Third Infantry Finds Chemical Weapons South Of Baghdad

This report comes from Paul Strand the embedded reporter with the Third Infantry in Iraq. I have not heard it confirmed by other news media as of yet.

Fair Use…
“What I just heard from a highly placed source here is that they’ve discovered, they’ve captured chemical warheads, they’re Russian, they have Russian writing all over them and they are chemical warheads.”

The Third Infantry Division has captured evidence of chemical weapons as they are fighting Iraq’s Republican Guard just 60 miles south of Baghdad. The evidence has yet to be confirmed, but CBN News War Correspondent Paul Strand delivered this exclusive information by satellite phone early Wednesday.

Click here to read article in it’s entirety.

I’ll wait for the confirmation before I get all excited about this. Fool me once, etc etc.

I believe what you meant to say was:

“There’s an old saying in Tennessee – I know it’s in Texas, probably in Tennessee…that says, fool me once, shame on… shame on you. Fool me … can’t get fooled again.”

That said, this report looks moderately more compelling than the last one. I’ll wait for confirmation as well, though.

The questions this raises, but fails to answer:

Do they really exist, or is it a scam?

If they exist:

Are they LOADED warheads?

If not, they’re old news. Chemical capable warheads have, after all, been found by the inspectors forgotten among others, in bird-dung covered boxes, and the Iraqis back then admitted there might be more boxes like that one and promised to search for them.

Then again, the way the report is written: There’s russian writing all over them, so they have to be dangerous, no? :wink:

Heres a bit more info, but still no mainstream confirmation

Fair use…

U.S. troops capture chemical warheads?
Report: Russian weapons sent for testing, specialist with Medina unit also nabbed

U.S. troops south of Baghdad believe they have captured Russian chemical warheads along with a launcher and a chemical warfare specialist, according to a reporter embedded with the 3rd Infantry Division.

A spokesman for the U.S. Army Central Command in Kuwait, Dani Burrows, told WND that her office could not confirm the report. Diane Perry said her Pentagon office had not heard the report but noted that embedded reporters often are getting stories ahead of the Defense Department.

Click here for complete article

I’m less convinced after doing a little investigating. So far, you have Pat Robertson talking on the phone to some “embedded” reporter, and that’s it. The worldnetdaily report is based on it, and so doesn’t constitute corroboration, but does tell us that the army hasn’t heard about it, in spite of the fact that news of possible chemical weapons would make it to command very very quickly. The cbn report is now the better part of a day old, and if there were anything to it, I’d think the Pentagon would know by now, and given how badly they’d like to have something like this in the news, they’d have been quick to let the mainstream media know.

I’m leaning towards concluding this is another case of crying wolf.

I agree, just having CBN as a source isn’t enough.

However, years ago I remember seeing a story on CBN (not that I make a habit of watching them) that seemed unbelievable at the time, and yet later it was confirmed to be true. You never know.

This ‘embedded reporter’ thing is really working well for those seeking to control, or at the very least dominate, the war reporting agenda. And, at the same time, the ‘embedded one’ gets to see his / her name in lights and the unit gets profile; a ‘win’ ‘win’ for the whole shooting match !

Just a shame about the manipulation, the absence of objectivity and the ack of substance …

I came across that story about 14 hours ago.

I’ve been regularly searching the topic because of the Pit thread and the GD thread on the subject.

But when I saw the source, and the lack of any follow up, I didn’t bother linking to it.

My guess is that if they had, and had actually captured the guy who mixes the chemicals, it would have been trumpeted loudly long before now.

CBN is NOT a credible source. For me, having seen it here first raises the burden of proof that I would need to see before I would begin to believe it.

Maybe the voices in Pat Robertson’s head confused his reporter, because elements of that story sure sounds a lot like this one from the Herald.

Original quote from the 700 Club:

Compared to the Herald, three days ago:

Sounds mighty similar to me, except that it’s the Black Watch who found the weapons, and they didn’t find any chemicals…


And again, we’ll just have to wait and see.

I think we should consider the ‘source’ of this “report”. I don’t see any mention of this at the Faux News website. And quite frankly, CBN makes Fox actually look "fair and balanced.

I’m such an idiot. Here I’m reading this, thinking, “Man, those Canadians scooped all of the U.S. journalists?”

And then I realized that “CBN” meant “Christian Broadcasting Network” … I was thinking of the CBC.

Well, here’s exactly what they found–a big pile of shells.,5936,6200714%5E25440,00.html

So what they found were “artillery shells”. Period. No information on what kind of warheads they had–could be chemical, biological, or Chanel No. 5 talcum powder–but the Daily Telegraph obviously prefers them to be “suspected WOMD”.

Chalk up another one for the media’s intense desire to scoop the competition. :rolleyes:

And another one for Pat Robertson’s intense desire to have the world divided up into Good Guys and Bad Guys, and to his ability to listen to any news source that will tell him what he wants to hear.

Actually, your cite says they also found “more than 100 chemical warfare protection suits.”

Actually, the Daily Telegraph quotes The Ministry of Defence as saying the shells contained suspected “weapons of mass destruction”. Using the passive voice, the article says, “They were not believed to be nuclear.” If they’re not nuclear, it follows that they’re suspected of being chemical or biological.

In short, you’re blaming the media for merely reporting what the Ministry of Defense said. Note that CBN referred to “Possible Chemical Weapons.” The thread title could be dinged for leaving out the modifier “suspected” or “possible.”

Fair use…
Chemical Weapons Report Not Confirmed

CBN News War Correspondent Paul Strand reported yesterday that U.S. forces had found unconfirmed evidence of chemical weapons. Paul spoke to Pat Robertson today from his assignment with the Third Infantry Division with an update on that evidence.

“Today what we’re hearing is that those Russian warheads that they thought had chemical markings, 1-22 rounds they’re called, intelligence sources now say it’s unconfirmed that these warheads were found.”

Click here for complete article

As has been noted on these boards already, one does not “store” chemical or biological munitions in the “warheads” of missiles or the artillery shells.

The chemicals are usually stored elsewhere, and shells are filled shortly prior to use.

If the “warheads” are empty, the point is moot. They could be leftovers from prior projects much as the ones located by the inspection teams.

It’s only if they’ve been filled do they become WOMD.

The missiles are something else- if they are indeed recent Russian sourced, then that shows simply that Russia has been evading the UN sanctions. Something that’s been heavily suspected, but not yet proven.

Anti-ship missiles are not WOMD.

Without regard to whether what was found is or is not a WOMD, I have to take issue with the above statement. Think about it this way: Suppose the reporters were forbidden to go out with the troops. Then some people would be complaining about being kept from the truth! Dammed if you do, dammed if you don’t. The press can be pretty difficult to control. IMHO there is such a variety of reporters from different media that it is unlikely that some power is controlling or dominating all of them.

Oh, but one does. At least, the US Army does.

It is currently facing the problem of how to safely dispose of just under half a million M55 chemical rockets. They were produced “in the late fifties” and have been kept in storage since, "containing chemical agent fill, explosives, and propellant ".

Link to FAS

Handy map with chemical weapons storage facilities:

  • chemical agents stored in containers, but also in rockets, projectiles, bombs, mines and spray tanks.

One certainly can store chemical agents in the warheads.