You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

DU Answers Sen. Durbin's Call for WMD Questions [List Edits]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Archives » Research Forum Donate to DU
Open Edit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Nov-10-05 10:55 PM
Original message
DU Answers Sen. Durbin's Call for WMD Questions
Edited on Thu Dec-01-05 03:46 PM by BJW
Read the following letter from Senator Durbin.

For phase two of WMD commission, Senator Durbin is inviting input on questions to ask. This was emailed around earlier:

Dear ________,

The American people deserve to know the truth. That's why I seconded the motion Sen. Harry Reid made last week to put the Senate into a special closed session to force the Republican leadership to face lingering questions vital to our national security. Republicans in Congress have refused, despite repeated promises, to investigate the Bush administration's misuse of pre-war intelligence, so Senate Democrats are standing up and demanding the truth.

We want to know how and why the Bush administration distorted intelligence to lead us into war in Iraq. We want to know who else was involved in Lewis Libby's efforts to conceal the White House's deceptions. And we want to know why the Republicans who control Congress have, until just last week, repeatedly accepted the deception coming from the White House and refused to ask the hard questions about the misuse of pre-war intelligence.

Most of all we want to know when George Bush will stop misleading Congress and the American people, acknowledge the mistakes we've made in Iraq, and develop a strategy to achieve military, political and economic success to bring our troops home.

There's one more thing I want to know. What questions do YOU want answered? In a democracy, our leaders must be held accountable to all the people. I've told you some of the questions Senate Democrats will be asking, but I want to make sure we get the answers the American people want. Visit the DSCC website today to let me know what questions you want answered about how we were lead to war in Iraq.

We know that there were no WMDs in Iraq and no connection to the terrorists who attacked America on September 11. Those at the highest levels of the White House have gone to great lengths to spread these myths as justifications for war. They have gone to even greater lengths to conceal the fact that their case for war was based on distorted intelligence. Senate Democrats are going to get the truth.

Join me in demanding answers on behalf of the American people. Together, we will hold the Bush administration and the Republicans in Congress accountable and we will get the truth that every American deserves.


Dick Durbin

P.S. Our leaders must be held accountable to ALL Americans. Forward this message to your friends and family and ask them what questions they want answered about how we were lead to war in Iraq.

Here is a link for sourcing this letter.

Before continuing it is strongly recommended that you read the "How to use this Forum" thread at the beginning of the Research Forum this is essential for all questions on how to use these threads.

If you don't you may mess up the research :dunce:

Please post ideas and comments down in the talk box.

Please post questions at the end of the last number on the list below.

When posting do not and I REPEAT DO NOT ERASE THIS MESSAGE - this is a live thread meaning if you paste over it only what you pasted shows up.

If you have a question for Sen. Durbin post it down below in place where the next number would be and please space in between questions, all other issues please post in the talk box.

We expect that these questions will evolve over time with each edit, just use the box "Briefly explain your edits" so that we know why it was changed from what was stated before. Hopefully this method will keep a permanent list without duplicate and frivolous questions

We will be sending these questions from DU as a collective whole.

In addition, we are floating the possibility of having his office check this thread on a regular basis.

Have fun and good luck: :toast:

These questions have already been sent to the DSCC as of 11/29/2005

1. Why are we using White Phosphorous?

2. Question for Secretary Paul O'Neill: You have stated that you were reading CIA intel on Iraq WMD for two years prior to your departure from the administration. You have also stated that the intel you saw was always carefully phrased and highly qualified. What differences did you notice between what you read and what was publicly claimed by the administration?

3. Question for President Bush: When did your administration know that the Niger Yellowcake claim was that? Just a Claim? Alt offered 11/11: What evidence did you have that the Niger letter was authentic? Whom offered that evidence and when? Conversely, by whom and when were suspicions raised about the letter?

4. Uranium in yellowcake form is likely years before it can be refined to the point considered necessary for viable imminent use in a nuclear weapon. IAEA weapons inspectors discovered and seized 500 metric tons of yellowcake in Iraq years prior to the start of the Iraq war. They then sealed and monitored this yellowcake every year. The seals were found every year to be completely intact and never touched. Why then would Iraq with this huge quantity already at their disposal be seeking additional yellowcake uranium in quantity up wards of 500 or more tons, and from a country capable of mining only 300 tons of uranium per year? The records of this kind of purchase equivalent to nearly two years total production of uranium would be almost impossible to conceal. Not only that, how would Saddam Hussein continue to process and enrich this uranium avoiding the watchful inspections in Iraq being conducted countrywide on a daily basis? How is it possible that these two such obvious facts certainly known to the CIA and DIA were manipulated into a plausible scenario and presented to the American people as arguably the single most urgent reason to initiate unilateral and imminently necessary war?

Here are a few links for reference:

5. Upon Bush's becoming president, Richard Clarke was retained as Bush's top anti-terrorism expert. You would think then as the expert entrusted with the task of analyzing intelligence data that his advice would be painfully examined, if not outright accepted. It was his instincts and expertise that foiled numerous terror attempts while working in the Clinton administration. Yet when he insisted to Bush that Saddam Hussein had nothing to do with September 11th, Bush angrily told him to find him information on Iraq. Why did he totally ignore his own chief adviser of anti-terrorism?

