....all that was planted by Halliburton and the shadow government. I just can't believe he ever existed. This whole thing smells to high heaven!! How can the administration keep insisting that he existed without verifiable proof?
Honestly, they even fooled the UN into thinking he existed. This whole thing goes right to the top. Kofi's probably dirty as well---I heard he shook hands with Dick Cheney once. There all in this together, its all about oil. I mean when you have people ramming jet planes into the pentagon and world trade center, people sending anthrax through the mail---it only makes sense to go out and secure more oil fields. How could anyone expect the Administration to do more than attack Afghanistan (with the backing of Halliburton, of course---to get the oil in Berzerkistan) just for show?
Its all about oil, no connections with CBN, no connections with al Queda, no foreign fighters from other countries, no connection with violence in Israel, no payments to suicide bombers, and certainly no suicide vests.
Exactly, nothing else makes sense. Why---I was driving to work today, and when I passed the "huge facilities" that the anthrax mailer used to generate his powder, I looked at those "huge facilities" and thought, y'know giant is right, the UN said Iraq was clean of weapons and since it's not possible to fool the whole world, when GWB made up those phony lies about Iraq having CBN, well, aw shucks, it just ain?t right.
The only explanation, since Iraq was clean of all CBN, is that GWB, for short-term gain, had Halliburton manufacture evidence that fooled the UN into adopting some hard-line measures against Iraq. Then he pissed off Europe by invading a lucrative trading partner. Since he's so stupid, he didn't even stop to think that someone might want evidence of CBN after the invasion is over---and since there is no fighting going on in Iraq, no one is dying, there are no pockets of resistance left, and the soldiers are running around in Ray-Bans and T-shirts willy-nilly, there are no places left to find traces of CBN. Also, Iraq is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier that no one and nothing crossed before, during, or after the war.
Bush's former counter-terrorism chief (remember he resigned right before the war) is now working to get bush out of office. He says the Bush admin has made life more dangerous for americans, not less.
Also, check out what his wife had to say about the Bush admin:
Quote:
"It's a very closed, small, controlled group. This is an administration that determines what it thinks and then sets about to prove it. There's almost a religious kind of certainty. There's no curiosity about opposing points of view. It's very scary. There's kind of a ghost agenda."
Bush's former counter-terrorism chief (remember he resigned right before the war) is now working to get bush out of office. He says the Bush admin has made life more dangerous for americans, not less.
Also, check out what his wife had to say about the Bush admin:
Speaking from a little personal experience, politics is a dirty business, if you had a window on that world you would lose all faith in the system. The petty bullshit, the gangs, powermonger committee chairs, advisroy committee nominations, staffers with thier noses up "da man's" ass. It's crap--don't look too closely. It's a wonder the whole thing doesn't implode.
The worst thing of all is that what you read in the papers is what happened but not why. The journalists in most cases don't get it.
Trust me when I tell you that you are young and idealistic. You are assuming too much about the press.
You must be ****ing kidding. You get called out for not reading the article before commenting, and then you continue to show you can't inform yourself by writing something totally unrelated.
I point out that Beers speaks out about why he left the bush admin and is now working to remove bush from power, and somehow me pointing that out is a judgement call about the state of american news media?
You must be ****ing kidding. You get called out for not reading the article before commenting, and then you continue to show you can't inform yourself by writing something totally unrelated.
I point out that Beers speaks out about why he left the bush admin and is now working to remove bush from power, and somehow me pointing that out is a judgement call about the state of american news media?
Go job at making an ass of yourself. Again
Generally speaking, the media is that bad. Getting whipsawed by what is essentially a press release just plain gets old after a while.
....more later, I must go---arguing is such sweet sorrow that I would bicker till it be morrow.
Giant enough with personal attack. It's not because you are absolutely sure of your arguments that others people are oblige to agree.
Same apply to any members here. Is this so important to have the last word ? There is nothing to win here. The AI staff will not send a prize for the best poster
If you really aren't a teenager, I feel bad for your kids.
And likely visa versa...
Lets stick to the issue.
Ena: Four issues regarding the "proofs" of WoMDs
-The nigerian connection.
-The non-mobile bomb factories.
-The student desk report regarding Iraqi WoMDs from early 90s.
-The trucks
The three first was proven to be false proofs within a few days to one week after the speech at the UN SC. The last was proven by british government investigators to be excatly what the Iraqis said they were: Hydrogen factories for military balloons.
Now we could chose to consider these examples coinsciedences. But the student report wasn´t just found on a toilet at waterloo station. And the nigerian uran report was considered bogus by the agencies. Why was all information presented in their worst case senario and in a lot of cases beond that to the UN SC, the congress and allies around the world as facts? Even Grover agree with this. How will you defend this?
