|
|
Blog Feeds
Public InquiryInterested in maladministration. Estd. 2005
Human Rights in IrelandIndymedia Ireland is a volunteer-run non-commercial open publishing website for local and international news, opinion & analysis, press releases and events. Its main objective is to enable the public to participate in reporting and analysis of the news and other important events and aspects of our daily lives and thereby give a voice to people.
Lockdown Skeptics
Voltaire NetworkVoltaire, international edition
|
Weapons of Mass Destruction - Where are they? national |
miscellaneous |
news report
 Saturday June 07, 2003 09:50 by Anonymous
 "What they said" "Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." "Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons." "If he declares that he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world." "We know for a fact that there are weapons there." "We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorised Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons: the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal lethal weapons." - "We know where they are. They are in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad. " "There are people who, in large measure, have information that we need . . . so that we can track down the weapons of mass destruction in that country." "I am confident that we will find evidence that makes it clear he had weapons of mass destruction." "I never believed that we'd just tumble over weapons of mass destruction in that country." "US officials never expected that 'we were going to open garages' and find weapons of mass destruction." "I just don't know whether it was all destroyed years ago, whether they were destroyed right before the war, [or] whether they're still "They may have had time to destroy them, and I don't know the answer." "For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction [as justification for invading Iraq] because it was the one reason everyone could agree on." |
printable version
Digg this
del.icio.us
Furl
Reddit
Technorati
Facebook
Gab
Twitter
|
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (8 of 8)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8Funny, isn't it?
Before the war Bush and Blair would have us believe that Iraq was going to drop WMD on our heads at any second, that they knew exactly where they were and had to get rid of Hussein as he would happily give all these weapons to all the terrorists he was sheltering in his country.
Now, after the war, there is allegedly several tons of anthrax, VX nerve agent and various other bits and pieces at large in Iraq, along with all those terrorists who want them - and all of a sudden Blair reckons finding WMD isn't a top priority...
Is it too much to ask for a little internal consistency from our world leaders?
(WMD)
Is it too much to ask for a little internal consistency from our world leaders?
YES!!!
find the idea of Bush & Blair having weapons of mass destruction alot more worrying then Hussein having them.
Our so-called world leaders wouldn't be where they are if the weren't adept in all the finest arts of deception and intrigue ......
Expecting "consistency" from such like is bit like expecting an eel to stop wriggling ......
There has never been a more unpopular president. He was never elected. He actually lost. Nobody votes anyway. It's a sorry state. Thanks to Ireland for demonstrating at Shannon!
"Expecting "consistency" from such like is bit like expecting an eel to stop wriggling ......"
You mean that killing them is the only way to make them listen? Now there's a sentiment I don't disagree with ;)
Try the basement of 44 Parnell Square, Dublin 1.