the advantage an agricultural-commodities business gains by securing drums of pesticide in camouflaged bunkers 6 feet underground. The ‘agricultural site’ was also colocated with a military ammunition dump – evidently nothing more than a coincidence in the eyes of the ISG.”

“. . . It seems Iraqi soldiers were obsessed with keeping ammo dumps insect-free . . .”

So let’s ask this question: What do you think weapons of mass destruction should look like?

Is the media’s real problem here that nothing short of a functional nuclear missile in a silo would meet their criteria for “weapon of mass destruction”? Is it an all or nothing scenario, in which anything else discovered outside of these criteria is, ipso facto, of no concern?

I have known about some of this evidence for a while know, as do many people who have been reading the blogosphere. But the true scale and depth of the network for the weapons program is greater than I had realized, and we need to be talking about this. All of this evidence needs to be brought into the light of the mainstream news to counteract the “we found no WMD” and “Bush lied” refrain that emanates endlessly from the left.

This goes beyond political party affiliation and who’s conservative and who’s liberal and who’s socialist. It’s not about defending a “side”. We’re talking about the truth here, people.

Via Instapundit

7 Responses to “Oh, Those Weapons of Mass Destruction”
  1. Sigivald says:

    What’s even worse about the “pesticide” result is that, IIRC, many pesticides are nerve agents.

    That chemical X tests as “a pesticide” does not, as I understand it, mean “chemical X is not a chemical weapon”.

  2. Mithras says:

    Kay’s report contained much of this information. Kay doesn’t believe Iraq had WMD. Why is Mr. Insight Magazine correct and Kay wrong?

    Also, without delving too deeply into this dreck, I note this quote: “‘Reference strains’ of a wide variety of biological-weapons agents were found beneath the sink in the home of a prominent Iraqi BW scientist. ‘We thought it was a big deal,’ a senior administration official said. ‘But it has been written off [by the press] as a sort of “starter set.”‘” First of all, what was found was a single botulinum strain – C. Okra – that could be used to generate toxin. That strain is found in soil all over the world. It was left in some scientist’s refrigerator with a bunch of other reference strains for non-threatening organisms. So, the “senior administration official” (named Feith, presumably) is just factually wrong. And there still are no WMD.

    Hey, but it’s okay, because there are no shredders being used to murder people anymore. Oops, looks like they didn’t exist, either.

  3. Sigivald says:

    As I recall, Kays’ report was issued after inspecting only 10% of the locations/depots/bunkers to be searched, and that he reported only that no stockpiles had been found and verified.

    Not, as Mithras suggests, no “weapons”. Just no stockpiles of them. I guess it’s okay to have nerve gas as long as it’s not in a “stockpile”, and that that somehow negates the UN resolutions used to justify the war, and makes everything better.


  4. Bill Karwin says:

    Anne, I appreciate your posting and the questions they raise. It seems to me that if you had access to this information, the Bush administration might have it too. Why, then, was it not presented in a detailed fashion when it became available? It would have been more solid evidence than anything they have used so far to convince the world that Iraq violated UN resolutions.

    I’m not a lawyer, but I don’t think what they presented would not have been sufficient for a criminal conviction in a US court, so why is it sufficient to justify invasion, war, and regime change?

    I agree with you that this issue goes beyond party affiliation. I would hold any president to the same standards. They should have presented more than rumors, assertions, and fuzzy photos to justify an action of such gravity.

  5. Pre-troll says:

    I didn’t realize that United States soldiers were gang raping women:

    The Abu Ghraib Prison Photos

    I guess we can use 9-11 to justify anything…I’m up for a good gang rape and if we get caught we could just point to 9-11.

  6. tom preobsting says:

    I linked your site to mine, Truthprobe, which is a centrist political commentary. Check it out.



  7. Anne Haight says:


    If those pictures are for real (the rape ones at the bottom, not the others), then holy fucking Christ.

Leave a Reply