they were all destroyed in the ninety one gulf war he did have weapons of mass destruction in the one nine hundred eighty s. and they were destroyed in ninety one and then all further destroyed and sealed up by the united nations inspection commissions back in the one nine hundred ninety s. but your question of whether the opi study is capable of doing this destruction absolutely first of all it's not the opi study that does the destruction it's the responsibility of the state parties so it's the responsibility of syria but syria is a poor country it needs financial support and it needs technical support from the countries that have long experience doing this now russia the united states japan china and many of the european countries which have worked to clean up the the legacy of world war one and world war two for decades so we all need to pitch in and the o.p.'s w. is only as strong as the member states and so what i've said many times is we need at this point to support the opi study you and the united nations we need to get on with the inventorying complete the declaration which

like a lot of areas regarding weapons of mass destruction, and not the least of which is the u.s.efusal to live up to it and of the nonproliferation treaty. it has deftly hurt the credibility -- it has deftly hurt the credibility of the u.s. and trying to be an enforcer of these universal disarmament resolutions. >> paul walker, what are the chemical weapons the u.s. still has? the u.s. chemical weapons stockpile had act solely everything in it. the ones remaining now -- has absolutely everything in it. the ones remaining, we have mustard agent in pueblo, colorado and in bluegrass, kentucky, we have all the nerve agents plus mustard agent and lewisite, which are blister agents. it -- these are large and, faded stockpiles. these are large and constituted stockpiles. i'll miss all of the agent is in landmines, artillery shells, rockets, spray tanks, aerial bombs in kentucky. some of us have said many times, why in heavens name to the u.s. and russia produce all of this 19 60s,rough the 1950s, 1970s? they are enormously dangerous, leaking risky stockpiles. it is in everyone's interes

they indicate al qaeda was trying to get their hands on weapons of mass destruction.we had in saddam hussein a guy who had produced and use the weapons of mass destruction. >> i supported -- you know, i don't blame you, you, vice president cheney or president bush for doing what you can i mean, i'm not monday morning quarterbacking. but, right now, what do we get of iraq for all of that blood and treasure? what do we get out of it? >> what we gain and my concern was then and is today biggest threat we face is the possibility of terrorist groups like al qaeda equipped with weapons of mass destruction. nukes bugs or gas. that was after 9/11 and when we took down saddam hussein we eliminated iraq. >> but they are back. >> that's right. but they wouldn't be if they followed the policies that we laid out for them when we left he. let me finish. >> sure. >> what we got out of it took down saddam hussein as a major source. five days africa geography said he would surrender his weapons materials. he had century fiewdges and uranium stock. after that we took down his major sup

so the record from the outset has been against the use of weapons of mass destruction. however, there's the capability, and i know a little bit about the capability. i've studied it. for much of my adult life. it happens that when i was assigned to iran as the junior diplomat in 1959, one of my first tasks was to accompany david lilienthal, the former head of the atomic energy commission, on his trip around iran. he was in retirement. he was head of an energy company that worked with the plan organization of iran on its energy needs for the coming centuries. and he developed a plan of hydra gas fired, coal-fired, and nuclear power plants that would supply the energy needs of iran. and that original plan had a proposal of 22 reactors, nuclear reactors. to for each host. of course, that was a grand plan not feasible in the immediate circumstances. but certainly over the long term. it was a part of the vision of the united states government, atoms for peace, where we fostered the development of nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, including mining, the version of rivers,

establishing a free , a zone free of weapons of mass destruction is an achievable without the accession of israel, the only nuclear .ower in the region to put its nuclear facilities under the supervision of the international atomic energy agency. at the same time, we emphasize the right of all countries who acquire and develop nuclear purposesy for peaceful in accordance with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty. in this respect, syria condemns the blocking by the united of theand israel international conference on establishment of a zone free of weapons of mass destruction in the middle east which was scheduled to take place in 2012. mr. president, my country calls on the united states and the european union countries and others to refrain from adopting immoral to me unilateral economic measures that contradict with the rules of international law and the principle of peace. accordingly, we call for the lifting of the blockades imposed by the united states against cuba for decades. we also renew our call to lift and stop all unilateral coercive measures imposed on syria and the peoples o

