April 14, 2006
Clinton W. Taylor Talks Trash
I say, I say trailer trash that is. What is an uneducated hillbilly like me doing linking a Yale grad? Is that not unusual, for the classes to mix like that? Well not when you have as much class as Clinton does. Plus IÂ’m a reading addict and he provides just the fix for that.
Comments are disabled.
Post is locked.
Clinton W Taylor Via The Spectator : Flash back to February 5, 2003, when Secretary of State Colin Powell addressed the U.N. General Assembly about Iraq's WMD program. He played audio of an intercepted phone call between an Iraqi Brigadier General and a Colonel, dated November 26, 2002, and showed slides of their transcribed conversation:Plus my master, The Macktastic Rusty Wicked says, “Link him Howie or else!”COL: About this committee that is coming...That sure got the General's attention, didn't it? There was something about the mention of a "modified vehicle" from the "al-Kindi Company" that made him want to visit this colonel's site, wherever it was, "in the morning." That would be November 27, the first day that IAEA and UNSCOM inspections resumed. And on the very first day of the inspections, this general was rushing out to tend to this particular vehicle.
GEN: Yeah, yeah...
COL: ...with Mohamed El Baradei [Director, International Atomic Energy Agency]
GEN: Yeah, yeah.
COL: Yeah.
GEN: Yeah?
COL: We have this modified vehicle.
GEN: Yeah.
COL: What do we say if one of them sees it?
GEN: You didn't get a modified...You don't have a modified...
COL: By God, I have one.
GEN: Which? From the workshop...?
COL: From the al-Kindi Company
GEN: What?
COL: From al-Kindi.
GEN: Yeah, yeah. I'll come to you in the morning. I have some comments. I'm worried you all have something left.
COL: We evacuated everything. We don't have anything left.
GEN: I will come to you tomorrow.
COL: Okay.Probably because of those darned hydrogen generators. Yeah? Yeah.
Posted by: Howie at
11:32 AM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 320 words, total size 2 kb.
1
In case no one has seen what i think they're talking about:
Mobile weapon labs found in Iraq?
These vehicles show components made by "Al-Naser Al-Adeem State Co." which is different to what the article talks about.
Posted by: davec at April 14, 2006 12:06 PM (CcXvt)
2
actually in the article it goes on to specify:
Senior Iraqi officials of the al-Kindi Research, Testing, Development, and Engineering facility in Mosul were shown pictures of the mobile production trailers, and they claimed that the trailers were used to chemically produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons. Hydrogen production would be a plausible cover story for the mobile production units.
So it most likely is exactly the vehicles we're talking about.
Posted by: davec at April 14, 2006 12:14 PM (CcXvt)
3
Yeah, it all makes sense--except the mobile weapons lab were not for nukes, and nuke stuff is what this guy was investigating. General WMD was the broader interest of the UN weapons inspectors. Moreover, the mobile weapons crap has been entirely discredited. Nobody believes that who has expertise in intel. Nobody. Even the WH admits that was a pantload of crap. Remember when Bush said "We've found the WMD"? That was a mobile weapons lab. Turns out, it had nothing to do with WMD...oops.
Posted by: jd at April 14, 2006 12:16 PM (aqTJB)
4
uh Jd did you read the link I posted, the reason no one can prove these were weapon labs is because of "dual use", where they could have been used to produce B/W or even chemicals for agriculture / missile fuel.
Problem is, they were never declared, they had been prepped for discovery -- tanks washed with caustic soda, and painted, they were in military colors, and no one has been able to explain the gas collection purpose.
It's pretty easy to fall into the old no WMD line, but there are things that are not reported in the U.S press, like for example this:
1.7 tons of Enriched Uranium removed from Iraq in 2004, as it does not talk of the purity of enrichment, and doesn't discuss it's purpose you'd have to wonder what it was doing there after the U.N inspections in the first place.
Posted by: davec at April 14, 2006 01:01 PM (CcXvt)
5
Tried to go to your link, but it didn't open, whether the problem was your end or mine, I dunno. But my point is--they were hiding these from Baradei, who was investigating Nukes. But the mobile labs were for bio, if they were for anything. You wouldn't hid a bio from Baradei. And the idea of mobile centrifuges is ludicrous to anyone who knows crap about nuke processing.
Remember, Cheney went before the country and said we believe he has a reconstituted nuclear weapon, later amended to weapons program. When the VP says "we believe" about something that was highly contentious in the intel community, that's a lie. If you present an uncertainty as a certainty, that's deception.
Of course, coming from the guy who said the insurgency is in its 'last throes' (some last throes!), we shouldn't expect too much truth.
Posted by: jd at April 14, 2006 01:29 PM (aqTJB)
6
Link worked for me I must be special. (yes I'm wide open on that one go ahead)
Posted by: Howie at April 14, 2006 03:56 PM (D3+20)
7
Why wouldn't they hide a biological weapons from him? he is a U.N official, and biological/chemical weapons would obviously concern him enough to mention it to UNSCOM ? less you think because they work for different departments of the U.N they don't care about violations of any U.N rules, unless it concerns their field? and judging about their discussion that Baradei was visiting a facility where it was stored, not that they had a "nuclear" mobile lab, I don't believe anyone claimed such.
Oh and 1.7 tons of enriched Uranium, was that declared?
Posted by: davec at April 14, 2006 05:06 PM (CcXvt)
8
You make a good point, Dave. My working assumption was that the alleged dual use trucks would fool a non-expert in bio like Baradei, but they may have also been concerned about his reporting their presence, or members of his team being cross-trained, or someone taking a picture.
I think I was also affected by the fact that the entire dual use story has been thoroughly discredited. Most of Powell's testimony has been refuted, and he himself admits it.
But, on the point that I raised, your counter argument is apt.
Posted by: jd at April 15, 2006 06:09 AM (uT71O)
9
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/report/2003/iraq-mobile-bw-plant_cia28may2003.htm
Just in case you could not read it the first time.
As I said:
Problem is, they were never declared, they had been prepped for discovery -- tanks washed with caustic soda, and painted, they were in military colors, and no one has been able to explain the gas collection purpose.
The ability to put components/chemicals/equipment to "dual use" gave the U.N a headache during their inspections, and the Iraqi's were continually giving cover stories for their activities.
Posted by: davec at April 15, 2006 11:25 AM (CcXvt)
21kb generated in CPU 0.0549, elapsed 0.1192 seconds.
118 queries taking 0.1103 seconds, 245 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
118 queries taking 0.1103 seconds, 245 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.
