What Kay Found --- Colin L. Powell

[Khephra]

What Kay Found

By Colin L. Powell
Tuesday, October 7, 2003; Page A25


The interim findings of David Kay and the Iraq Survey Group make two things abundantly clear: Saddam Hussein's Iraq was in material breach of its United Nations obligations before the Security Council passed Resolution 1441 last November, and Iraq went further into breach after the resolution was passed.

Kay's interim findings offer detailed evidence of Hussein's efforts to defy the international community to the last. The report describes a host of activities related to weapons of mass destruction that "should have been declared to the U.N." It reaffirms that Iraq's forbidden programs spanned more than two decades, involving thousands of people and billions of dollars.

What the world knew last November about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs was enough to justify the threat of serious consequences under Resolution 1441. What we now know as a result of David Kay's efforts confirms that Hussein had every intention of continuing his work on banned weapons despite the U.N. inspectors, and that we and our coalition partners were right to eliminate the danger that his regime posed to the world.

Although Kay and his team have not yet discovered stocks of the weapons themselves, they will press on in the months ahead with their important and painstaking work. All indications are that they will uncover still more evidence of Hussein's dangerous designs.

more...........

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A53173-2003Oct6.html

(Note to Mods: An article like this from one of the Bushies is less an editorial than it is an official statement, so I hope you agree with me in thinking that it belongs more in BN than Ed. If I'm wrong, you have my apology.)

[bowens43]

1. Translation:

They still haven't found WMD.

[leftchick]

2. hmmmm , "dangerous designs"

Are danderous designs now WMD? This is the most pathetic twist of logic yet there colin....

[phillybri]

7. Can "Dangerous Designs" attack us in 45 minutes???

Didn't think so!

[boneygrey]

26. 45 minutes

Did Blair or Bush say that?

[jmowreader]

27. Bush

Said the Iraqis had all sorts of evil weapons that could be turned against us in 45 minutes.

Also said he had a shitload of "dual-use" plants, like the Iraqi chlorine plant that somehow the Iraqis could never get to work more than a day or so at a time. Yes, there is chlorine in WMDs. There is also chlorine in drinking water. There is chlorine in bleach. There is chlorine in a vinyl shutter. Chlorine is one of the most common industrial chemicals. Would Iraq have used this chlorine in WMDs? Possible. Would they have used it to purify their water? Definitely.

[jamesinca]

3. And what does Resolution 1441say Mr. Powell?

If and when it is determined that Iraq is in material breach of the Resolution, THE U.N. WILL DECIDE WHAT ACTION TO TAKE. Not the U.S. He keeps picking parts of the resolution that fit his needs. He needs to sit and read the entire resolution. He is either just as aliterate as Bush, or he is just perpetuating the lie. Because it says the U.N. has the final word, the U.N. agreed to it. The U.S. was in material breach of the resolution by 1) not turning over its evidence it claims to have had on WMD 2) not respecting the borders of Iraq a soverign nation 3) not involving the U.N. in its invasion 4)giving false leeds and as a consequence slowing down the U.N. inspectors or hindering their investigation 5)not giving the final decison to the Security Council on the decision to invade. There are 14 sections and 1 general statement to resolution 1441. The U.S. was in violation of 5 of these parts. Iraq was in violation of semantics and a box of photocopy paper.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

12. Exactly.

They also conveniently forget the "Show their cards!" vote that was to be taken and then was dropped.

[LiberalFighter]

19. Is there a point by point about 1441?

Would be good to have it laid out in an easy to comprehend way to read.

[Zhade]

4. What was Hussein going to do, THROW BLUEPRINTS AT US?

Learn the definition of "threat", you traitorous whores!

[shockingelk]

5. granted

"We knew that Iraqi officials, members of the ruling Baath Party and scientists had hidden prohibited items in their homes."

Point taken. Would you care to address the claim that Iraq had ACTUAL bio and chemical weapons and could attack NYC with drones?

[lovedems]

14. Maybe zip codes would've helped in tracking down the home

addresses of these scientist. lolololo! The Bushies and their damn zip codes! I know it was removed but the fact that it was in there is just really funny to me.

[0007]

6. Both Colin & Michael Powell

would do well if they had listened to Harry Belafonte, and be men, instead of small persons manipulated by the hand.

[Noordam]

8. Note the page number

of A25......

WashPost did not think this is top news.

[Ripley]

10. Also notice the CIA Covert Agent Leak has disappeared.

It wasn't even mentioned in my paper yesterday, except for a wingnut opinion piece that said it was all political.

This happens every time a HUGE SCANDAL happens in this administration...it breaks in the news and everyone here says "last nail in coffin..woohoo!" Then it goes away in a week.

I wish we could get our hopes up about just one thing and it would pan out. But without anyone to investigate, report or give air time to opposition it won't happen.

Where is Al Gore and his new TV channel?

[Barrett808]

16. Probably the op/ed page n/t

n/t

[Q]

9. The issue is whether Iraq posed a sufficient threat...

...to justify a unilateral, 'preemptive' war.

- History will show that the Bushies unnecessarily murdered thousands of innocent Iraqis and hundreds of American soldiers.

[Guaranteed]

22. The question is was Saddam actually

making weapons or not. If he wasn't, then this shouldn't have even been an issue.

[Corgigal]

11. dangerous designs

Well, I would agree that the road system over in Iraq must have some dangerous designs due to amount of American GI's lost in traffic accidents. Or at least that is what we're told.

[Cambist]

13. What About Isreal ?

How many resolutions are they in violation of as we speak? Lots. Does that mean we have the right to bomb them and kill tens of thousands of inocent people? Of course f*cking not. F*ck Colen Powel and his "masters". I hope they all rot in hell. (As I'm sure they will)......(provided there is actually a hell)

[Raster]

15. silly boy, the rules DON'T apply to israel...

...they are our "special" friends...
just like the rules didn't apply to geedubya...

i mean, a two-time drunk drivin', coke-snortin', AWOL party-boy gets to be pResident...

[Selwynn]

17. This is why I think harping on "no weapons found" is a mistake for Dems

Now bear with me ~

I've been very hestitant about making the entire force of our complaint against the war rest on the fact that no WMDs have been found. The force of criticism should be on the issue of "immanent threat." Why couldn't we work multilaterally, convince the world of our position, exhaust diplomatic options, work with the United Nations instead of against them, and thuse engage in an operation in Iraq that was safer, more efficient, less costly and more effective? The answer is because we said that there was a "clear and present" thread to the United States. The word that was used, was "immanent." This is the part of the tale that has been completely and utterly unsubstantiated.

I remember when we went to war, I had to remind myself that I actually did believe that Sadaam a) absolutely wanted to obtain whatever weapons he could and b) probably had WMDs, specifically chemical weapons leftover from when we armed him with them the first time. So I tried to not base my criticism of the war on the claim that Sadaam didn't have weapons. Instead my criticism of the war was that it was rash and wreckless, needlessly putting American children in harms way for a war that wasn't about security, wasn't about democracy, but was about US geo-political interests and profitmaking -- which is the key reason why we were motivated to go it alone, becuase we don't want to share.

I wouldn't be suprised if weapons or unassembled material for making weapons were eventually found, and not the planted variety either. To me that would seem consistent with Sadaam's regime. However, they will not be many, and they will not constitute and immanent threat to anything, and that is where the heart of our criticism should lie. Our criticism should be based on the fact that your brother, my neighbor, her daughter is dead, blown apart and guts spilled out in the desert of a foreign land and it was NEEDLESS AND WRECKLESS AND WANTON. We flipped of the rest of the world, alienating our allies, and we invaded with no genuine commitment to lasting peace or democracy in the country - we simply came in to take what we could take, and fuck the towelheads if they get in the way.

This must be the bulk of our protest. If we blindly focus on the appearance that our position against the war is vindicated by the absence of weapons, what happens when/if weapons are legitimately found? The war will still have been wrong, but why? The answer I believe is decribed above. Democratic talking points on the war should be: Needless and Wreckless to act in the manner that we did, a testiment to Bush's needless and wreckless doctrine of preemption.

Thanks for listening.
Sel

[boneygrey]

20. I agree

Sel,

Reluctantly, I must agree with you. If all we do is hang our hat on WMDs or no WMDS things could go bad for us. I read Kay's report and what concerns me the most are: Only 10 of 130 ammo dumps have been searched, the Iraqi army in the past didn't mark which weapons were not conventional, and there may be 650,000 tons of weapons to go through. The odds are too high that something may be found I disagree, however, about using the "imminent threat" because the RePukes are just going to counter with the state of the union address where Bush says something about acting before there is an imminent threat. I think we should concentrate on the administration moving too quickly, not exhausting diplomatic alternatives, and acting without the UN.

[trapper914]

23. I don't know if I buy this.

Prior to Kay's arrival, the Iraqi Survey Group had run out of work to do. They had searched every likely location of WMD and were almost literally just standing down every day in Iraq. Maybe they haven't re-searched the ammo dumps since Kay took over, but in the first three months after Baghdad fell, I gotta feeling our guys went through those areas. If they didn't, our leaders over there are more inept than we thought.

[Rex]

18. "activities related to weapons of mass destruction"

In other words; Kay found nothing worth going to war over AND he couldn't find jackshit when it came to actual WMD!

These people are pondscum.

[peterh]

21. Powell’s opinion falls squarely into the following opinion…

Addicted to spin
Weapons report: No threat, just 'aspirations'

<http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc/editorials/article/0,1713,BDC_2489_2326825,00.html>

Kay did report, however, that Saddam, ever the jonesing addict, never dropped his "aspirations" to stockpile such dangerous weapons. But if desire to possess WMD is the new threshold, then there's hardly a country on Earth that isn't guilty of the same crime.



Powell can put all the lipstick on this pig report as he wants….it won’t change the fact this war was sold on the basis of physical stuff…..not aspirations.

[tom_paine]

24. More Lies from the Bushevik Swine

Yawn.

Colon, you would have made a GREAT General Jodl if you had been white and leading German Soldiers during DubyaDubyaTwo.

In fact, one might argue that Colon Foul is, in fact, the Jodl to Bush's Fuehrer.

[karlschneider]

25. I never knew his middle initial before. Now it's pretty clear what it

stands for.
:grr:
:puke: