# So the Neocons had no real evidence of WMD in Iraq. **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [May 30, 2003, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643 "2003-05-30T22:43:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 6:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/81 "2003-06-01T18:09:50Z")
> [@](#): > > Factually, the discovery of mobile plants is exactly the kind of thing - the damning evidence - we were looking for, and now that the suspicion (or intelligence) has been realized, we have to tackle the matter of accounting for the rest of them that are also said to exist. A Pandora’s Box of sorts. I like the phrase \*Pandora’s **Bush** \* myself. It seems more appropriate in this instance. Finding two broken down Winnebagos(I think someone on here used that description), ain’t much of a first step. And finding “the rest of them” and the zillions of tons of chemicals, etc. just seems like wishful thinking. Don’t any of the revelations in the news the last few days in any way _start_ ignite your thinking that maybe, just maybe, these stories were _made up_ by Iraqui exiles, and the intelligence community in the US fed the rumors to Rumsfeld, and he and the other powers behind the throne fed rumors rather than facts to Bush, Powell and others? We’re searching for things that, quite probably, never existed. ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 6:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/82 "2003-06-01T18:40:01Z")
For those who truly think that this war was based on real threats, > [@](#): > > Tony Blair’s sensational pre-war claim that Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction “could be activated within 45 minutes” was based on information from a single Iraqi defector of dubious reliability, The Independent on Sunday can reveal. > > British intelligence sources said the defector, recruited by Ahmed Chalabi’s Iraqi National Congress, told his story to American officials. It was passed on to London as part of regular information-sharing with Washington, but British intelligence chiefs considered the “45 minutes” claim to be unreliable and uncorroborated by any other evidence. How it came to be included as the most dramatic element in the Government’s “intelligence dossier” last September, making the case for war, is now the subject of a furious row in Whitehall and abroad. from the ‘_Independant on Sunday_’ here [http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=411301](http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=411301) Odd how British Security analysts had their opinions overruled by an intelligence ‘addition’ that seems to have been sourced from the US. Both British and US experts had access to the original source, they had differant interpretations, and yet the US one is the one that made it into the final draft. Makes me wonder why we bother having an intelligence service at all if the US can insert its own agenda into such crucial assessments. I expect that France treats its own intelligence experts with more respect for their professional abilities. If our analysts are not to be relied upon by our policy makers, then it seems we are either incompetant at appointing experts, or our policy makers. Since Blair and Bush straight out lied, I think I know the answer. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/83 "2003-06-01T18:53:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by samclem \* > **Finding two broken down Winnebagos(I think someone on here used that description), ain’t much of a first step. And finding “the rest of them” and the zillions of tons of chemicals, etc. just seems like wishful thinking.** Oh. Is that all they are? 😛 > [@](#): > > **Don’t any of the revelations in the news the last few days in any way _start_ ignite your thinking that maybe, just maybe, these stories were _made up_ by Iraqui exiles, and the intelligence community in the US fed the rumors to Rumsfeld, and he and the other powers behind the throne fed rumors rather than facts to Bush, Powell and others?** No. “Revelations” in the news lately always ignite my thinking, but not in that direction. The time to assess claims made by exiles (and the motivations behind them) was before the war. Finding tangible evidence of one of those claims, after the war, seems to disprove the idea that this one was blowing smoke. ---
**Author:** ![Lissa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/85f322/32.png) [@Lissa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lissa)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/84 "2003-06-01T20:01:53Z")
For the record, I supported attacking Afghanistan when the Taliban was in power… long before Sept. 11th. I supported going into Baghdad years ago when he defied the UN resolutions and was persecuting his people. In other words, I have supported the use of American forces when human rights are threatened. This is unpopular and believe me, I understand the strategic limitations of our armed forces. However, no one can deny, that prior to Sept. 11th, all the aforementioned reasons existed to invade Iraq and Afghanistan (we know they supported terrorists and oppressed their people) and in the early term of GW’s presidency he called for an isolationist view (only attack when we are threatened). In fact, he nailed Gore in a debate about the problems with nation building and restated his isolationist philosophy. Thus, the overriding reason for this war, was Sept. 11th. I think all you have to at least admit this- the war would not have happened without Sept 11th. Thus, if Sept. 11th started the whole thing, then Bush had to prove to the American people that Saddam was a threat to us. The only way to do this was the WMD’s and ties to terrorism argument. The evil dictator was not an issue because it was not an issue for 12 years. I am sad to say, that despite the fact that I consider myself well