Reviewing the 9 years of Iraqi disarmament, UNSCOM's executive chairman Rolf Ekeus stated in a presentation at Harvard University on 23 May 2000 that "in all areas we have eliminated Iraq's [WMD] capabilities fundamentally".
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/iraq/reading/artgr6.htm
Chief UNSCOM weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, has described how Iraq was
”fundamentally disarmed”, with 90-95% of its weapons of mass destruction
eliminated between 1991-98. Of nuclear weapons capability, for example,
Ritter says:
”When I left Iraq in 1998... the infrastructure and facilities had been 100%eliminated. There's no doubt about that. All of their instruments and facilities had been destroyed. The weapons design facility had been destroyed. The production equipment had been hunted down and destroyed. And we had in place means to monitor - both from vehicles and from the air - the gamma rays that accompany attempts to enrich uranium or plutonium. We never found anything." (Ritter and William Rivers Pitt, War On Iraq, Profile Books, 2002, p.26)
Why have you not reported and urgently highlighted these vital facts undermining the U.S./U.K. case for dismissing further inspections?
http://www.arabmediawatch.com/iraq/reading/artgr6.htm
Chief UNSCOM weapons inspector, Scott Ritter, has described how Iraq was
”fundamentally disarmed”, with 90-95% of its weapons of mass destruction
eliminated between 1991-98. Of nuclear weapons capability, for example,
Ritter says:
”When I left Iraq in 1998... the infrastructure and facilities had been 100%eliminated. There's no doubt about that. All of their instruments and facilities had been destroyed. The weapons design facility had been destroyed. The production equipment had been hunted down and destroyed. And we had in place means to monitor - both from vehicles and from the air - the gamma rays that accompany attempts to enrich uranium or plutonium. We never found anything." (Ritter and William Rivers Pitt, War On Iraq, Profile Books, 2002, p.26)
Why have you not reported and urgently highlighted these vital facts undermining the U.S./U.K. case for dismissing further inspections?