6. For Vice President Cheney: There seems to be much evidence that the Niger letter was incorrect: Iraq already had yellowcake that was not used...the Cia had warned that the letter's point is insupportable and should not be used in speeches....the Niger letter itself is easily determined to be a forgery....and the CIA's envoy (Wilson) returned from a fact finding mission to Niger to state that the letter's claim is not substantiated. These were all known prior to the President's speech and prior to the invasion. What evidence did you have to the contrary that justified the administration position that Iraq attempted to purchase uranium from Niger?

7. Please define the word "imminent".

8.It has been mentioned over and over again including by Stephen. Hadley on 11/10/05 during WH press conference, that all previous administrations and other country's believed that S. Hussein had WMD's. According to testimony given by Richard Clark the number one concern in fighting terror in regards to the last administration(Clinton's) most urgent outgoing concern. Was the threat of Osama Bin Laden, Taliban, and al Quaeda as being the primary terror threats for the world, not Iraq and S. Hussein. At what point(s) did the administration shift it's focus the from primary threat as indicated by the experts to Iraq that was never at the top of the list as a threat, and what intelligence did the administration use to make this decision and how was this intelligence vetted?

9. ALL old intelligence is inoperable when facts on the ground are available. Why is everyone getting pulled into the old intel from Clinton debate when the ONLY intel that mattered were the FACTS being sent to the UN and to George Bush from the two months of weapons inspections from INSIDE Iraq?

10. On August 22, 1995 the Executive Committee Chairman of UNSCOM met with General Hussein Kamel , Saddam Hussein’s son-in-law. Kamel reported in a transcript of his testimony that all of Iraq’s WMDs were destroyed in 1991. Why was Kamel's testimony not taken seriously prior to the Iraq War? A copy of the transcript can be found here:

< >

11. What military actions were ongoing against Iraq since the end of Gulf War I up to six months prior to the U.S. invasion "Operation Iraqi Freedom"? Give specific details.

12. What military actions were occurring in the six months prior to U.S. invasion? Give specific details.

13. Given the revelations that the administration paid pundits to promote their agenda on education reform, and that the administration also produced "news" that was aired or printed without proper attribution re: same and other domestic topics, and that a fake reporter names Jeff Guckert apparently had after-hours access to the WH, did the administration produce or pay for "news" pieces to support the Iraq invasion? If so, identify the specific pieces and persons involved.

14. Was any of the "intelligence" that was the basis for announcing upgrades to the threat level (post-9/11) and pre-invasion gained from torture? Was any of this intelligence later shown to be demonstrably false or exaggerated? Give specific details.

15. Was any of the "intelligence" purporting to support and justify the invasion gained from torture? Was any of this inteligence later shown to be demonstrably false or exaggerated? Give specific details.

16. Where are Iraq's "weapons" scientists now, and where have they been since the invasion? Have any of these scientists been tortured? Have any of the admin's claims about WMDs been based on statements these scientists have made after being tortured? Have any of these scientists been paid or given monies?

17. Examine statements made by Joseph Wilson regarding the Niger/uranium yellowcake claims. Do you agree or disagree with Joseph Wilson's factual analysis? Do you believe he is truthful? Provide specific points of agreement or disagreement.

18. Give specific details about construction of military bases in Iraq, specifically including when in pre- or post-invasion planning scenarios this was discussed, considered, ordered and acted on.

19. Examine reports of Italian and American journalists regarding the Niger/yellowcake claim and possible forged documents. Examine reports of Italian and other countries' intelligence agencies re same. Do you agree or disagree with the factual analysis? Provide specific points of agreement or disagreement.

20. Each witness from the Administration should be asked:

"How much money are you making (profiting) from the war?"


11/29/2005 Post NEW questions here:

21. Was any pre-war intelligence gained from "security contrators" or other private individuals, institutes, or companies? If so, discuss the specific intelligence received, how it was received, the amounts paid for this intelligence, and how this information was vetted by government agencies.


The Talk Box is for comments. Please include your username.

Sso who is sending DU's letter to Durbin and when?
I was thinking soon like this week or at least before they get back from break, I have been busy in another thread in the "News Relevant to Iraq War" but the first set of questions should go out. If you would like to send them go ahead. If not then I will do it later this week. Whoever sends them should denote the thread in some way so that when the newer questions come on we will be able to avoid duplicates. Let me know what y'all want to do. stop the bleeding

So do you all like what has been started so far?- posted by:stop the bleeding

The links that are bad for #4 were working last night I am going to try and research and update them if possible.- stop the bleeding

Please remember to use the "Briefly explain your edits" so we can see why and where people are making changes. Also we need to communicate here so that we can discuss issues such as overall arangement of questions and identify points that need to be made and identify the others that are frivolous. --stop the bleeding

I think that questions 5 and 8 are related, however I am torn on whether they should be combined or left apart if they are left apart we should ar least put them in chronological order- any thoughts? -- stop the bleeding

I think 5 and 8 should be left as separate questions -- mantis49

My, my I am the only one talking to myself here, Bueller anyone? Bueller?-stop the bleeding

Usrename, question #20. Come on! It's time to take off the gloves here fellas! What is the motive for the deceptions! Money, $$$$$ Huge amounts of money. Anyone who thinks the war is is not going very well just doesn't have a clue about how much money they are making. We need to know who they are. This isn't a Dem or Rep question, this is not about political debate, this is about saving our country. The World Is Watching!!!

I agree, it is time to quit playing around and start with the tough questions. I'm tired of the Democratic party pussy footing around...0007

Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Edit | Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » Research Forum Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC