Re: [casi] AOL Headline- Does Iraq have banned weapons?

[bob.steel1@DELETETHISjuno.com]

A pint to a pound, as an estimate for water. Keep that in mind for a few
moments...

I heard an interview with Woolsey on BBC last night ("Agenda" show). They
talked about chemical weapons, and the idea that were destroyed just
before the war. Why didn't anyone see them being destroyed the
interviewer wanted to know? There were accusations they were hidden in
schools, so why didn't people or satellites see them moved or destroyed?

Woolsey explained it: The chemical and biological weapons aren't like
missiles -- it only takes a little bit and they don't take up much room.
They could easily have been destroyed in secret, he said. Small
quantities could never be picked up by satellite, or even noticed by
observers on the ground.

>``Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a >stockpile of
between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons >agent,'' Powell said at the
United Nations in February.

Woolsey also mentioned in the interview about the hundreds of tons of the
stuff. But wait -- "a pint to a pound". 500 tons of chemicals would be
about 500 tons of water -- unless it was dry and would then likely take
up more space.

Let me work this out -- check my math...

A friend gave me a case of Piast Polish beer, pint bottles, which has 20
pints in the box. Good sized box -- about 10" x 11" x 15" (0.955 cubic
feet). If one were to plan a party for the night the wife went to opera,
and get a few cases of that, it would be doubtful one could hide it from
her. If I wanted a huge party, with 10 cases (200 pints) I would need a
station wagon to cart home the beer.

A pint to a pound! 500 tons of beer would be a million pints -- 50,000
cases of beer! Talk about alcohol poisoning!!! Could we afford to hire
the fleet of trucks to cart that much? An 8x8x40 foot trailer has 2560
cubic feet (and could haul about that many cases). Hauling 50,000
well-packed cases of Piast would need 20 big tractor-trailers. (Don't
look in the back yard, my dear, or the yards of the rest of the people on
the block.)

And yet the satellites seemingly had no trouble picking up just two
trucks to be reported to the UN by Mr. Powell -- even to insisting what
sort they were, and what they were used for. One might think that
Woolsey, as former head of the CIA, and recently slated for a top
position in post-carnage Iraq, might have figured out the problem with
this story.

But then he also quoted the NY Time's story by Julia Miller as an
"intelligence source" to help him make his case. You remember -- the
Julia Miller who never got close to the alleged Iraqi defector, never
talked to him or knew who he was, who supposedly told the Army, who told
Miller, and then vetted her story -- yes, THAT intelligence source. Poor
Woolsey: even with the above mention credentials, as well as being a
well-in member of various high-end defense advisory boards, large
corporations, JINSA, and a player in PNAC, must now depend on Julia
Miller's story because, as he said, he isn't well connected anymore.

Set back in your comfy chair, Mr. Woolsey, and knock down a few more
pints, and see if you can work out all this hidden weapons in Iraq stuff
a second time.

 "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me!"


________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

_______________________________________________
Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss
To contact the list manager, email casi-discuss-admin@lists.casi.org.uk
All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk