Head US WMD Hunter Gives Up

January 23, 2004 1:14 PM

Head US WMD Hunter Gives UpAfter stepping down, Mr Kay told Reuters news agency that he did not believe there were any large stockpiles of such weapons in existence in Iraq. Mr Kay is being succeeded by former UN weapons inspector Charles Duelfer. Earlier this month, Mr Duelfer said he believed the chances of finding chemical or biological weapons in Iraq now were close to nil, the BBC's Jon Leyne in Washington reports. Woo-hoo? mrmanley? Time for that Right-wing apology!
posted by Perigee (62 comments total)

No fear true believers we've got a replacement! I think they're going to give this guy the "secret" briefcase with all the forged documents and a few mustard gas mortars. This is going to be the best election ever!

Seriously, we've seen more than a few faked Iraq documents about WMDs, has anyone looked into who is making these things? CIA? The mossad?
posted by skallas at 1:24 PM on January 23, 2004

Actually true believers should be in fear, Duefler doesnt think he'll find anything either.

In Duelfer, Tenet has selected an American expert with deep experience in tracking Iraqi weapons of mass destruction programs but also one who in recent comments has expressed doubt that any weapons would ever be found.

"The prospect of finding chemical weapons, biological weapons is close to nil at this point," he said this month in an interview with PBS, the public television network.

"There has been every incentive in the world for the Iraqi people and the Iraqi scientists to come forward and say this is where the weapons are. That hasn't happened. So I think the problem right now is what is the extent of the problem and where was it headed? What were the intentions of the regime?"

Intentions, proposed programs, pre-1991 stuff, etc will be this quarter's case for 'why we went to war.'
posted by skallas at 1:28 PM on January 23, 2004

From the SOTU:

We are seeking all the facts -- already the Kay report identified dozens of weapons of mass destruction-related program activities and significant amounts of equipment that Iraq concealed from the United Nations.

From Mr. Kay, via Counterpunch:

There were no weapons of mass destruction. There were no active WMD programs. There were no mobile weapons labs. There was no nuclear program, or any efforts to obtain the technology to start one--even after UN inspectors were withdrawn in 1998. "On any given day," Saddam Hussein could not have threatened the United States or neighboring countries, nor passed any WMD material to any terrorist group anywhere in the world. These are not the ravings of anti-war dissidents, but the sober conclusions of David Kay's official $300 million investigation. (source)

posted by swerve at 1:29 PM on January 23, 2004

Actually true believers should be in fear, because if Saddam did have WMD and they're not in Iraq, then where are they? Who has them? Did the invasion make it easier to smuggle them out?
posted by homunculus at 1:45 PM on January 23, 2004

Damn, Saddam, WEAK! Last WMDs we sell you . . .
posted by hackly_fracture at 1:50 PM on January 23, 2004

It's sure too bad that that totally ineffecual UN organization took care of those WsMD before we told them that they were useless.
posted by interrobang at 1:55 PM on January 23, 2004

Meanwhile, CIA warns of Iraq civil war.
posted by homunculus at 1:56 PM on January 23, 2004

Newsfilter + Iraqfilter + calling someone out by name with a "right-wing apologist" insinuation on the front-page.

Nicely done, d00d!

Perhaps, though, you could have saved time and simply written:

Nyah nyah! Told you so! mrmanley = teh sux0rs! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!1

At one time or the other we've all had a time where we feel we've "gotten one over" on a fellow MeFite and are dying to be recognized for it (or dying to make the other person feel small), but including it in a front-page post seems like really poor form.
posted by dhoyt at 2:01 PM on January 23, 2004

I guess if he didn't want to be called out, he shouldn't have made the proposal, huh?
posted by mr_crash_davis at 2:06 PM on January 23, 2004

Awwwwww. Poor mrmanley. Maybe he shouldn't have been in such "poor form" with his original comments, hmm? I'll be interested to see that promised public apology too.

Hey, whatever happened to Macboy, anyway?
posted by soyjoy at 2:06 PM on January 23, 2004

Nyah nyah! Told you so! mrmanley = teh sux0rs! LOLOLOLOLOLOL!!!!!!!1
posted by quonsar at 2:10 PM on January 23, 2004

Hey - those were the terms of the bet, dhoyt. I'm sure we would have heard it from the other side, had it gone otherwise.