Generally speaking, the media is that bad. Getting whipsawed by what is essentially a press release just plain gets old after a while.
But that not what we are talking about! We are discussing ONE particular article, which you responded to by claiming it didn't say why when the whole article was Beers sayingexactly why. That was the entire point of the interview!
This is just like last week when you claimed that the UN press release announcing the adoption of 1441 was a statement that Iraq breached 1441, even though the title clearly stated that it was the adoption of 1441!
Quote:
Powerdoc:
Giant enough with personal attack. It's not because you are absolutely sure of your arguments that others people are oblige to agree.
I'll work on it. It is hard not to comment on a train wreck when it's right there, but it can be done.
alright, I'm downloading an update for omnipage, so I can get back in here....
I think the about the best evidence thus far, probably about the best thing they have---is the vests--not quite CBN! On the evidence presented, between the buearcracy, and the deisre to get that "worst case scenario", they may have screwed up along the way. It's hard to get a whole staff "going in the same direction" and even harder to keep track of who has what and what got approved to show the press and the UN (which may or may not have included the same stuff).
It's like fact-checking a textbook, there's always going to be a 2nd ed. just for the typos and wrong answers.
The thing with "lying" is that it would be suicide for GWB to do that. If he doesn't produce the goods for the world and the voters in the US--then he's finished. They'll have to let the UN carry their water on their nuke program, because the credibility would be gone.
A bad thing. Bad for the war on terror, bad for Powell---and every politician on his/her way up, bad for the party---it would be a monumental screwup of epic proportions.
At any rate they're still shooting at each other over there, so it will take some time to sort it all out.
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
Except for the fact that it is not physically possible. There is always residue, there is always some remnant. The facilties need to exist if you are to have a large program.
Then there is the everpresent though oft ignored fact that all available evidence from the inspection process demonstrates clearly that Iraq's weapons programs hardly existed if at all.
Oh, and what military doesn't have some chemical suits? Note that not only were there not very many found, but there were no chem weapons deployed. If there were no chem weapons deployed, then the suits were obviously defensive. So sorry, but that not at all proof of anything.
So if the "best evidence" they have is no evidence at all, then it's clear what the logical conclusion is.
I think the about the best evidence thus far, probably about the best thing they have---is the vests--not quite CBN! On the evidence presented, between the buearcracy, and the deisre to get that "worst case scenario", they may have screwed up along the way. It's hard to get a whole staff "going in the same direction" and even harder to keep track of who has what and what got approved to show the press and the UN (which may or may not have included the same stuff).
So you are going for the "coinscidence" escape. The naive route. Grover is smarter than you then...
Quote:
Originally posted by ena
The thing with "lying" is that it would be suicide for GWB to do that. If he doesn't produce the goods for the world and the voters in the US--then he's finished.
"Which comes closest to your view about the war with Iraq? It was justified only if the U.S. finds conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. It was justified even if the U.S. DOES NOT find conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. OR, It was not justified even if the U.S. finds conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
Perhaps yes. There was also he chance he will have used it if he had one (his future was doomed wether or not he used WOMD).
As Giant said getting rid of every scap of evidence was not easy, there is the residues, there is the spying of Sattelites (and you can guess how many US and british sattellites where spying Iraq at that time) and there was the UNMOVIC inspections who where removed only a few days after the attack. Iraq was under watch, it was really difficult for them to do such things.
My guess (but it's just a guess, like the many ones i made about apple related future products) is that Iraq owned a very few WOMD, because it was difficult to have a large amount of them hidden. Using a such limited amount of WOMD was useless, because it will not bring enough casualties among the opponement, and just reverse the public opinion of some anti-war mongers.
Saddam was only a potential threat, dangerous only if you give him enough air to breath. He did not have this breath since 1991, but i have no doubt that he will have make tons of WOMD if it was not such a case.
Comments
Originally posted by ena
....all that was planted by Halliburton and the shadow government. I just can't believe he ever existed. This whole thing smells to high heaven!! How can the administration keep insisting that he existed without verifiable proof?
Honestly, they even fooled the UN into thinking he existed. This whole thing goes right to the top. Kofi's probably dirty as well---I heard he shook hands with Dick Cheney once. There all in this together, its all about oil. I mean when you have people ramming jet planes into the pentagon and world trade center, people sending anthrax through the mail---it only makes sense to go out and secure more oil fields. How could anyone expect the Administration to do more than attack Afghanistan (with the backing of Halliburton, of course---to get the oil in Berzerkistan) just for show?
Its all about oil, no connections with CBN, no connections with al Queda, no foreign fighters from other countries, no connection with violence in Israel, no payments to suicide bombers, and certainly no suicide vests.
