UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after

[Grojlach]

For the record, here's the original Associated Press article, without the WorldTribune slant that ripped quotes out of context and turned a rather harmless and insignificant news report into every pro-war conspiracy theorist's living wet dream. As it seems, it's more about concerns regarding the dangerous nature of scrap metal from weapon sites that have been known for ages to exist anyway (heck - these had already been monitored by the UN for quite some time in the pre-war period) than that it justifies any conspiracy theories regarding any phantom WMDs. I'd say that it's simply a lot of fuss over nothing - and that, and only *that* is the reason why none of the major news outlets deemed it worthy of their attention to run huge headlined special editions and breaking news reports on it.

U.N. Experts Find 20 Engines Used in Banned Iraqi Missiles in Jordan Scrapyards

UNITED NATIONS (AP) - U.N. weapons experts have found 20 engines used in banned Iraqi missiles in a Jordan scrapyard along with other equipment which could be used to make weapons of mass destruction, an official said Wednesday.
The discoveries were revealed to the U.N. Security Council by acting chief U.N. inspector Demetrius Perricos during in a closed-door briefing. The text was obtained by The Associated Press.

The U.N. team was following up on an earlier discovery of a similar Al Samoud 2 engine in a scrapyard in the Dutch port of Rotterdam. Perricos said inspectors also want to check in Turkey, which has also received scrap metal from Iraq.

The discoveries raise questions about the fate of material and equipment that could be used to produce biological and chemical weapons as well as banned long-range missiles.

The missile engines and some other equipment discovered in the scrapyards had been monitored by U.N. inspectors because of their potential dual use in both legitimate civilian activities and banned weapons production.

In his briefing to the Security Council, Perricos said U.N. inspectors do not how much material has been removed from Iraq that they had been monitoring.

U.N. inspectors were pulled out of Iraq just before the war began in March 2003, and the United States has refused to allow them to return, instead deploying its own teams to search for weapons of mass destruction.

Perricos suggested that the interim Iraqi government, which will assume sovereignty when the U.S. and British occupation of the country ends on June 30, may want to reconsider "the whole policy for the continued export of metal scrap" which apparently started in mid-2003 and is regulated by the U.S.-led coalition.

"The removal of these materials from Iraq raises concerns with regard to proliferation risks ... thereby also rendering the task of the disarmament of Iraq and its eventual confirmation, more difficult," Perricos said.

"The only controls at the borders are for the weight of the scrap metal, and to check whether there are any explosive or radioactive materials within the scrap," he said, according to the text of his briefing.

Afterwards, he told reporters that up to a thousand tons of scrap metal was leaving Iraq every day.

"It's being exported. It's being traded out, and there is a large variety of scrap metal from very new to very old, and slowly, it seems the country is depleted of metal," he said.

During last week's visit to Jordan, Perricos told the council that U.N. experts visited "relevant scrapyards" with the full cooperation of Jordanian authorities and discovered 20 SA-2 missile engines.

The U.N. team also discovered some processing equipment with U.N. tags - which show it was being monitored - including heat exchangers, and a solid propellant mixer bowl to make missile fuel, he said. It also discovered "a large number of other processing equipment without tags, in very good condition."

"These visits provide just a snapshot of the whole picture since the scrap metal has a short residence time and is re-exported to various countries," Perricos told the council.

In its quarterly report to the council on Monday, the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission which Perricos heads, said a number of sites in Iraq known to have contained equipment and material that could be used to produce banned weapons and long-range missiles have been cleaned out or destroyed.

The inspectors said they didn't know whether the items, which had been monitored by the United Nations, were at the sites during the U.S.-led war in Iraq. The commission, known as UNMOVIC, said it was possible some material was taken by looters and sold as scrap.

UNMOVIC said its experts and a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. body responsible for dismantling Iraq's nuclear program, were jointly investigating items from Iraq discovered in a scrapyard in Rotterdam.

Source: Associated Press

Hope you're not choking in that cigar though, John.

[ 06-13-2004, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Grojlach: John D., maybe you should have added an actual source to the article you posted in that other topic, though - it's difficult to determine for anyone if you were quoting it from a source that's generally considered to be trustworthy or directly from some nut's online blog. Anyways... Judging from the "nuggets" posted by you, it's far too soon to conclude anything from Perricos's findings (when were they turned into scrap? Were they relics from the first Gulf War, or still operative at the moment Bush and Blair made their case for war? Because as it stands, this doesn't prove anything (yet?), just that some scrap from old Iraqi missiles has been located - and we know Saddam had long range missiles at some point anyways); and that's probably the reason why all of the major news outlets - including fox news I assume, whom you can hardly call anti-war - have refrained from drawing the same conclusions as you did. So it's nice and all that you're already linedancing ( ) in joy, just keep in mind that it could very well be false alarm.