But it didn't.

Soooooo.... Let's see if mrmaley is willing to suck it up and admit it, or sulk away from the "curd-eaters" he was "baiting."

I spent six months being accused publically of being una-American for saying this was all a load of crap. Damn skippy I'm gonna be loud when I'm proven right. Seems to me the right-wing oughtta grow a backbone to take what they dish out.
posted by Perigee at 2:11 PM on January 23, 2004

Quonsar, that being your general tone no matter what the topic, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if you put that in an FPP ;) Guess I expected better of Perigree.
posted by dhoyt at 2:15 PM on January 23, 2004

Damn skippy I'm gonna be loud when I'm proven right. Seems to me the right-wing oughtta grow a backbone to take what they dish out.

Good to know you're willing to fight obstinance with brattiness. That'll show him!
posted by dhoyt at 2:17 PM on January 23, 2004

dhoyt, if it's wrong to be pulled up on it now, wasn't it wrong for mrmanley to make the challenge then?

why didnt you berate him then?
posted by dash_slot- at 2:23 PM on January 23, 2004

No problem, dhoyt - and it's similarly nice to know that you face return fire from the opposition with whining childishness.

In a firefight, they don't give you back your bullets.
posted by Perigee at 2:23 PM on January 23, 2004

Extremists don't apologize; they rationalize.
posted by rushmc at 2:29 PM on January 23, 2004

why didnt you berate him then?

Because I, as joe Citizen, had no idea whether or not we'd find WMDs. Neither did any of us, despite our arrogance and partisan impulses.

with whining childishness

That's the height of hypocrisy for obvious reasons, Perigree. All I'm saying is why not a "More inside", a mention in MetaTalk, or an email to mrmanley--why an attempt to humiliate on the front page? When did that become acceptable?
posted by dhoyt at 2:31 PM on January 23, 2004

I'm waiting for the O'Reilly apology.
"And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he has nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush Administration again, all right? "



....*crickets chirping*
posted by 2sheets at 2:32 PM on January 23, 2004

I guess we have to go find the bar in which O'Reilly and mrmanley are hiding.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 2:34 PM on January 23, 2004

In a firefight, they don't give you back your bullets.


This is more like a paintball skirmish, and the splattered paint doesn't really add to the front page.

Also, mrmanley's sorry opinions don't deserve that much attention.
posted by liam at 2:37 PM on January 23, 2004

Who's sorry now ?
Who's sorry now ?
Who's heart is aching
For breaking each vow ?
Who's sad and blue ?
Who's crying too ?
Just like I cried
Over you
Just like a friend
Right to the end
I tried to warn you somehow
You had your way
Now you must pay
I'm glad that you're sorry now

I would have put it inside. I don't need to share my humiliations with the teeming masses, why should anyone else? It's too inside to be outside, anyway.
posted by y2karl at 3:07 PM on January 23, 2004

MeTa.
posted by homunculus at 3:10 PM on January 23, 2004

"For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America."

So much for that idea.
posted by homunculus at 3:25 PM on January 23, 2004

Well, mrmanley did explicitly state that perigree choose the forum.
posted by strangeleftydoublethink at 3:36 PM on January 23, 2004

"For diplomacy to be effective, words must be credible, and no one can now doubt the word of America."

We lied about why we were going in to Iraq. And we are losing the rest of the world, except, as we said, El Salvador, which gives us political support. And Bulgaria, (laughs) whose air space we can fly over. This was a sad excuse for a speech. And if you go over this, this speech, you'll see that they do, he does things a lot like listing those countries that aren't actually providing troops to us, and say they are.


- al franken responds to the state of the union pack of lies
posted by specialk420 at 3:52 PM on January 23, 2004

Text of interview with David Kay
posted by homunculus at 3:54 PM on January 23, 2004

Charles Duelfer in September 25, 2002:

The most striking intelligence is the statement that the Iraqi military has the capability to deploy and use chemical and biological weapons within 45 minutes of receiving an order. Until Unscom left Iraq in 1998, we strongly suspected that the regime had the ability to launch a chemical or biological attack. This evidence suggests to me that concrete intelligence has now been obtained ... On his nuclear weapons development, the dossier points to Saddam’s attempts to obtain uranium from Africa; and procurement attempts for enrichment-related equipment, specifically the key elements for uranium centrifugal-enrichment technology.