In other words: You declare yourself defeated?
The only explanation, since Iraq was clean of all CBN, is that GWB, for short-term gain, had Halliburton manufacture evidence that fooled the UN into adopting some hard-line measures against Iraq. Then he pissed off Europe by invading a lucrative trading partner. Since he's so stupid, he didn't even stop to think that someone might want evidence of CBN after the invasion is over---and since there is no fighting going on in Iraq, no one is dying, there are no pockets of resistance left, and the soldiers are running around in Ray-Bans and T-shirts willy-nilly, there are no places left to find traces of CBN. Also, Iraq is surrounded by an impenetrable barrier that no one and nothing crossed before, during, or after the war.
If it doesn't fit---you must acquit.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hptop_tb
Bush's former counter-terrorism chief (remember he resigned right before the war) is now working to get bush out of office. He says the Bush admin has made life more dangerous for americans, not less.
Also, check out what his wife had to say about the Bush admin:
"It's a very closed, small, controlled group. This is an administration that determines what it thinks and then sets about to prove it. There's almost a religious kind of certainty. There's no curiosity about opposing points of view. It's very scary. There's kind of a ghost agenda."
Originally posted by ena
Why---I was driving to work today, and when I passed the "huge facilities" that the anthrax mailer used to generate his powder
Last I checked, Fort Detrick was pretty ****ing big.
As for chemical weapons, yes, you need large chemical plants to produce them in bulk. Sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation.
Originally posted by giant
So check this out:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...l?nav=hptop_tb
Bush's former counter-terrorism chief (remember he resigned right before the war) is now working to get bush out of office. He says the Bush admin has made life more dangerous for americans, not less.
Also, check out what his wife had to say about the Bush admin:
Speaking from a little personal experience, politics is a dirty business, if you had a window on that world you would lose all faith in the system. The petty bullshit, the gangs, powermonger committee chairs, advisroy committee nominations, staffers with thier noses up "da man's" ass. It's crap--don't look too closely. It's a wonder the whole thing doesn't implode.
The worst thing of all is that what you read in the papers is what happened but not why. The journalists in most cases don't get it.
Originally posted by giant
Last I checked, Fort Detrick was pretty ****ing big.
As for chemical weapons, yes, you need large chemical plants to produce them in bulk. Sorry, but that's just the reality of the situation.
.....you have solved the anthrax mailer case too? You're amazing!
(and yes I know about the genetic signature of the anthrax)
Originally posted by giant
Except that the whole article is about why. Maybe you should read before responding, genius.
Trust me when I tell you that you are young and idealistic. You are assuming too much about the press.
Originally posted by ena
.....you have solved the anthrax mailer case too? You're amazing!
(and yes I know about the genetic signature of the anthrax)
If you really aren't a teenager, I feel bad for your kids.
Originally posted by giant
If you really aren't a teenager, I feel bad for your kids.
tacky, tacky, giant!
Originally posted by ena
Trust me when I tell you that you are young and idealistic. You are assuming too much about the press.
You must be ****ing kidding. You get called out for not reading the article before commenting, and then you continue to show you can't inform yourself by writing something totally unrelated.
I point out that Beers speaks out about why he left the bush admin and is now working to remove bush from power, and somehow me pointing that out is a judgement call about the state of american news media?
Go job at making an ass of yourself. Again
Originally posted by giant
You must be ****ing kidding. You get called out for not reading the article before commenting, and then you continue to show you can't inform yourself by writing something totally unrelated.
I point out that Beers speaks out about why he left the bush admin and is now working to remove bush from power, and somehow me pointing that out is a judgement call about the state of american news media?
Go job at making an ass of yourself. Again
Generally speaking, the media is that bad. Getting whipsawed by what is essentially a press release just plain gets old after a while.
....more later, I must go---arguing is such sweet sorrow that I would bicker till it be morrow.
Caio.
Originally posted by giant
Go job at making an ass of yourself. Again
Giant enough with personal attack. It's not because you are absolutely sure of your arguments that others people are oblige to agree.
Same apply to any members here. Is this so important to have the last word ? There is nothing to win here. The AI staff will not send a prize for the best poster
Originally posted by giant
If you really aren't a teenager, I feel bad for your kids.
And likely visa versa...
Lets stick to the issue.
Ena: Four issues regarding the "proofs" of WoMDs
-The nigerian connection.
-The non-mobile bomb factories.
-The student desk report regarding Iraqi WoMDs from early 90s.
-The trucks
The three first was proven to be false proofs within a few days to one week after the speech at the UN SC. The last was proven by british government investigators to be excatly what the Iraqis said they were: Hydrogen factories for military balloons.
