The WMD Cult

page: 10
0
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 10:23 PM
link   
Springer: it's moot at this point. What's done is done. Some of us are glad that a tyrant is gone and some I don't know about

MA: why are you bothered by the tastes of underage drinkers???? I hope your community isn't to be concerned with you.




posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 10:26 PM
link   
There are a few establishments in both the manufacture and retail of sweet tasting (and cheap) liquors that I have a role in monitoring. I'm not one that approves of selling intoxicants to minors, simple.



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 11:15 PM
link   
cheap and sweet liquor? I used to drink Mad Dog 20/20 also, MA.



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 11:21 PM
link   
Savage WMDs destroying teenage brains indeed, Bob.

Popular el cheapo things in the antipodes are:

* pre-mixed cans/bottles
* wine coolers getting worse each decade
* rum and vodka 'breezers'
* fruit-infused high strength beers.

Within reach of very meagre allowances.

There is discussion of raising the price of the cheap and nasty, as was done for ciggies.

But there are none of these buried in the deserts of Iraq either...



posted on Oct, 8 2003 @ 11:31 PM
link   
I am hearing you, MA! If the youngsters could just learn to love a good ale, lager, or stout the world would be a better place. AND, over here in the US we have a problem with the kids and 'Bud light' and Zima.



posted on Oct, 9 2003 @ 05:42 PM
link   


TC, you still dont get it do ya?

If I had the money to buy designer shoes, I would not, because designer shoes are pretty much something that stupid lazy people waste thier money on.

Americans are stupid and lazy. And the part about working hard 8 hours a day building helicopters made me laugh. Those helicopters are being increrasingly built overseas by non Americans. Your knee jerk patriotism is based on oideals of the past, TC wake up and smell the 21st century.

And, for your information, those weapons that you so worry could be slipped through our ill guarded borders, doesnt that make something in your brain snap there? Hmmmmm?

Things being smuggled through our borders......sigh. Dont you get it? Our ILL GUARDED BORDERS! They wouldnt be so #ing ill guarded if our soldiers were at HOME guarding them and not off in some mid east #hole trying to enstil a peace that has not nor will ever exist! The question isnt going and chasing invisible WMD and psider farts in Saddams basements, its about bringing our stretched too thin military home to guard and lock down our own leaky borders! If we brought the soldiers home, if we started using our military here to patrol our coastlines, our land borders, ect, that wouldnt be a #ing problem, and we would not only save money, but LIVES doing so.

The soldiers place is HERE at home defending AMERICA, not Iraq, not Europe, not Korea, Not Saudi, Not Israel, Bosnia, NONE OF THESE PLACES. If we had military here at home defending and patroling THESE borders they wopuldnt be getting # in. Are you to blind to this simply and most OBVIOUS fact?

And springer, no, every avenue had not been exhausted on UN resolution1441. There still was the poil for food program that could have been cdut off, as well as heavier UN sanctions for any of Saddams trading partners. There was more that could have been done, and the UN inspections were not completed, the deadlines were not even up, and we had already built up. This is obvious to anyone.

Are you so limited in your thinking that violent force is the only thing that comes to mind under serious concequences?

Free mason, you better limit your racist diatribes in your posts, or youre gonna get banned again dude. I mean, Um.....NEO....lol.



posted on Oct, 9 2003 @ 05:45 PM
link   
Firstly, who wants to live in a prison? You claim you have no freedom yet you desire to be locked away from the world.

Secondly, it doesn't matter how hard you patrol your borders. If they want to get in - they'll get in.



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 07:23 AM
link   
I'm done with this thread. I've clearly stated my facts and yet the orifices in the WMD cult refuse to see that, hey, those ARE facts.

It makes it easier to argue with someone if you totally ignore their side of it I guess.

If anyone would care to debate this I would be happy to go head to head, but I suspect that's far too frightening for you, since your arguments are weak and disjointed.

TC: "All it took to kill a few thousand a couple years ago was a handful of semi-trained terrorist pilots and some box cutters. It is a very myopic and unimaginative view that would indicate that because the U.S. is out of Iraq's missile reach, we are out of reach by any other means.
"

See above. For the gazzilionth time, no one has found a link between Al Qaeda and Saddam. Say it to yourself a few times until it sinks in.

"They are busy making decent lives for their families, giving them nice homes, safe cars and putting the children in private schools. Ignorant? While you and I debate that which is out of our control, they take their own destinies into their grip and make it happen. "

LOL So having nice stuff is a DESTINY? How American of you.



jakomo



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Who said anything about prisons, leveler?

Blowing up Iraq sure as # didnt decrease our threat of getting attacked again, it didnt make the world any safer. Hm..I have notices an increase in the number of terrorist attacks since, and it wont be long before they come through our own borders. Our own poorly guarded borders.

The chances of a terrorist attack hitting us have increased now, with a weakened thinned out military, a military that belongs back home looking at the welfare of its own.

Patroling our borders doesnt keep people locked in, it prevents people from outside coming in who are unwanted. Period. people still are free to leave, they will just have one hell of a time getting back in.

Terrorism is less likely if we have military at home fending off threats from the outside.

Of course, that is, assuming you still believe 9/11 was caused by terrorists alone who acted without the aid or foreknowldge and complicity of the US govornment.


It makes absolutely no sense going across the world to fight invisible enemies. Have we got bin laden? is bin laden the only terrorist leader out there? you dont think there are more in existance who sleep in the shadows that cannot be struck by bombs, who are unknown the the feds? hm?

As Masked Avatars signature wisely points put:

It is stupid to wage war on an abstract noun.



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 03:25 PM
link   
The WMD have been found already and we gave them to them. The War in Irag has been going on for years now, we just wanted to push it to the next level and establish a bridgehead. It's as simple as that. Everyone knows the best defense is an offense better than your opponent. I would rather have the fightin going on over there than here any day.



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 03:29 PM
link   
Skadi,

there is a simple answer to your assertation, the US is in a global' world and it can no longer just consider its needs any more than Rome could do the same thing with its provinces and territories.

Jakomo,

you are finally experiencing what you do to others and that is ignore their arguments in favour of your own. How does it feel?



posted on Oct, 10 2003 @ 05:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by THENEO
you are finally experiencing what you do to others and that is ignore their arguments in favour of your own. How does it feel?


ahem...well all I've got to say is that you've got an absolute cheek to say that to him my friend.



posted on Oct, 11 2003 @ 07:18 AM
link   
JohnNada: "quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by THENEO
you are finally experiencing what you do to others and that is ignore their arguments in favour of your own. How does it feel?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



ahem...well all I've got to say is that you've got an absolute cheek to say that to him my friend. "


I'm thinking he's more like two cheeks. Not face cheeks either.



jako



posted on Oct, 11 2003 @ 07:36 PM
link   
Didn't Saddam 'confess' to having WMD*?
* indicates that WMD needs to be defined.

Here's a bit of what he confessed:
"In 1995 Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law and the chief organizer of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan. He revealed that Iraq was continuing to conceal weapons and missiles and the capacity to build many more. Then and only then did Iraq admit to developing numbers of weapons in significant quantities--and weapons stocks. Previously it had vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.

Now listen to this: What did it admit? It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability, notably, 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs. And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production. . . .

Next, throughout this entire process, Iraqi agents have undermined and undercut UNSCOM. They've harassed the inspectors, lied to them, disabled monitoring cameras, literally spirited evidence out of the back doors of suspect facilities as inspectors walked through the front door, and our people were there observing it and had the pictures to prove it. . . .


Link:
www.weeklystandard.com...

And here:
"Saddam's Forgotten WMD Confession"
Link:
www.newsmax.com...

Excerpt:

"The elite media continues to insist that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction when the U.S. attacked in March, citing the scant evidence of any actual weapons finds by U.S. arms inspector David Kay.

But if it's true that Saddam Hussein was actually innocent on the WMD charge, then why did he confess in 1998 that his country had amassed huge stockpiles of highly toxic weaponized poisons - along with the delivery systems to take them beyond Iraq's borders.