This guy seemed willing to take on face value the two most outrageously false assertions of the Blair Regime. I can see why they gave him the job.
posted by meehawl at 4:06 PM on January 23, 2004

Maybe Mrmanley should email perigree in private with his apology, thereby saving face. I would!
posted by Keyser Soze at 5:19 PM on January 23, 2004

"Because I, as joe Citizen, had no idea whether or not we'd find WMDs. Neither did any of us, despite our arrogance and partisan impulses."

nononononononononono. no, sorry. n-o.

the world has been told again and again and again that the evil man from Mesopotamia was going to blow up the world in, like, 45 minutes. hence the absolute need to overthrow him, fuck that Euroweenie socialist Hans Blix and his raghead buddy ElBaradei.

that's what the world has been told about WMD's in Iraq by the whole Bush administration. so the "nobody knew" argument is particularly lame. the people who had that great evidence were screaming bloody murder (or, "bloody mushroom cloud" to be more precise)

I understand eating crow is hard to know.
but shamelessness does not really help.


strange how our right-wing buddies never show up to lecture the whole community of America-hating Pinko Peaceniks when facts play -- again, and again, and again -- against them. but of course it wasn't about WMD's, despite months of bullshit about them.



posted by matteo at 5:28 PM on January 23, 2004

"I understand eating crow is hard to know"

of course it is:

I understand eating crow is hard to do I know

bad typo, my mistake, sorry
posted by matteo at 5:30 PM on January 23, 2004

Because I, as joe Citizen, had no idea whether or not we'd find WMDs. Neither did any of us, despite our arrogance and partisan impulses.

Oh really. After months of the most yellow rationalizations, now it's "we were ignorant". How perfect. How predictable. Comes now the chickenhawk brigades claiming ignorance. The great hand washing commences. The great ducking begins. The grand backpedaling continues.

How does it feel to be so fucking ignorant in the matter of this little charade that led to slaughter? "I mean, you've really said it all right there when you talk of your ignorance, haven't you, dhoyt?


And despite that ignorance, your ilk didn't mind supporting killing. That really says it all as well.

Enjoy living with that.
posted by fold_and_mutilate at 5:42 PM on January 23, 2004

After stepping down, Mr Kay told Reuters news agency that he did not believe there were any large stockpiles of such weapons in existence in Iraq.

Well duh... they were moved to Syria. Pfffftt.

mrmanley apologizes for being wrong. I asked him.
posted by Witty at 5:57 PM on January 23, 2004

Well duh... they were moved to Syria. Pfffftt.

Hmm, let's ask David Kay:


Q. What about the nuclear program?

A. "The nuclear program was as we said in the interim report, I think that will be a final conclusion. There had been some restart of activities, but they were rudimentary.

"It really wasn't dormant because there were a few little things going on, but it had not resumed in anything meaningful."

Q: You came away from the hunt that you have done believing that they did not have any large stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons in the country?

A: "That is correct."

Q. Is that from the interviews and documentation?

A. "Well the interviews, the documentation, and the physical evidence of looking at, as hard as it was because they were dealing with looted sites, but you just could not find any physical evidence that supported a larger program."

Q: Do you think they destroyed it?

A: "No, I don't think they existed."

Q. Even though in the mid-1980s people said they used it on Halabja?

A. "They had stockpiles, they fought the Iranians with it, and they certainly did use it on the Kurds. But what everyone was talking about is stockpiles produced after the end of the last (1991) Gulf War and I don't think there was a large-scale production program in the '90s."