You maybe right, but I've got'n to where I don't want to give the source freely that doesn't incourage people to look and search for themselves. But rest assurred I'm not an internet guru so anything I find is extremely easy for anybody else to find if they but look. Check out the biggies the Rueters, AP, UPI, CNN, MSN, MSNBC, FOX I rarely go to out of the way websites, if I do the I'll give the website. [img]smile.gif[/img] In all I read I weed out the editorial part of any supossed NEWS artical, and the vast majority of News articals are full of editorializ'n. If you doubt that there is editorializ'n going on ask yourself why is the world's body that is supossed to be keeping an eye on the proliferation of nuclear material looking into some items found at a location. And that FACT only gets a sentence. We're talking about the orginization that is supossed to be incharge of stopping the spread of the most powerful and destructive weapons that we have ever seen, and it gets only a mention in passing. Yet there are paragraphs, as in more then one sentence, as to weither the missles/material that came from Iraq, (there is no dispute that they did come from Iraq), was before or after the war started. The articals all will agree the items came from Iraq, and in the case of the missles were in VIOLATION of the UN, in the case of the UNREGISTERED/UNMARKED items that were supossed to be marked that is also a violation at best and an attempt to hide from the UN at worst. The UN was supossed to be incharge of inspecting the Iraqi weapons sites and acounting for the weapons and other Items. WHY OH WHY can't the UN pull up the paper work to show that these missles and other items were legaly exported in a matter of minutes. After al this is the computer age, and everybody wanted the USA to come up with their stuff in a matter of minutes. What the opposite of Heaven(see Cerek no cuss'n)is the UN doing looking at material that it has given the OK to get rid of? If the UN, that wonderful orginization(yes the is a Harris editorization) was doing its job why don't they know what went where and when. They are the ones that everybody is saying should be in charge and are the ones that many are putting their hopes in. Yet you got former UN inspector saying there is notheing cause we found it all, then stuff shows up that the UN was supossed to have a handle on and didn't, that's why they are looking at the scrap yards. YET what do you(the collective you) ask well it could have come from before the war? I say so what? The UN dropped the ball.

[Jorath Calar]

ehmm, just a thought... maybe naive, but I'll post it anyways...

If Saddam shipped the WMD out then it's not very likly he could have used them so isn't that practicly the same as disarmament?

...

Oh I see, he was going to get them back after we* would stop searching... hehehe, sure blew up in his face, since we didn't really need a reason to invade anyway.


*I say we because the icelandic government is one of those who support the war (even if a poll showed 89% of the population is against it).

[John D Harris]

