Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Powell Not Sure Iraqi Trailers Were Labs  
User currently online727LOVER From United States of America, joined Oct 2001, 6571 posts, RR: 20
Posted (10 years 8 months 23 hours ago) and read 1040 times:

Over 600 Americans dead.
Over 18,000 wounded, many seriously.
An estimated over 13,000 Iraqis dead.



Powell Not Sure Iraq Trailers Were Labs

WASHINGTON (April 3) - Secretary of State Colin Powell conceded Friday evidence he presented to the United Nations that two trailers in Iraq were used for weapons of mass destruction may have been wrong.

In an airborne news conference on the way home from NATO talks in Brussels, Belgium, Powell said he had been given solid information about the trailers that he told the Security Council in February 2003 were designed for making biological weapons.

But now, Powell said, ''it appears not to be the case that it was that solid.''

He said he hoped the intelligence commission appointed by President Bush to investigate prewar intelligence on Iraq ''will look into these matters to see whether or not the intelligence agency had a basis for the confidence that they placed in the intelligence at that time.''

Powell's dramatic case to the Security Council that Iraq had secret arsenals of weapons of mass destruction failed to persuade the council to directly back the U.S.-led war that deposed the Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. But it helped mobilize sentiment among the American people for going to war.

As it turned out, U.N. inspectors were unable to uncover the weapons, but administration officials have insisted they still might be uncovered.

David Kay, who led the hunt for the weapons, showed off a pair of trailers for news cameras last summer and argued that the two metal flatbeds were designed for making biological weapons.

But faced with mounting challenges to that theory, Kay conceded in October he could have been wrong. He said he did not know whether Iraq ever had a mobile weapons program.

Powell told reporters that as he worked on the Bush administration's case against Iraq U.S. intelligence ''indicated to me'' that the intelligence was solid.

''I'm not the intelligence community, but I probed and I made sure, as I said in my presentation, these are multi-sourced'' allegations, Powell said.

The trailers were the most dramatic claims, ''and I made sure that it was multi-sourced,'' he said.

''Now, if the sources fell apart we need to find out how we've gotten ourselves in that position,'' he said.

''I have discussions with the CIA about it,'' Powell said, without providing further details.

The trailers were the only discovery the administration had cited as evidence of an illicit Iraqi weapons program.

In six months of searches, no biological, chemical or nuclear weapons were found to bolster the administration's central case for going to war: to disarm Saddam of suspected weapons of mass destruction.




Listen Betty, don't start up with your 'White Zone' s*** again.
13 replies: All unread, jump to last
User currently offlineBofredrik From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (10 years 8 months 21 hours ago) and read 1034 times:

Two swedes, Blix and Ekeus, did try to say that it all was a misstake.
But the oil was important to get for the US gvmt.

User currently offlineSolarix From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (10 years 8 months 20 hours ago) and read 1032 times:

War for oil? Bullshit. It was was for oil I would not be paying well over $2.00 a gallon for gasoline.

User currently offlineKevi747 From United States of America, joined Apr 2001, 1058 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (10 years 8 months 20 hours ago) and read 1022 times:

"Powell Not Sure Iraq Trailers Were Labs"

He's decided to do some fact-checking now? A little late, isn't it?

"War for oil? Bullshit. It was was for oil I would not be paying well over $2.00 a gallon for gasoline."

You're falsely assuming that any of this was supposed to be in the best interest of the American public.

"Reality has a well-known liberal bias." --Stephen Colbert
User currently offlineNoUFO From Germany, joined Apr 2001, 7965 posts, RR: 12
Reply 4, posted (10 years 8 months 19 hours ago) and read 1004 times:

To make things worse:

My favorite weekly, Die Zeit, reports the BND (the German Federal Intelligence Service) knew the accusations were actually single-sourced, and that this one source wasn't reliable.
This comes as no surprise, since the BND itself provided the CIA the information on "Mobile Production Facilities for Biological Agents", Mr. Powell later introduced to the UN Security Council.

This ominous, anonymous source was a chemical engineer, who emerged in a German refugee camp and was later nicknamed "Curveball".
When the BND informed the CIA on Curveball's alarming report, it stressed that Curveball may not be reliable and that the information provided were not confirmed.

Richard Kerr, a former CIA deputy director, however, considered the information "detailed and specific". "They make sense", Kerr said.