we as a country invaded iraq in two thousand and three we were looking for weapons of mass destruction that didn't even exist a little white lie so that you win never hurt anyone. my fellow citizens at this hour american and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm iraq to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. on my orders coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine saddam hussein's ability to wage war. these are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign. our president was looking to get rid of evil saddam so iraqis could enjoy the kind of democracy we enjoy in america oh by the way speaking of democracy that president wasn't really a lech to president another guy actually won the election but this guy became president just think of it as another exceptional quality of the us of a bush was also trying to defeat the terrorists behind september eleventh in iraq only they were in a different country we occupied two years earlier afghanistan we carry out how it was all em

we as a country invaded iraq in two thousand and three we were looking for weapons of mass destruction that didn't even exist a little white lie to the u.n. never hurt anyone. my fellow citizens at this hour american and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm iraq to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger. on my orders coalition forces and begin striking selected targets of military importance to undermine saddam hussein's ability to wage war. these are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign. our president was looking to get rid of evil saddam so iraqis could enjoy the kind of democracy we enjoy in america oh by the way speaking of democracy that president wasn't really elected president another guy actually won the election but this guy became president just think of it as another exceptional quality of the us of a. bush was also trying to defeat the terrorists behind september eleventh in iraq only they were in a different country we occupied two years earlier afghanistan we carry out as all empires to kind

are facing in syria today. >> john, the opcw has been tasked with destroying these weapons of mass destructionthe manufacturing sites by november. that's a pretty short timeline. has there ever been a weapons destruction period that is taking place in such a short time frame? >> no, there hasn't been. the final deadline of the summer of next year is going to be extremely tighter. we're speaking about nine months. however, in terms of the operations we have to separate two things from each other. one is the destruction of installations and equipment. the other part is the destruction of the chemical warfare agents. in november what we're talking is the destruction of installations. as your introductory film indicated one could use methods that are not really foreseen in the chemical weapons convention as such, but given the extraordinary circumstances they might be acceptable to the international community. that's exploding buildings, that's putting cement in to reactor vessels, crushing munitions and equipment. >> is this something that the inspectors will already have planned for? will they k

we ended up in the public discourse with a tremendous emphasis on the weapons of mass destruction. and i think the reason for that, in part, is that the -- those who were concerned, to put the argument forward in a way that would gain the broadest international approbation, were listening to the advice of lawyers and others who said, you know, regime change may be noble, but an argument that no one can quarrel with is the argument that you have got to deal with saddam's weapons of mass destruction. so there was never one argument there were many arguments. just as there was never one argument in opposition. there were many arguments in opposition. and i find it a bit disingenuous to suggest now, after it's done, that somehow the other arguments for regime change were never relevant. they were relevant all along and the president often articulated them. c-span: page 189. "both of the authors of this book," and the other author is david frum, "both of the authors of this book have spent many dozens of hours talking to journalists from around the world, almost all of whom eventually w

zone free of nuclear weapons or weapons of mass destruction in the middle east didn't happen the first thing that happened is israel announced they wouldn't participate. so it was waiting to see what was interesting was waiting to see would iran would choose your room so that they would participate with no condition immediately obama called for . giving the reasons which are the official israeli reasons cannot have a conference until this regional peace. of course in the background there can be a regional peace settlement until the us and israel stop blocking the international consensus on an israel palestine agreement as they're doing have been thirty years so no meeting people in the united states have done very almost nothing about it for a very simple reason not a word about this is appeared in the american press literally you can read about it in arms control journals or international affairs journals or and articles that i write things. with the presses so i don't so no pressure on syria chomsky says getting rid of chemical weapons is a good first step but not enough great opport

iraq and the attack against the united states on nine eleven turned out to be no weapons of mass destruction no justification for our hour of diverting attention from afghanistan where the real war was being waged to iraq where it war under false pretenses was about start center of the cia maintains that you were briefed in two thousand and two about waterboarding and other enhanced interrogation techniques used by the bush administration on terrorism suspects. why didn't you speak up at the time about this issue. and i'm smiling because i was asked that exact question within the hour . our conversation. i'm holding up a notebook since nine hundred seventy seven i have carried a notebook in which i. inscribe among other things what i do throughout the day when these charges were made there i've been briefed on enhanced interrogation i asked the cia to give me the dates were. those briefings took place and they gave me four dates are i went back to my note books a contemporaneous record of what i had done and i found that on three to four dates there was no greeting and on the fourth day ther