Oh, no problem--your apologies are pre-accepted.
posted by y2karl at 6:28 PM on January 23, 2004

Well, let the campaign to discredit the former arms inspector begin!
posted by 2sheets at 6:42 PM on January 23, 2004

Yo hama7, clavdius, midasmulligan:

Hear me now, believe me later:

One need not be a mental or moral defective; a member of the Communist International; an anarcho-syndicalist; or even a Democrat to be justly outraged at those who would dare to send our beloved country to war based on false pretenses. Thousands of young Americans have shed their blood for these lies, as well as untold thousands of Iraqis. The United States grievously wounded the institution of transnational collective security in whose name it purported to act; savaged and denigrated its oldest ally, without whose aid the country would never have won its own freedom; and showed its utter contempt for international law.

For those of us who have agonized watching the disgraceful evolution of Mr. Bush's War and its aftermath, it is cold comfort to have Dr. Kay confirm what we knew all along: that the gangster regime of Saddam and his relatives posed no actual threat to the world at large.

Meanwhile Osama laughs and thanks us all for assisting him in recruiting the martyrs of tomorrow.
posted by rdone at 6:47 PM on January 23, 2004

I say none of these private e-mailing perigee bullshit either, unless of course that's what perigee wants. He said "forum of your choice", so choose wisely, perigee. I'd have it put in a nice cross-stitch and hang it on the wall.
posted by Hildago at 6:53 PM on January 23, 2004

Meanwhile Osama laughs and thanks us all for assisting him in recruiting the martyrs of tomorrow.

And asks for more.
posted by homunculus at 7:15 PM on January 23, 2004

What justification is the White House using now for that war? Is it down to the insulting comic-book-level fabrication of 'liberation for the great Iraqi people' now?

And how, in a country that would actaully seem to have a functional democracy going on (in stark contrast to America) is it that Tony Blair is still around, in the UK?

I'm genuinely curious.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 7:19 PM on January 23, 2004

Meanwhile, in an investigation closer to home: After months of stonewalling the panel's requests for information about the terror attacks, the White House is signaling that it opposes extra time to complete the probe.
posted by homunculus at 8:17 PM on January 23, 2004

Cheney Is Adamant on Iraq 'Evidence'
posted by homunculus at 8:50 PM on January 23, 2004

I doubt mrmanley will ever admit that he was wrong; I bet he thinks the WMDs were moved to Syria, Iran, Mars or whatever swarthy, heathen nation will be next on the list for "liberation."
posted by drstrangelove at 9:27 PM on January 23, 2004

And how, in a country that would actaully seem to have a functional democracy going on (in stark contrast to America) is it that Tony Blair is still around, in the UK?

Give it a week. The Hutton Report's due on Wednesday.
posted by riviera at 10:33 PM on January 23, 2004

I doubt mrmanley will ever admit that he was wrong

Is he? If we are playing by the laws of the playground, which what metafilter is, (not has become) then mrmanley wins from the stuff the danes found. Sure, it is old, rusted, safely buried (like saddam was) but it was nasty none the less.

Yo hama7, clavdius, midasmulligan:

please do not insult midas and hama by lumping me in with them.

and showed its utter contempt for international law.

ya, it was about time.


recruiting the martyrs of tomorrow recruiters down 70% making it more difficult for al Qaeda to strike.

Recruiter On Iraq 'Holiday'

that the gangster regime of Saddam and his relatives posed no actual threat to the world at large.

thank god saddam was just a local nuisance. Imagine what Bush may have done if Saddam did pose a real threat like hamper oil production or destroy oil production or influence oil production or even stop oil production.

One need not be a mental or moral defective; a member of the Communist International; an anarcho-syndicalist

you must be a Larouche youth, because few even use the term:anarcho-syndicalist

speaking of old communists....

rub your nose in that little juicy article.

let the denunciation begin.

savaged and denigrated its oldest ally, without whose aid the country would never have won its own freedom

shame on you for dragging France into this. She had every right to sell saddam weapons and what not, she has every right to denounce the war and not support it. And while I am grateful to France for her helping us win the revolution i will say that they only did so to offset the British. (and who would not at that time)

The United States grievously wounded the institution of transnational collective security

thats a joke right....is the U.N. involved in this joke?
posted by clavdivs at 8:29 AM on January 24, 2004

Powell says Iraq may have no WMDs
posted by romanb at 10:05 AM on January 24, 2004

At least clavdivs shows up to give it the old college try, and thumb his nose at international law, which means he thumbs his nose at our own government, since congress ratifies the treaties that constitute that law. It's ok, clav, we let america haters like you have their say just like antbody else around here.
But really, You could do better than this:

"then mrmanley wins from the stuff the danes found"

It's a shame when your assertion can be shot down by a source like GOPUSA, who are "Bringing the conservative message to America":

"Iraqi Shells 'Chemical Free' "
"The Danish Army's Operational Command on Sunday confirmed that all 36 mortar shells that had been discovered Friday, January 9, tested negative for any traces of chemical blistering agents."