Now CIA blames BND that the agency were never allowed to interview Curveball in the US. In fact, the BND repeatedly rejected CIA requests to meet Curveball vis a vis, saying it needed to protect its source. Furthermore, CIA officials blame their German colleagues for not informing them that Curveball wasn't a reliable source. The BND rejects those accusations.

Edit: For those who can read German:

[Edited 2004-04-04 00:40:24]

I support the right to arm bears
User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 5, posted (10 years 8 months 19 hours ago) and read 993 times:

Another chink in the armor against what was this rock-solid case against Iraq.

But it wasn't for the oil, folks. Why do some of you keep sayihg that. If it WERE for the oil, prices wouldn't be skyrocketing in the U.S.

If you want to oppose the war, do it for a factual reason, not a made-up one. It makes you no better than those who keep making excuses, after the fact, for going to war.

User currently offlineKlaus From Germany, joined Jul 2001, 21496 posts, RR: 53
Reply 6, posted (10 years 8 months 17 hours ago) and read 980 times:

Alpha 1: But it wasn't for the oil, folks. Why do some of you keep sayihg that. If it WERE for the oil, prices wouldn't be skyrocketing in the U.S.

Because everything else except the oil price has been going exactly as planned? Is that what you´re talking about?  Wink/being sarcastic

I think it´s quite a bit more complex than just the oil. But with the still undisclosed collusion between the Bush/Cheney administration and the US energy industry, it is difficult to believe that it wasn´t a major factor.

User currently offlineDonder10 From Canada, joined Oct 2001, 6660 posts, RR: 21
Reply 7, posted (10 years 8 months 18 hours ago) and read 972 times:

It was more about the oil than some think,but not in the same area they are looking at.

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29813 posts, RR: 58
Reply 8, posted (10 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 959 times:

By definition all intel is shakey until it proves true or the event happens.

User currently offlineWellHung From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (10 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 955 times:

The ol' Bush dictionary...

User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (10 years 8 months 14 hours ago) and read 953 times:

No it was not about oil. Get over it. If that were the case, why was Tony Blair equally or even more adamant about removing Saddam well before GWB became President?

The question is not raised because it does not fit the Euro-nonsense theories that abound and sell.

User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1837 posts, RR: 14
Reply 11, posted (10 years 8 months 11 hours ago) and read 942 times:

Two problems here.

1. The politicians politicised intelligence. The intelligence services felt that they had to provide intelligence to fit with politicians desires.
2. Even when they didn't, the politicians only saw what they wanted to see. They grew certain half-truths and assumptions into full blown facts, and therefore fought a war on false pretences.

Punish them at the ballot box people. Show the power of democracy.

User currently offlineScbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12808 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (10 years 8 months 7 hours ago) and read 930 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Slowly but surely, the Bush and Blair lies are being shown for what they were. There are no WMD.

Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana! #44cHAMpion
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (10 years 8 months 6 hours ago) and read 929 times:

why was Tony Blair equally or even more adamant about removing Saddam well before GWB became President?


He wasn't.

Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Powell Not Sure If War Minus WMD's Was Justified posted Tue Feb 3 2004 17:15:35 by Alpha 1
I'm Not Sure If I Do "Support The Troops" posted Sat Aug 27 2005 04:37:28 by MD-90
Dad Knows, Not Sure What To Do.... posted Thu Jun 9 2005 04:04:30 by UAL747
I'm Not Sure About Accepting A Promotion. posted Mon Feb 21 2005 20:53:48 by SFOMEX
Top 10 Reasons Canada Did Not Join Iraqi War posted Tue Apr 15 2003 23:01:37 by Canadi>nBoy
I Am Not Sure But.... posted Sat Dec 29 2001 05:30:36 by Aeromexico495
I'm Not Sure About My Feelings For A Girl... posted Sun Nov 18 2001 13:24:04 by Turbolet
Fema Trailers Trashed By Users; Used As Meth Labs posted Wed Nov 1 2006 22:41:04 by MaverickM11
Foods That Were Just Not Meant To Be Eaten posted Thu Apr 22 2004 05:09:20 by United4everDEN
GI Guilty, But Not Punsihed For Beating Iraqi posted Sat Dec 13 2003 20:15:46 by Alpha 1