That's right - lost in the debate over why U.S. weapons inspectors have yet to uncover the Iraqi version of the Manhattan Project is this salient factoid: Not only did Saddam's regime admit to possessing thousands of tons of lethal chemical and biological agents - Baghdad gave a detailed inventory of their WMD arsenal to the United Nations.

This week's Weekly Standard revisits Baghdad's 1998 WMD mea culpa - complete with a laundry list of the frightening weapons that the press continues to suggest were a figment of the Bush administration's imagination.

Just before Iraq kicked out U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998, Saddam admitted he had:

• At least 3.9 tons of deadly VX nerve gas, along with 805 tons of precursor ingredients for the production of more VX.

• 4,000 tons of ingredients to produce other types of poison gas.

• 8,500 liters of anthrax.

• 500 bombs fitted with parachutes for the purpose of delivering poison gas or germ payloads.

• 550 artillery shells filled with mustard gas.

• 107,500 casings for chemical weapons.

• 157 aerial bombs filled with germ agents.

• 25 missile warheads containing germ agents, including anthrax, aflatoxin, and botulinum.

Again, the above arsenal is NOT what U.S. or European intelligence suspected Baghdad had. These are the WMD's that Saddam himself admitted he had.

It's also worth noting that the overwhelming majority of the WMDs Saddam confessed to went completely undetected by U.N. weapons inspectors who combed Iraq for 12 years.

Still, thanks to the media's five-month-long campaign to discredit the Iraq war - not to mention the horrible job done by the White House public relations team - most Americans have no idea that questions about whether Iraq was in recent possession of WMD's have already been answered - and answered by no less an authority than Saddam Hussein himself."



Hmmm.....irony...everywhere and all over....


regards
seekerof





[Edited on 11-10-2003 by Seekerof]



posted on Oct, 11 2003 @ 07:56 PM
link   
courtesy bump.....



regards
seekerof



posted on Oct, 11 2003 @ 07:58 PM
link   
Skadi -

Just a thought here - I believe the Posse Comitas act forbids the deployment of US forces on US soil for police matters ?. Shurely the INS is a Federal police agency ?.

But i have seen out cry here of the revocation of Posse Comitas on the grounds its NWO and "they are taking over" (albeit I dont recal any post from you on this).

Its the revocation of Posse Comitas meant to strengthen homeland security ? - if so you are quite correct - and the troops could strengthen borders. If it is for ulterior motives then perhaps these troops are better in Iraq - they would serve or could serve no purpose at home without revocation of something people here seem to see as a "Holy Grail" of the beginning of the end times ?.

We in the UK thank god have no such prohibitions - and troops have and do serve in the control of terrorist activity.



posted on Oct, 12 2003 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Well, I said I wouldn't, but I read something I have to respond to.

Seekerof: The article you pasted says "But if it's true that Saddam Hussein was actually innocent on the WMD charge, then why did he confess in 1998..." when the actual article at the link says "But if it's true that Saddam Hussein was actually innocent on the WMD charge, then why did he confess in 1991." Not sure how that happened...

Anyway, this is a perfect example of spin. What Hussein Kamel is quoted as saying is correct, but you ignore what you don't want to read.

www.wnd.com...

"The debriefing of Iraqi defector Hussein Kamal, the text of which was obtained by WorldNetDaily, provides compelling insight into Iraq's nuclear weapons program, as well as the nation's plans for enhancing the development of biological and chemical weapons. ..

The debriefing documents, from UNSCOM and the International Atomic Energy Agency, or IAEA, are labeled "SENSITIVE" and record discussions with Kamal about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. The discussion occurred in Amman, Jordan, in 1995.

The documents describe Iraq as still possessing and hiding blueprints, microfiches and computer disks with plans for missile and nuclear weapons programs. While Kamal states that most all of Iraq's WMD had been destroyed at that time, there are questions from U.N. staffers as to the lack of evidence of such destruction, and Kamal admits that blueprints were kept as a first step to "return to production." Kamal is questioned on Iraq's keeping of some elements of its missile program and chemical weapons program. He also is questioned on a mysterious reference to a nuclear "final experiment," found by U.N. officials in Iraqi documents...