Let me put this in another way [img]smile.gif[/img]
IF~~THEN BEGIN scrapyarditems
SAY~Are these items things that the UN weapons inspectors were supossed to be keeping track of?~
IF ~~ THEN REPLY~ Yes~ GOTO scrapyes
IF~~ THEN REPLY ~ NO~ GOTO scrapno
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN scrapyes
SAY ~If the UN kept track of these Items why are they looking at them now, don't they have the paperwork to show a chain of custody?~
IF ~~THEN REPLY ~YES~ GOTO scrapyes2
IF ~~ THEN REPLY ~NO~ GOTO scrapno2
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN scrapno
SAY ~Then this is nothing~
IF ~~ THEN EXIT
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN scrapyes2
SAY~UN can you produce the paper work and show the chain of custody?~
IF~~ THEN REPLY~ YES, here it is~ GOTO scrapno~
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN scrapno2
SAY~Why can't the UN show the paper work and chain of custody?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~The weapons weren't acounted for~ GOTO acounted
IF~~THEN REPLY~The weapons were acounted, but sliped through the cracks~ GOTO cracks
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN acounted
SAY~WHY?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~Sodamn Insane hid them from the weapons inspectors~ GOTO hid
IF~~THEN REPLY~Sodamn Insane didn't hide them the UN inspectors missed them~ GOTO missed
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN cracks
SAY~How could they have slipped throught the cracks?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~The UN is a large orginization and can't keep track of all that its doing.~ GOTO nuffsaid
IF~~THEN REPLY~The UN is full of bureaucrats just shuffling papers and not paying attention to what is going on~ GOTO thesearetheones
IF~~THEN REPLY~Sodamn Insane hid them from the weapons inspectors~ GOTO hid
IF~~THEN REPLY~Sodamn Insane didn't hide them the UN inspectors missed them~ GOTO missed
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN nuffsaid
SAY~Nuffsaid, think long and hard before trying to place blame on any other large orginization, like maybe the US military, CIA, WhiteHouse, Enron, Worldcom, ETC.~
IF~~THEN EXIT
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN thesearetheones
SAY~These are the ones, people want to place their hopes in, they can't even keep track of their paper work, ok.~
IF~~THEN EXIT
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN hid
SAY~So these items were hidden from the UN inspectors and The UN inspectors didn't know where these items were correct! Why is it unreasonable to believe there were are other items that were also hidden, like say some serin gas shells?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~It is reasonable~ GOTO reason
IF~~THEN REPLY~It is not reasonable~ GOTO notreasonable
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN missed
SAY~So the UN inspectors missed these items and the UN inspectors didn't know where these items were correct! Why is it unreasonable to believe there were are other items that were also missed, like say some serin gas shells?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~ It is reasonable~ GOTO reason
IF~~THEN REPLY~It is not reasonable~ GOTO notreasonable
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN reason
SAY~So it is reasonable that these items were either hidden or missed by the UN inspectors, does this new information change anything about your thinking of thing leading up to the war?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~ YES~ GOTO ok
IF~~THEN REPLY~ NO~ GOTO fine
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN notreasonable
SAY~Why is it not reasonable to believe there couldn't be other items unacounted for are the UN inspectors perfect and incapitable of making mistakes?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~YES~ GOTO scrapyarditems /the back to the begining
IF~~THEN REPLY~NO, UN inspectors are just as human as everybody else~ GOTO cracks
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN ok
SAY~Ok at least you're thinking~
IF~~THEN EXIT
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN fine
SAY~Fine, so I can take it that the exsistance or non exsistance of items the UN had said Iraq was not supossed to have, has no bearing on your position about the war~
IF~~THEN REPLY~Correct~ GOTO ok
IF~~THEN REPLY~Incorrect these items are bad, and should not exsist, but these items could have been sent to the scrap yards before the war~ GOTO time
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN time
SAY~So time alters the fact that these are items the UN inspectors where supossed to be keeping track of theses Items?~
IF~~THEN REPLY~ YES~ GOTO magic
IF~~THEN REPLY~ NO~ GOTO scrapyarditems /back to the begining
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN magic
SAY~So time alters the fact that these are items the UN inspectors where supossed to be keeping track of theses Items? How by magic?
IF~~THEN REPLY~ Yes~ GOTO ooooookay
IF~~THEN REPLY~ NO~ GOTO time
END

IF~~THEN BEGIN ooooookay
SAY~Ooooookay, I think I'll be going now, you enjoy yourself now you hear~
IF~~ THEN EXIT
END

[ 06-15-2004, 09:29 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Jorath Calar: ehmm, just a thought... maybe naive, but I'll post it anyways... If Saddam shipped the WMD out then it's not very likly he could have used them so isn't that practicly the same as disarmament? ... Oh I see, he was going to get them back after we* would stop searching... hehehe, sure blew up in his face, since we didn't really need a reason to invade anyway. *I say we because the icelandic government is one of those who support the war (even if a poll showed 89% of the population is against it).

COME on Jorath, If you were ordered by a court to disclose and destroy something in a certain manner and you failed to do it in the manner you were ordered to you would be in violation of the court, no if, ands, or buts, it would be a violation. Same in true for the UN, the UN ordered Sodamn Insane to disclose and destroy. There were Items found that were not diclosed!!!!! the UN doesn't know if these items were items that Sodamn Insane had said he destroyed, or they wouldn't be at the scrapyards looking at them. They would be pulling up the paper work and the inspectors tags showing where these items were and when they left the country of Iraq. It's called chain of custody, if the UN had that they wouldn't need to be looking at anything they could prove it. It is just like a receipt you get from a store showing you have bought something, if you have it when you walk out of the store and a security guard stops you you show them the receipt for the item you have. You walk out on your merry way. You have no receipt you get busted for stealing.

[Timber Loftis]

I think Saddam obfuscated facts, failed to produce weapons publicly, and gave the UN inspectors the run-around just so he could quietly and discreetly abolish his weapons program in secret because he was such a nice guy but didn't want the world to know it. That's my story, and I'm sticking to it. [img]graemlins/noevil.gif[/img]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Grojlach: Hope you're not choking in that cigar though, John.

Not hardly Grojlach If you re-read what I wrote you see your post confirms each and everything (factwise, now that we have the facts out we can argue all day long about what they mean) I posted in my original post. My Hat's off to you thanks for confirming exactlly what I wrote and that it did not come from some far right out to get the world of peace nicks haters Thanks for confirming that the UN Inspectors didn't find everything see your post where is says that items were found in good condition without UN inspection stickers on them. [img]smile.gif[/img]
*Note* The phrase "don't Know for sure" is used. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I love it when somebody tries to refute me on facts, I remain undefeted

[ 06-14-2004, 09:59 PM: Message edited by: John D Harris ]

[John D Harris]

Originally posted by Grojlach: For the record, here's the original Associated Press article, without the WorldTribune slant that ripped quotes out of context and turned a rather harmless and insignificant news report into every pro-war conspiracy theorist's living wet dream. As it seems, it's more about concerns regarding the dangerous nature of scrap metal from weapon sites that have been known for ages to exist anyway (heck - these had already been monitored by the UN for quite some time in the pre-war period) than that it justifies any conspiracy theories regarding any phantom WMDs. I'd say that it's simply a lot of fuss over nothing - and that, and only *that* is the reason why none of the major news outlets deemed it worthy of their attention to run huge headlined special editions and breaking news reports on it.

I'll stipulate to the facts as you posted them on posted 13-06-2004 07:10 PM and unedited.

Now can you please point to the line of words in the facts so stipulated too, that supports your assesment: That the artical is more about the concerns of the dangerous nature of scrap metal? ie: the scrap metal has sharp edges that can cut people, or small pieces that little children could choke on? Because if you are going to argue that these items that came from Iraq could be used to make banded items and that is why they are dangerous I'd welcome that admittion(sp?) since there were items found that the UN didn't tag or account for. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I can point to the line that supports my assesment that the UN inspectors didn't find everything:The U.N. team also discovered some processing equipment with U.N. tags - which show it was being monitored - including heat exchangers, and a solid propellant mixer bowl to make missile fuel, he said. It also discovered "a large number of other processing equipment without tags, in very good condition."
*Since the subject of his statement is processing equipment used in the construction and creation of banded items why else would he mention the UNTAGGED equipment if that equipment DID NOT NEED to be tagged in the first place?*

I can also point to the line that makes me pose the question about why the International Atomic Energy Agency is looking into the scrap:UNMOVIC said its experts and a team from the International Atomic Energy Agency, the U.N. body responsible for dismantling Iraq's nuclear program, were jointly investigating items from Iraq discovered in a scrapyard in Rotterdam.

[Timber Loftis]

John D. that "programing language" post gets my unequivocal nomination for the longest run-on buncha junk from which I can discern no meaning whatsoever that I have ever, ever, seen online (written in a form of English, anyway).

[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by John D Harris: quote: Originally posted by Grojlach: Hope you're not choking in that cigar though, John.

Not hardly Grojlach If you re-read what I wrote you see your post confirms each and everything (factwise, now that we have the facts out we can argue all day long about what they mean) I posted in my original post. My Hat's off to you thanks for confirming exactlly what I wrote and that it did not come from some far right out to get the world of peace nicks haters Thanks for confirming that the UN Inspectors didn't find everything see your post where is says that items were found in good condition without UN inspection stickers on them. [img]smile.gif[/img]
*Note* The phrase "don't Know for sure" is used. [img]smile.gif[/img]

I love it when somebody tries to refute me on facts, I remain undefeted [/QUOTE]I was going to point that out also, John. I have to admit I thought it was rather ironic to read Grojlach's critical disdain for The World Tribune and how they distort the facts, then posted his own article that listed every single one of the same facts found in the The World Tribune article.

I also agree that the magical "timeline" excuse regarding any WMD's or components found has me baffled. Illegal missiles and components are found in various scrapyards outside of Iraq - some that still have the U.N. Inspection Sticker on them - and the immediate rebuttal is "Well, we don't know how old these items are. They may have even been from the first Gulf War". Uh...OK...exactly HOW does that make those missiles LESS of a violation of the U.N. Sanctions? Is there a Statute of Limitations on illegal WMD's? (any WMD's found to be older than "x" number of years can NOT actually be considered a violation of the U.N. Sanctions).

The relevant facts mentioned in BOTH articles are:
1) WMD's (and components for WMD's) have been found in the countries around Iraq. It is irrefutable that at least some of these items came from Iraq - because they still bear the stickers placed on them by the U.N.
2) The fact that these items came from Iraq certainly seems to prove that Saddam Hussein DID have WMD's at his disposal. The U.N. Inspectors seem to believe that the newer "untagged" items also came from Iraq - otherwise they wouldn't be interested in inspecting them.
3) The "export" of these items (and components) was done without knowledge or approval of the U.N. Inspection Team. Otherwise the inspectors wouldn't have gone to Jordan and other places to investigate the items personally, because they would have already known they were there.
4) All of this certainly seems to substantiate the "conspiracy theory" that Saddam Hussein shipped his WMD's out of the country before (and perhaps during) the War on Iraq.

So neither article does anything to contradict the "wet dreams" of the pro-war conspiracy theorists. But it does put a serious crimp on the "wet dreams" of the "No WMD's existed" crowd.