Hey, if it's any consolation, I think something nasty has to turn up eventually, and I don't mean planted by your buddy GW. But it looks like that something will fall somewhat short of the enormous stockpiles that were waiting to be unleashed on a fearful world. You war mongers were left holding a turd by this administration, so you may as well polish it and put it on the mantle, cause you bought and paid for it.
posted by 2sheets at 10:40 AM on January 24, 2004

How appalling that there are still people who insist that -- despite all evidence to the contrary -- the Administration's claims for going to war were truthful.

How the hell is America ever going to succeed in getting good governance with that sort of attitude?

Hellinahandbasket, folks, and happily carried along by the voters. Geesus, how sad.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:46 AM on January 24, 2004

I'd like to propose a new political meme (equally applicable to Canada, which has its fair share of corrupt politicians):

---

We deserve better government.

In the next election, demand honesty.

---

This should be done tabloid poster-size, pasted all over the freaking place.

The second line can be varied:

In the next election, demand accountability.

In the next election, demand truth.

In the next election, demand compassion.

In the next election, demand reform.

etcetera.

We truly get the government we deserve when we vote. If we continue to elect liars, corrupters, and haters, we will continue to inch closer and closer to a society which can not survive.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:49 AM on January 24, 2004

5 U.S. soldiers, 4 Iraqis killed in attacks
posted by homunculus at 12:31 PM on January 24, 2004

i never finished college. you shoulda figgered tha one out.

and thumb his nose at international law, which means he thumbs his nose at our own government

My god, I am the president, you found me out. (parody, not real, fiction, not true)

thumbing ones nose, i would say is worse then sucking ones thumb. To thumb one's nose is an understandable quip when international politics and diplomacy are concerned but PLA-lease. equating opinion into some sort of "nah-nah" towards ones government is like so unfair man.

besides your an american and i assume (which may be risky here pairsOsheets, assumption i mean) you pay taxes? well, the easiest and most "american" form of protest is taxation or moreover, not paying them. Millions could (do) evade taxes, not pay them, cheat, pay little but if you have have 100,000,000 people not paying taxes, thats a political change QUICK pardon the assumed result of said action.

so take a walk in this old form of protest.
stop paying your taxes setOsheets. Taxes fund your country that 'breaks your law'.
stop funding them.

The Danish Military, in a statement to the Associated Press, said they are unsure why the initial tests by the Danes and Brits tested positive for a blistering agent. They also said that the initial testing kits used on the shells were to be sent to Denmark for analysis.

well thats something Horatio. i actually did not know that and offer a full retraction and if the bets time limit is up...wait didn't they find some mortar shells with trace amounts...well, if it be up, pony up i say.

and you get two points off for not seeing, what i thought a nice satire sans (perceived) facts about a bet and the honor of it. I really did not know the danes and brits test kits where faulty, im wringing my hands...mkay.

have anything else to say about the other parody links i posted?
or do you want to call me an american hater in jest s'more because i can get a juke box, a bag of fritos and someone who gives a rats whisker.

Just simply take your money and those like you politically into the open and elect someone else.

oh...and WTF is transnational collective security because....
PWEW....like my bald spot is a little chilly from that draft.
posted by clavdivs at 1:06 PM on January 24, 2004

Clavdivs, you ignoble faux Roman, you:

Ever heard of NATO? SEATO? CENTO? OAS? Not rocket science, even for those who are apparently proud of being educationally deficient. The recently concluded twentieth century featured many efforts to create international alliances for security purposes, including your favorites, the Axis.