Despite being credited by U.N. officials with having a "legendary" memory, at key junctures Kamal says that he does not remember certain details...

Kamal stated that the VX bombs were not used during the Iran-Iraq war and "the program was terminated." He added, "During the Gulf War, there was no intention to use chemical weapons as the Allied force was overwhelming."

When questioned whether Iraq restarted VX production after the Iraq-Iran war, Kamal answered, "We changed the factory into pesticide production. Part of the establishment started to produce medicine. … We gave instructions not to produce chemical weapons. I don't remember the resumption of any chemical weapon production before the Gulf War. Maybe it was only minimal production and filling. But there was no decision to use chemical weapons for fear of retaliation. They realized that if chemical weapons were used, retaliation would be nuclear. They must have a revision of decision to start production. All chemical weapons were destroyed. I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons – biological, chemical, missile, nuclear – were destroyed."

"The following passage referred to the purported destruction of such weapons:


Smidovich: Were weapons and agents destroyed?
Kamal: Nothing remained.

Smidovich: Was it before or after inspections started?

Kamal: After visits of inspection teams. You have an important role in Iraq with this. You should not underestimate yourself. You are very effective in Iraq. There was an engine for long-range missiles. I didn't want to get involved. It was a lost battle, and they chose to stop … using this.

Smidovich: We could not find any traces of destruction.

Kamal: Yes, it was done before you came in. The place where they buried them was found by you."


www.scoop.co.nz...

"Even more damning was the suppression of the testimony of Iraqi General Hussein Kamal, who defected from the regime in 1995. Kamal's testimony was repeatedly cited as evidence of the extent of Iraq's WMD programs. For example, in a statement to the Australian parliament on February 4, attempting to justify support for an invasion of Iraq, Prime Minister John Howard cited Kamal's post-defection debriefing by UN weapons inspectors.

However, Howard didn't reveal that Kamal stated: “I ordered destruction of all chemical weapons. All weapons — biological, chemical, missile, nuclear were destroyed... nothing remained.”




Check your foot, Seeker, you might have stepped in something. Something that came from a bull...

Hussein Kamal admitted they had destroyed almost all the WMD's, but that's not reported by you or by your sources.

Read the pdf transcript of the interview from FAIR (Fairness And Accuracy in Reporting).

www.fair.org...


jakomo






[Edited on 12-10-2003 by Jakomo]



posted on Oct, 12 2003 @ 05:16 PM
link   
Jakomo

Indeed.

1998 or 1991.

End of Gulf War 1 is when, in principle, the majority of WMDs were destroyed forever in that version of events.

Seven years is an awfully long time in war, weapons, cults, time travel and spin...



posted on Oct, 12 2003 @ 09:07 PM
link   
That "spin" works both ways...indeed, it does.
The thing with "bull...." Jakomo is anyone can step in it and it will continue to smell likewise....


regards
seekerof



posted on Oct, 13 2003 @ 08:19 AM
link   
Seeker: You just have to read the pdf at FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting), which is a transcript of the interview with this guy Kamel who you claim admits that Iraq had viable WMDs up to 2003.

He admits nothing even remotely close to that. He admits, on the other hand, that Iraq's WMDs are destroyed.

Read it, it's not that long.

www.fair.org...

There's also an article about it from Extra! (a magazine that FAIR puts out). It puts it clearly into perspective. No spin. I put the most pertinent parts in bold.

I look forward to your response, Seeker.

www.fair.org...

(full article at link)

"Where Did All the Weapons Go?
Before the war, media overlooked a key story
By Seth Ackerman

If the media seem surprised by the U.S. military's failure, as of this writing, to find any hidden chemical or biological weapons in Iraq, maybe it's because they virtually ignored a critical story that was lost in a flood of stories about the dangers of a chemically armed Saddam Hussein. Weeks before the war began (3/3/03), Newsweek's John Barry published an account of a secret United Nations transcript recording the 1995 interview between U.N. weapons inspectors and Iraq's highest-ranking defector, former weapons chief Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel.

