MORE PROOF REPUGLYKKKANS ARE LYING SACKS OF SHIT
Charles Nemo
29 Jan. 2004
By KEN GUGGENHEIM, Associated Press Writer
WASHINGTON - The man who led the CIA (news - web sites)'s search for banned
weapons in Iraq (news - web sites) entered the politically charged debate
over President Bush (news - web sites)'s decision to go to war and provided
fresh ammunition for Republicans and Democrats alike.
Under questioning by Senate Democrats, David Kay acknowledged Wednesday that he
found no evidence that Iraq had chemical or biological stockpiles - even
small ones. He offered doubts about Bush administration claims that trailers
and aluminum tubes were intended for weapons of mass destruction. He said
U.N. inspections, belittled by the administration, "achieved quite a bit."
But Kay agreed with Republican senators that there is no doubt deposed Iraqi
leader Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) had ambitions to use such weapons -
that in fact he had used such weapons in the past. Kay said Saddam had
secret weapons development programs that violated U.N. resolutions, and that
the world is much safer without his government in place.
"I have said I actually think this may be one of those cases where it was
even more dangerous than we thought," he told the Senate Armed Services
Committee (news - web sites).
Kay, a former chief U.N. nuclear weapons inspector in Iraq, resigned Friday
from his position as the CIA's special adviser for the weapons search,
citing a decision to reduce resources for the search.
At the hearing and in recent interviews, Kay said he found no evidence that
Saddam possessed the banned weapons in recent years. Bush's public rationale
for going to war was based mostly on claims that Iraq's stockpile of weapons
posed a clear threat to the United States and others.
Questioned by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Kay said he believed an outside
inquiry would be important to see why intelligence failed and how it could
be improved.
The White House opposes such an investigation, noting the CIA is conducting
its own intelligence review and the weapons hunt has not ended.
The Senate Intelligence Committee is also examining prewar intelligence. The
chairman, Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., told Kay, "I personally take some
umbrage at people who for one reason or another think we need to have an
outside investigation before our inquiry is even complete."
That inquiry is nearing completion. But the committee's top Democrat, Sen.
Jay Rockefeller of West Virginia, said in a statement that Kay's testimony
shows a need to expand that review. Rockefeller said the inquiry should
examine whether the administration manipulated intelligence.
At the hearing, Kay said he does not think analysts were pressured to shape
evidence to make the case for war. "I deeply think that is the wrong
explanation," Kay said.
"You know, almost in a perverse way, I wish it had been undue influence
because we know how to correct that," he said.
Kay described a broad intelligence failure on Iraq. "We were almost all
wrong, and I certainly include myself here," he said.
He blamed a lack of human spying inside Iraq and inadequate money for U.S.
intelligence agencies. He also said he believes analysts have been asked to
read too much into limited data and depended too much on data provided by
U.N. inspectors.
Kay said his team wrestled with the question of why Saddam did not try to
save himself by proving he no longer had stockpiles of banned weapons. Kay
said Saddam likely did not want to appear to be caving in to the United
States and the United Nations (news - web sites). He also wanted to use the
threat of chemical weapons as leverage against his domestic enemies.
Questioned by Sen. Hillary Clinton (news - web sites), D-N.Y., Kay said the
fear of U.N. weapons inspectors had contributed to Iraqi decisions to stop
making banned weapons. But when Clinton suggested that inspections should
have been given more time, Kay said Iraqis have been more forthcoming now
than under Saddam.
"I think we have learned things that no U.N. inspector would have ever
learned given the terror regime of Saddam and the tremendous personal
consequences that scientists had to run by speaking the truth," he said.
Kay agreed with the committee chairman, Sen. John Warner, R-Va., that
because Iraq is so large, there's a "theoretical possibility" that banned
weapons could still turn up somewhere. But he expressed reservations when
Warner said, "Maybe we'd better not pronounce, `We're all wrong,' yet."
"I believe that the effort that has been directed to this point has been
sufficiently intense that it is highly unlikely that there were large
stockpiles of deployed militarized chemical and biological weapons there,"
he said.
Charles Nemo
http://members.aol.com/ChasNemo/index.html
"Nemo is the Wal-Mart of the dark side, the one-stop superstore for everything
ugly, from Satanism to Nazi occultism to serial killers."
~Forbidden Internet Magazine #1 (May 2001)
Rick
<20040129073635...@mb-m12.aol.com>...
If you actually read this article, you'll see that Kay gives a great dealof
support to Bush.
- Rick
COL. BILL KILGORE
Rick wrote:
Nemo has a slight problem with reading; he can't.
Charles Nemo
Exactly. Kay is trying to save his own ass as well as Bu$h's. Unfortunately,
he can't manage either salvage effort successfully. It all comes across as
disingenous tap dancing -- much like Kilbore's efforts to explain all his own
lies. But it's all fun to watch.
Charles Nemo
Smith's exposures of your bullshit are quite legible. And you're quite the
total fool.
P.S. See my previous reply to Rick regarding Kay's disingenous efforts to save
Kay and Bu$h's asses.
Rick
You'll have to provide proof that what he is saying is not true.
>Unfortunately,
>he can't manage either salvage effort successfully. It all comes across as
>disingenous tap dancing -- much like Kilbore's efforts to explain all his
own
>lies. But it's all fun to watch.
- Rick