informed, I bought the whole story hook, line and sinker. My wife and I debated frequently about it and I actually stood up for the current administration, sometimes vehemently, saying they would not lie about something like this and in light of Sept. 11th, the threat of terrorism and WMD’s is real. Now, after the war, I have realized that the WMD’s is a lie. The links to terorrism are only proven to the middle eastern theatre and there was no real threat to the United States. Thus, I guess what I am trying to say is that I was a supporter of the administration, even though I did not vote for it. Now, I must admit that we were lied to and deceived. GWB used the post Sept. 11th fervor to build up fear in the populace. The people would not have supported a war unless they were afraid for their own safety. Thus, GWB played up this card- the WMD’s. Yes, he mentioned, on the side, all those other reasons that had existed for years. But, they knew, as all good politicians know, that they had to play on the wild card “fear”. I trusted them, against the insight of my wife (who is quite intelligent) and now I am very upset with the whole thing. I recall debating with her saying, “When they find those WMD’s, or if they are used, I will expect an apology from you.” Now, it is I who must apologize to her because she was the one who did not fall for the dupe and I went head first in. All presidents have lied and I think they are all wrong for that. I think it is ironic that the only one who was impeached, in modern times, was Clinton who lied about a simple affair. Even though I supported Clinton, I had to admit he was a criminal and maybe should not be in office. But, getting a blow job in the oval office and perjuring himself in a deposition, in no way equates to starting a war under false pretenses. Once again, if Bush would have, prior to Sept. 11th, went in and helped the people of Iraq and Afghanistan, I would have cheered. But, after taking an isolationist stand, becoming a hypocrite and then lying to the American people, I can only conclude he is a criminal. Thus, you have a convert elucidator. I will not allow an administration to play up the fears of the American people (WMD’s) and mention a couple other justifications that were not good enough prior to Sept. 11th. Then, try and change the emphasis later in the wake of a succesful military campaign. That is a classic deception and anyone who accepts it has disgraced the men and women who have given their lives so that this country, and others, will be free. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/85 "2003-06-01T20:07:41Z")
_Egotist te absolvo_, **Lissa’s Unworthy Consort** Go forth and sin no more. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 9:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/86 "2003-06-01T21:07:18Z")
Oh my goodness, the man is drawing converts. 😃 I actually enjoy **elucidator’s** posts more often than not and I get a chuckle or two, sometimes a good quote - the Winnebago thing is probably his handiwork - and they have the overall effect of keeping the other side honest. No problem. So I’ll just keep him honest here, if he doesn’t mind. What the hell is the point of being worried about WMD and proscribed weaponry, everyone’s overriding concern, _the whole reason some people supposedly supported the war_, if finding an actual production facility is meaningless. I ask you. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/87 "2003-06-01T22:12:17Z")
**Tee** , ask me when we have actually found a production facility. Call me crazy, but I was dubious about the reports when they were found (as if cleaning a lab with some cleanser were actually some nefarious activity). I would prefer to have an independent assessment of these facilities, but that has not yet occurred. Color me increasingly skeptical, given the reports about the intentional fudging of intelligence that occurred during the build-up to war. If **elucidator** is converting people, then I hope he will call the democratic leadership to get their heads out of their asses. These recent reports are the dam breaking on the bullshit that Bush has been slinging, yet Dodd and Biden were on the talking heads shows today not shouting condemnations, but giving such a mild “ahem” on the topic that I didn’t even really get where they stood. They do seem afraid to speak their mind, and all the listener gets from them is (prefacing remark) (prefacing remark) (disclaimer) (disclaimer) (concilliatory statement) followed by “But I am curious to know if any of these concerns are well-founded.” God dammit, is there a single democrat who isn’t named Byrd who is ready to kick some ass on this issue? Hell, Robert Novak was more condemning of the current state of affairs than the pusillanimous pussy-footers I saw today. (By god, now I am channeling Pat Buchanan - I’m gonna go get myself on the ballot in Palm Beach County. Arrrrgh!) ---
**Author:** ![quixotic78](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/3ab097/32.png) [@quixotic78](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/quixotic78)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/88 "2003-06-01T22:23:31Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\*What the hell is the point of being worried about WMD and proscribed weaponry, everyone’s overriding concern, _the whole reason some people supposedly supported the war_, if finding an actual production facility is meaningless. I ask you. \*\* I’ll take a stab at this. First of all, I’m not 100% convinced that these Winnebagoes 😉 are what the US is saying they are. They haven’t found any traces of chemical weapons in these things. All they’ve got is a few guys, standing around, scratching their heads and say, “Well, gee, Clem, I’m more confused than a boar hog in a bear trap. I can’t think of nothin’ this could be used fer except to make them bad WMDs the President is always talkin’ about.” The sad thing is, I’d probably agree with the CIAs assessment, except the Administration unfortunately burned up all of their cred throughout the war process. Maybe even more importantly – these trailers are not what we were expecting. I remember reading in a thread (can’t find it now, hamsters are too slow) just a few days ago where someone linked to what Colin Powell said to the UN. There was ONE paragraph in his speech about these trailers. We didn’t go to war over some trailers. That’s not to say that they’re unimportant… but at the same time, compared to tons of anthrax, liters of botulism, hundreds of pounds of nuclear material… well, they ARE unimportant. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/89 "2003-06-01T22:30:38Z")
> [@](#): > > if finding an actual production facility is meaningless. Is it an actual production facility for biological weapons ? The [CIA’s analysis of the trailers](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/iraqi_mobile_plants/index.html) is far from convincing. The [fermentor itself](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/iraqi_mobile_plants/images/fermentor_compressor.jpg) looks more like a chemical reaction chamber than a fermentor. Where are the steam lines, media lines, and nutrient lines ? Where’s the DO[sub]2[/sub] and pH probe ? What the heck is that big hinged pipe covering at the bottom, a place to shovel in coal ? How do they get media into that odd looking [media tank](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/iraqi_mobile_plants/images/interior_view.jpg), perhaps with a funnel through the 3/4” pipe fitting on top ? Who _ever heard_ of painting what must be oxygen, air or nitrogen tanks, battleship grey to match the labs color scheme ? The hookup looks odd too, if they ever planned on switching the things on the fly. Then there’s the [manufacturer’s data plate on the “fermentor”](http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/iraqi_mobile_plants/images/manufacturers_plate.jpg) itself. We are told that the stamped date is 2002, yet on the photograph it appears just as likely to be 1992. That would certainly make it easier to account for visible corrosion on what should be a new piece of equipment. The trailer certainly contains some odd pieces of equipment, but exactly what it is, when it was manufactured, and whether it was ever finished, much less used, remain to be seen. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/90 "2003-06-01T22:36:54Z")
Ah, but the Iraqis _admit_ that these massively sophisticated arrrangements of tubing were intended for the production of _hydrogen_! Perhaps if you Bush-bashers search the dim recesses of your French-style minds, you will recall a WMD based almost entirely on _hydrogen!_ Think carefull, dimwits. Think BOOOOOOOOM! They are evil, my precious…evil… ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/91 "2003-06-01T22:40:06Z")
**Tee** said > [@](#): > > No. “Revelations” in the news lately always ignite my thinking, but not in that direction. The time to assess claims made by exiles (and the motivations behind them) was before the war. Finding tangible evidence of one of those claims, after the war, seems to disprove the idea that this one was blowing smoke. You’re right. The time to assess those revelations was before you start a war. The intelligence communities in the US and Britain assessed them and found nothing. There was no threat. The politicians decided to spin it in a different direction. And there’s your justification for going to war. Your idea of “tangible evidence” and mine are a teensy bit different. On preview, I see that **squink** added some great stuff, nitty-gritty info that a politician can’t be bothered with. The good news is that there are people who have critical thinking powers( **Sam Stone, Mr. Lissa** ) , and are coming towards the light. Every day will produce more. Soon, there will be a tide which cannot be rolled back. Victory will be ours! ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/92 "2003-06-01T22:53:13Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by samclem \* > \*\*…Soon, there will be a tide which cannot be rolled back. Victory will be ours! \*\* In 2008, maybe. Don’t confuse a few posters at SDMB with the electorate in general. The electorate doesn’t care, hence the politically wise ignoring of the issue by most Democrats. This is an important issue…to you. And some others. But not to most people. Whatever the reasons for going into Iraq, it’s all over now. Iraq is now just another protectorate, like Kosovo, Afghanistan, S.Korea, Bosnia, etc. The electorate cares about terrorism at home. They care about taxes, education, and other, more pressing, issues. Iraq? Yesterday’s news. ---
**Author:** ![samclem](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a9a28c/32.png) [@samclem](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/samclem)\ **Post date:** [June 1, 2003, 11:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/93 "2003-06-01T23:12:58Z")
**Brutus**. Admitted like a _Mensch_. I didn’t know you had it in you. My hat’s off to you. Damn thing is, you are probably correct. ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 12:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/94 "2003-06-02T00:21:33Z")
Time’s take on the matter… > [@](#): > > As the U.S. prepared to go to war in Iraq last winter, the most compelling reason advanced by George W. Bush to justify a new kind of pre-emptive war was that Saddam Hussein possessed nuclear, chemical and biological arms — weapons of mass destruction (wmd). “There’s no doubt in my mind but that they currently have chemical and biological weapons,” said Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld in January. “We believe he has, in fact, reconstituted nuclear weapons,” said Vice President Dick Cheney in March. That Iraq might have WMD was never the only reason the Bush Administration wanted to topple Saddam. But it was the big reason, the casus belli, the public rationale peddled over and over to persuade a skeptical nation, suspicious allies and a hostile United Nations to get behind the controversial invasion. And while that sales pitch fell flat overseas, it worked better than expected at home: by late March, 77% of the public felt that invading U.S. troops would find WMD. > > But eight weeks after the war’s end, most of that confident intelligence has yet to pan out, and a growing number of experts think it never will. Current and former U.S. officials have begun to question whether the weapons will ever be found in anything like the quantities the U.S. suggested before the war — if found at all — and whether the U.S. gamed the intelligence to justify the invasion. For now, WMD seems to stand for weapons of mass disappearance. Smarting from the accusations that they had cooked the books, top U.S. officials fanned out late last week to say the hunt would go on and the weapons would eventually be found. CIA officials told TIME that they would produce a round of fresh evidence for increasingly wary lawmakers as early as next week. After dispatching dozens of G.I. patrols to some 300 suspected WMD sites in Iraq over the past two months, only to come up empty-handed, the Pentagon announced last week that it will shift from hunting for banned weapons to hunting for documents and people who might be able to say where banned weapons are — or were. But it is clear that the U.S. is running out of good leads. “We’ve been to virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad,” Lieut. General James T. Conway, commander of the 1st Marine Expeditionary Force, said last week. “But they’re simply not there.” [http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,455767,00.html](http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,455767,00.html) ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 3:23am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/95 "2003-06-02T03:23:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by quixotic78 \* > \*\*Maybe even more importantly – these trailers are not what we were expecting. I remember reading in a thread (can’t find it now, hamsters are too slow) just a few days ago where someone linked to what Colin Powell said to the UN. There was ONE paragraph in his speech about these trailers. We didn’t go to war over some trailers. That’s not to say that they’re unimportant… but at the same time, compared to tons of anthrax, liters of botulism, hundreds of pounds of nuclear material… well, they ARE unimportant. \*\* Nah. I have to disagree with all of this. **Squink’s** links (game show name!) go to the CIA site, where you can read their assessment and how it matches up with what we expected to find. That’s post-war, obviously…Powell’s presentation can be read at [http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/disarm/homepage.htm](http://usinfo.state.gov/regional/nea/disarm/homepage.htm) under Iraq: Failing to Disarm. His case is 7 or 8 pages long. This is the part about the mobile facilities, in the Biological Weapons section: > [@](#): > > One of the most worrisome things that emerges from the thick intelligence file we have on Iraq’s biological weapons is the existence of mobile production facilities used to make biological agents. Let me take you inside that intelligence file and share with you what we know from eyewitness accounts. We have first-hand descriptions of biological weapons factories on wheels and on rails. > > The trucks and train cars are easily moved and are designed to evade detection by inspectors. In a matter of months, they can produce a quantity of biological poison equal to the entire amount that Iraq claimed to have produced in the years prior to the Gulf War. > > Although Iraq’s mobile production program began in the mid-1990s, UN inspectors at the time only had vague hints of such programs. Confirmation came later, in the year 2000. The source was an eyewitness, an Iraqi chemical engineer who supervised one of these facilities. He actually was present during biological agent production runs. He was also at the site when an accident occurred in 1998. 12 technicians died from exposure to biological agents. He reported that when UNSCOM was in country and inspecting, the biological weapons agent production always began on Thursdays at midnight, because Iraq thought UNSCOM would not inspect on the Muslim holy day, Thursday night through Friday. He added that this was important because the units could not be broken down in the middle of a production run, which had to be completed by Friday evening before the inspectors might arrive again. > > This defector is currently hiding in another country with the certain knowledge that Saddam Hussein will kill him if he finds him. His eyewitness account of these mobile production facilities has been corroborated by other sources. A second source. An Iraqi civil engineer in a position to know the details of the program confirmed the existence of transportable facilities moving on trailers. A third source, also in a position to know, reported in summer, 2002, that Iraq had manufactured mobile production systems mounted on road-trailer units and on rail cars. Finally, a fourth source. An Iraqi major who defected confirmed that Iraq has mobile biological research laboratories in addition to the production facilities I mentioned earlier. > > We have diagrammed what our sources reported about these mobile facilities. Here you see both truck and rail-car mounted mobile factories. The description our sources gave us of the technical features required by such facilities is highly detailed and extremely accurate. As these drawings, based on their description show, we know what the fermentors look like. We know what the tanks, pumps, compressors and other parts look like. We know how they fit together, we know how they work, and we know a great deal about the platforms on which they are mounted. > > As shown in this diagram, these factories can be concealed easily – either by moving ordinary looking trucks and rail-cars along Iraq’s thousands of miles of highway or track or by parking them in a garage or a warehouse or somewhere in Iraq’s extensive system of underground tunnels and bunkers. We know that Iraq has at least seven of these mobile, biological agent factories. The truck-mounted ones have at least two or three trucks each. That means that the mobile production facilities are very few – perhaps 18 trucks that we know of. There may be more. But perhaps 18 that we know of. > > Just imagine trying to find 18 trucks among the thousands and thousands of trucks that travel the roads of Iraq every single day. It took the inspectors four years to find out that Iraq was making biological agents. How long do you think it will take the inspectors to find even one of these 18 trucks without Iraq coming forward as they are supposed to with the information about these kinds of capabilities. > > Ladies and gentlemen, these are sophisticated facilities. For example, they can produce anthrax and botulinum toxin. In fact, they can produce enough dry, biological agent in a single month to kill thousands upon thousands of people. A dry agent of this type is the most lethal form for human beings. By 1998, UN experts agreed that the Iraqis had perfected drying techniques for their biological weapons programs. Now Iraq has incorporated this drying expertise into these mobile production facilities. Sorry to quote at length but as you can see, it’s more than one paragraph. I wonder how often people are reading and linking to CNN or BBC summaries, for example, which might contain one paragraph on any given topic and suddenly that becomes “what Powell said” or “what we were told.” ---
**Author:** ![MeanJoe](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/meanjoe/32/5693_2.png) [@MeanJoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MeanJoe)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 5:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/96 "2003-06-02T05:46:43Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by elucidator \* > What! No kidding? Well, that certainly settles that! The Leader is right, as always. I stand ready to support our troops in Iraq! and Iran! and Afghanistan! and Columbia! and the Phillipines **and Klaandathu!** … _snort!_😃 (bolding mine) MeanJoe ---
**Author:** ![tagos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bbe5ce/32.png) [@tagos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tagos)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 9:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/97 "2003-06-02T09:33:43Z")
This is a massive issue for the UK. Blair said Iraq was a clear and present danger to the UK because of WMD’s that could be launched in 45 minutes. It now does not matter if a few shells, a few precursor chemicals or whatever are found as it’s now clear Saddam did not have WMD’s and a delivery system that Blair claimed threatened the UK. It now looks like Blair lied to Parliament and coming up with yet another dossier to “prove” some kind of WMD programme after the event, particularly after the lies and distortions of his first have been exposed, may not get him off the hook. Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld’s “We lied, we won anyway, no-one in the US cares, so sue us” line is killing him. Lying to Parliament is about as serious as it gets in the UK system. Those guys may just have finished Blair as PM if the opposition parties sprout some backbone and join with the growing ranks of the disaffected from his own party. ---
**Author:** ![OliverH](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/278dde/32.png) [@OliverH](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/OliverH)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 10:12am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/98 "2003-06-02T10:12:38Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\* > Sorry to quote at length but as you can see, it’s more than one paragraph. I wonder how often people are reading and linking to CNN or BBC summaries, for example, which might contain one paragraph on any given topic and suddenly that becomes “what Powell said” or “what we were told.” \*\* The problem is that already back then, ‘what Powell said’ (the real thing, that is) was widely dismissed by microbiologists and molecular biologists, given the ambient temperature necessary to cultivate microorganisms. ---
**Author:** ![athelas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/5e9695/32.png) [@athelas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/athelas)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/99 "2003-06-02T12:09:53Z")
You know, I highly doubt that hiding \hydrogen\ production facilities under camouflage and burying them underground is aiding the production process… ---
**Author:** ![Susma\_Rio\_Sep](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/35a633/32.png) [@Susma\_Rio\_Sep](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Susma_Rio_Sep)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2003, 12:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643/100 "2003-06-02T12:25:55Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\* > This post actually written by Lissa’s husband. \*\* Dear Lissa: You have a genuine man in your husband, full of honesty to see into his mistake and to admit it before the whole world, and to warn others to beware of being duped by leaders with their own dubious agendas. Susma Rio Sep [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643.md?page=4) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/so-the-neocons-had-no-real-evidence-of-wmd-in-iraq/178643.md?page=6)