For years, the story of Kamel's defection had been used by reporters, pundits and high-ranking U.S. foreign policymakers to prove that Iraq amassed vast stockpiles of dangerous weapons. But in the transcript obtained by Newsweek, Kamel added a crucial qualifier: "All weapons--biological, chemical, missile, nuclear, were destroyed."...

By the time the Bush administration began arguing for war, Kamel's story had become legend. Newsweek's story exploded the myth. Kamel did admit that Iraq once had a biological weapons program, despite the regime's denials. But according to Newsweek, he also said that "after the Gulf War, Iraq destroyed all its chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them." All that remained were "hidden blueprints, computer disks, microfiches" and production molds....

The weapons were eliminated secretly in the summer of 1991, he said, in order to hide their existence from inspectors, and in hopes of someday resuming production after inspections had finished. The CIA and MI6 were told the same story, Newsweek reported, and "a military aide who defected with Kamel... backed Kamel's assertions about the destruction of WMD stocks."...

...When Newsweek's story appeared, during the height of the U.N. Security Council debate over weapons inspections, CIA spokesperson Bill Harlow angrily denied it. "It is incorrect, bogus, wrong, untrue," he told Reuters (2/24/03). But two days later (2/26/03), a complete copy of the Kamel transcript--an internal UNSCOM/IAEA document stamped "sensitive"--was obtained by Glen Rangwala of Cambridge University and posted to the Internet...

...It's no wonder the CIA at first tried to deny the Newsweek story. By the time it was published, virtually every major foreign-policy official in the administration had publicly cited Kamel's testimony to argue not only that Saddam was harboring a fearsome arsenal, but that inspections could never work: Only defectors such as Kamel, the administration argued, can uncover Iraq's hidden weapons. Officials often used Kamel to cite specific quantities of weapons, like anthrax and VX, that Iraq produced before 1991, without noting that according to the defector, these quantities had been destroyed....

...George W. Bush himself declared in an October 7, 2002 speech: "In 1995, after several years of deceit by the Iraqi regime, the head of Iraq's military industries defected. It was then that the regime was forced to admit that it had produced more than 30,000 liters of anthrax and other deadly biological agents. The inspectors, however, concluded that Iraq had likely produced two to four times that amount. This is a massive stockpile of biological weapons that has never been accounted for, and capable of killing millions."

Secretary of State Colin Powell made use of the Kamel story in his widely hailed February 5 presentation to the U.N. Security Council. "It took years for Iraq to finally admit that it had produced four tons of the deadly nerve agent, VX," Powell said. "A single drop of VX on the skin will kill in minutes. Four tons. The admission only came out after inspectors collected documentation as a result of the defection of Hussein Kamel, Saddam Hussein's late son-in-law."

Vice President Dick Cheney (8/27/02) warned that inspectors would be unable to find Iraq's weapons: Kamel's story "should serve as a reminder to all that we often learned more as the result of defections than we learned from the inspection regime itself." Deputy National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley wrote in the Chicago Tribune (2/16/03) that "because of information provided by Iraqi defector and former head of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs, Lt. Gen. Hussein Kamel, the regime had to admit in detail how it cheated on its nuclear non-proliferation commitments."...

...The media also treated Kamel as an authority on Iraq's weapons. In the four months prior to Newsweek's story, the defector was cited four times on the New York Times op-ed page in support of claims about Iraq's weapons programs--never noting his assertions about the elimination of these weapons. In a major Times op-ed calling for war against Iraq (2/21/03), Kenneth Pollack of the Brookings Institution wrote that Kamel and other defectors "reported that outside pressure had not only failed to eradicate the nuclear program, it was bigger and more cleverly spread out and concealed than anyone had imagined it to be.""
...


Clear enough? Our side (the reality-based NO WMD side) wins this debate. This was the house of cards most of the assertions were based on for proof of WMDs.


jakomo





new topics
top topics
 
0
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join