Now we could chose to consider these examples coinsciedences. But the student report wasn´t just found on a toilet at waterloo station. And the nigerian uran report was considered bogus by the agencies. Why was all information presented in their worst case senario and in a lot of cases beond that to the UN SC, the congress and allies around the world as facts? Even Grover agree with this. How will you defend this?
Originally posted by ena
Generally speaking, the media is that bad. Getting whipsawed by what is essentially a press release just plain gets old after a while.
But that not what we are talking about! We are discussing ONE particular article, which you responded to by claiming it didn't say why when the whole article was Beers sayingexactly why. That was the entire point of the interview!
This is just like last week when you claimed that the UN press release announcing the adoption of 1441 was a statement that Iraq breached 1441, even though the title clearly stated that it was the adoption of 1441!
Powerdoc:
Giant enough with personal attack. It's not because you are absolutely sure of your arguments that others people are oblige to agree.
I'll work on it. It is hard not to comment on a train wreck when it's right there, but it can be done.
I think the about the best evidence thus far, probably about the best thing they have---is the vests--not quite CBN! On the evidence presented, between the buearcracy, and the deisre to get that "worst case scenario", they may have screwed up along the way. It's hard to get a whole staff "going in the same direction" and even harder to keep track of who has what and what got approved to show the press and the UN (which may or may not have included the same stuff).
It's like fact-checking a textbook, there's always going to be a 2nd ed. just for the typos and wrong answers.
The thing with "lying" is that it would be suicide for GWB to do that. If he doesn't produce the goods for the world and the voters in the US--then he's finished. They'll have to let the UN carry their water on their nuke program, because the credibility would be gone.
A bad thing. Bad for the war on terror, bad for Powell---and every politician on his/her way up, bad for the party---it would be a monumental screwup of epic proportions.
At any rate they're still shooting at each other over there, so it will take some time to sort it all out.
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
But then that's just me.
my download is done! bye.
Originally posted by ena
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
Except for the fact that it is not physically possible. There is always residue, there is always some remnant. The facilties need to exist if you are to have a large program.
Then there is the everpresent though oft ignored fact that all available evidence from the inspection process demonstrates clearly that Iraq's weapons programs hardly existed if at all.
Oh, and what military doesn't have some chemical suits? Note that not only were there not very many found, but there were no chem weapons deployed. If there were no chem weapons deployed, then the suits were obviously defensive. So sorry, but that not at all proof of anything.
So if the "best evidence" they have is no evidence at all, then it's clear what the logical conclusion is.
Originally posted by ena
I think the about the best evidence thus far, probably about the best thing they have---is the vests--not quite CBN! On the evidence presented, between the buearcracy, and the deisre to get that "worst case scenario", they may have screwed up along the way. It's hard to get a whole staff "going in the same direction" and even harder to keep track of who has what and what got approved to show the press and the UN (which may or may not have included the same stuff).
So you are going for the "coinscidence" escape. The naive route. Grover is smarter than you then...
Originally posted by ena
The thing with "lying" is that it would be suicide for GWB to do that. If he doesn't produce the goods for the world and the voters in the US--then he's finished.
CNN/USA Today/Gallup Poll. May 30-June 1, 2003. N=1,019 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
"Which comes closest to your view about the war with Iraq? It was justified only if the U.S. finds conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. It was justified even if the U.S. DOES NOT find conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction. OR, It was not justified even if the U.S. finds conclusive evidence that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction."
Justified Only If Find Evidence 23%
Justified Even If Does Not Find Evidence 56%
Not Justified 18%
No Opinion 3%
Originally posted by ena
If it were me, if I were an evil dictator of a small country who knew he was about to get his ass kicked, I'd get rid of every scrap of evidence just to spite the bastard who defied the word to attack me.
Perhaps yes. There was also he chance he will have used it if he had one (his future was doomed wether or not he used WOMD).
As Giant said getting rid of every scap of evidence was not easy, there is the residues, there is the spying of Sattelites (and you can guess how many US and british sattellites where spying Iraq at that time) and there was the UNMOVIC inspections who where removed only a few days after the attack. Iraq was under watch, it was really difficult for them to do such things.
My guess (but it's just a guess, like the many ones i made about apple related future products) is that Iraq owned a very few WOMD, because it was difficult to have a large amount of them hidden. Using a such limited amount of WOMD was useless, because it will not bring enough casualties among the opponement, and just reverse the public opinion of some anti-war mongers.
Saddam was only a potential threat, dangerous only if you give him enough air to breath. He did not have this breath since 1991, but i have no doubt that he will have make tons of WOMD if it was not such a case.