so there's a broader issue this goes back to the question of weapons of mass destruction freezone in the middle east which the us is the blocking for the same reason so this is a partial. it's good in itself but very partial on the broader opportunities not being who flew we also talked about one of the most pursued men in the world chomsky doesn't buy edward snowden is a threat to u.s. national security the security is almost always relevant but its security of the government from its own population that's the security concern genuine security like security of the population is very low. and drones according to trump ski are a direct threat to america. well four of the biggest tours in the world. never grow. which would prove a moratorium or it's generated. from the highest level. short of. the road it was create and will. thank you very much for your time for inviting us to your office here at mit that with noam chomsky and i mean it's in our way for our team. doctor charm school gave you all see plenty more insight into how the u.s. operates domestically and abroad so make sure yo

so it was a broader issue it was back to question of weapons of mass destruction pretty and so on in the middle east which the u.s. is blocking for the same reason so this is a partial. it's good in itself the birth partial and the broader opportunities are not going through we also talked about one of the most pursued men in the world chomsky doesn't buy edward snowden is a threat to u.s. national security and security is almost always relevant but its security of the government from its own population that's the security concern the genuine security like security of the population. are in the open. and drones according to chomsky are a direct threat to america. we're horrible we were. never right. for them or her. good little. truth you refuse. to. create. thank you very much for your time for inviting us to your office here at mit that with noam chomsky the nominees and the way for our team. and of course dr charles could gave plenty more insight into how the u.s. operators domestically and abroad so make sure you log on to auntie dot com falling to. the u.s. government in parts h

it was invaded and essentially destroyed libya gave up its weapons of mass destruction it was invaded it was essentially destroyed we'll see what's going to happen in syria i mean people in the region have to be looking around and say you know there's is there a learning curve here because disarm make friends and then you know what regime change i mean i'm not being an advocate for to iran but i mean recent history kind of gives you a clue what the americans actually think. look there are two things that i have to raise here one is that there might be some difference of opinions in washington or in other european capitals what their iranian regime is trying to weaponize its nuclear program or not anytime soon but there is no that out or. lead to doubt about iran's objectively. nuclear program is a tool is not an object to the object is to have supremacy in the region is to threaten the interest of united states not only united states and rest have. cold war against iran iran in last thirty years has killed americans in lebanon in afghanistan in iraq and elsewhere and threaten u.s. int

that was invaded and essentially destroyed libya gave up its weapons of mass destruction it was invaded it was essentially destroyed we'll see what's going to happen in syria i mean people in the region have to be looking around and say you know there's is there a learning curve here because disarm make friends and then you know what regime change i mean i'm not being an advocate for to iran but i mean recent history kind of gives you a clue what the americans actually think. look there are two things that i have to raise here one is that there might be some difference of opinions in washington or in other european capitals what their iranian regime is trying to weaponize its nuclear program or not any time soon but there is no doubt or. lead to doubt about iran's objectively. nuclear program is a tool is not an object to the objective is to supremacy in the region is to threaten the interest of united states not only united states and rest have. cold war against iran iran in last thirty years has killed americans in lebanon in afghanistan in iraq and elsewhere and threaten u.s. interes

up until that time we are in cost of we're in bosnia even the iraq war the phony weapons of mass destruction the public opposition remained rather quiet and tepid but here it was so overwhelming the american people want the united states to defend its own interests here at home when you don't go abroad to do your thinking on what inside the reduce everybody the bill this was a year ago was go ahead as a neo conservative plan for the region then it all florida and i agree with you that there was a massive uprising in popular discontent with the wars blood that wasn't the question the question really was has this driving force which has been mysteriously transplanted now into the obama administration with his declarations at the u.n. and of american exceptionalism in every every bit of baggage that kerry's has the neocons. servant of design on the region been thwarted my contention is that seventy percent of that agenda has been completed and kind of the left over i are rebuilding to some extent israel's economy away from socialism and some minor points along the lines of the us israel relatio