And no, there is no "LaRouche youth" here--nice of you to dig *that* deep in your seemingly inexhaustible bag of irrelevant insults. I used to dodge LaRoushies in 1968, when Lyndon was right of John Birch. Are you really an *old-style* LaRouche youth? Is that where you get your contempt for international institutions?
posted by rdone at 3:05 PM on January 24, 2004

yes, i have heard of these.

Main Entry: collective security
Function: noun
: the maintenance by common action of the security of all members of an association of nations

transnational seems to a bit redundent when contemplating the word collective security.

This SEATO.... was ultimately disbanded in 1977.

This CENTO?

It lasted nominally until the Iranian revolution of 1979. However, in reality, it had been as good as finished after 1974, when Turkey invaded Cyprus, leading the United Kingdom to withdraw forces from there that had been declared to the alliance.

OAS
Really had no offical condemnation or support for the invasion of Iraq as far as i can see. though many member nations disagreed, Mexico for one.
here is thier terrorism policy. (unrelated to the invasion of Iraq)

I do not talk about NATO. (it's a personal thing)
so...rdone what kind of IDIOT are you.
posted by clavdivs at 4:38 PM on January 24, 2004

My god, I am the president, you found me out. (parody, not real, fiction, not true)

Well, actually Vice President Cheney you are--and we wondered where your spider hole was--but, even so, the statement still stands in its factual entirety.
posted by y2karl at 5:39 PM on January 24, 2004

And that was from the Crazy Uncle In The Basement News Network--
now, here's Captain Beefheart with Ant Man Bee...
posted by y2karl at 5:49 PM on January 24, 2004

this is gay
posted by shoos at 6:00 PM on January 24, 2004

Saddam's WMD hidden in Syria, says Iraq survey chief
posted by homunculus at 6:02 PM on January 24, 2004

Whee! Syria again! The Muslim Pacification Campaigns will continue! Maybe that's where we'll find Saddam's secret giant robot with laser-shooting eyes!
posted by moonbiter at 10:55 PM on January 24, 2004

"My god, I am the president, you found me out. (parody, not real, fiction, not true)"

of course you aren't.
you're much better read.
posted by matteo at 3:24 PM on January 25, 2004

oh karl, if you remember, and i do not see a reason why, i said Cheney was evil. (way before 9-11)
he is just my kinda evil...

kidding

where we'll find Saddam's secret giant robot with laser-shooting eyes!
{warning, link to another mefi mebers site, but wel wort it}
posted by clavdivs at 3:56 PM on January 25, 2004

You have given many quotes from the interview, but missed this one:

Liane Hansen: Knowing what you know now, though, did Iraq pose an imminent threat?

Kay: Liane, I think this is one of the questions the American public and politicians are going to have to grapple with. "Imminent" depends -- it's a risk assessment. How risky are you to run? And in the shadowing effect of 9/11, it seems to me that you recalculate what risk based on the intelligence that existed. I think it was reasonable to reach the conclusion that Iraq posed an imminent threat. Now that you know reality on the ground, as opposed to what you estimated before, you may reach a different conclusion -- although I must say I actually think Iraq, what we learned during the inspection, made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than, in fact, we thought it was even before the war."

Emphasis added by me.

I wish I knew what he meant by that last part.
posted by Plunge at 2:43 PM on January 26, 2004

So i just scanned the thread and and no comment from manley. Perhaps he choked on his crow.

Let this be a lesson, for you 'true believers' politicians lie to you. Do not go around believing what you are told because it makes you "feel good". Always question authority, because they are usually wrong.
posted by MrLint at 2:53 AM on January 27, 2004

Kay Says Evidence Shows Iraq Disarmed

U.S. weapons inspectors in Iraq found new evidence that Saddam Hussein's regime quietly destroyed some stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons in the mid-1990s, former chief inspector David Kay said yesterday.

The discovery means that inspectors have not only failed to find weapons of mass destruction in Iraq but also have found exculpatory information -- contemporaneous documents and confirmations from interviews with Iraqis -- demonstrating that Saddam Hussein did make efforts to disarm well before President Bush began making the case for war.
posted by y2karl at 10:52 PM on January 27, 2004