Home | Community | Message Board


World Seed Supply
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract, Kratom Powder For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Amazon ½ Pint Jars, Scales

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991
    #1927183 - 09/18/03 01:25 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Iraq dumped WMDs years ago, says Blix

No evidence to link Saddam with September 11 attacks, Bush admits

Oliver Burkeman in Washington
Thursday September 18, 2003
The Guardian

The former UN chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, believes that Iraq destroyed most of its weapons of mass destruction 10 years ago, according to an interview broadcast yesterday.
The claim came on the same day that President George Bush stated more bluntly than ever that there is no evidence to link Saddam Hussein to the terrorist attacks of September 11 2001 - despite 69% of Americans believing Saddam had a personal role, according to a recent Washington Post opinion poll.

Mr Blix, who spent three years hunting for chemical, biological and nuclear weapons in Iraq as head of the UN monitoring, verification and inspection commission, told Australian Broadcasting Corporation listeners: "I'm certainly more and more to the conclusion that Iraq has, as they maintained, destroyed all, almost, of what they had in the summer of 1991. The more time that has passed, the more I think it's unlikely that anything will be found."

Saddam kept up the appearance that he had the weapons to deter a military attack, Mr Blix added. "I mean, you can put up a sign on your door, 'Beware of the dog,' without having a dog," he said, speaking from his home in Sweden.

Investigators with the US-led Iraq survey group would be unlikely to find anything more than some "documents of interest", he predicted.

Mr Blix had previously declared himself "agnostic" on the issue of if or when Saddam destroyed such weapons, and has never dismissed so forcefully the arguments of Mr Bush and Mr Blair.

"Time will tell," the prime minister's official spokesman responded in London. "We have to exercise a bit of patience and recognise the survey group has been operational for a matter of some weeks. And clearly there is a lot of work to get through."

Mr Bush's remarks, made to reporters as he met members of Congress at the White House, place him at odds with his vice-president, Dick Cheney, who sought conspicuously to leave the question of Saddam's links with September 11 open in a TV appearance at the weekend.

"We have no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved in the September 11 [attacks]," Mr Bush said, though he said there was "no question" that the Iraqi dictator "had al-Qaida ties".

On Sunday, by contrast, Mr Cheney said the popular belief in a link was "not surprising ... we don't know." Victory in Iraq, he went on, would strike at "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault for many years, but most especially on 9/11."

Mr Cheney also returned in the interview to an allegation, attributed to Czech intelligence, that the 9/11 hijacker Mohammed Atta met a senior Iraqi intelligence official in April 2001 in Prague. According to numerous reports, the FBI and CIA found no evidence of such a meeting, and Vaclav Havel, the then Czech president, told the White House that there was none.

But Mr Cheney told NBC's Meet The Press: "We've never been able to develop any more of that yet either in terms of confirming it or discrediting it. We just don't know."

Democrats have accused the Bush administration of deliberately seeking to convey a false impression about the relationship between the terrorist network and Saddam.

Condoleezza Rice, Mr Bush's national security adviser, told a US television interviewer on Tuesday that Saddam was targeted because he posed a danger in "a region from which the 9/11 threat emerged".

Asked about Saddam's weapons, Mr Cheney referred only to the Iraqi leader's "capabilities" and "aspirations", not to weapons themselves.

"To suggest that there is no evidence there that [Hussein] had no aspirations to acquire nuclear weapons I don't think is valid," he said.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1044511,00.html


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineLearyfanS
It's the psychedelic movement!
Male User Gallery

Registered: 04/20/01
Posts: 32,179
Loc: High pride!
Last seen: 11 hours, 11 minutes
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1927236 - 09/18/03 01:37 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Saddam kept up the appearance that he had the weapons to deter a military attack, Mr Blix added. "I mean, you can put up a sign on your door, 'Beware of the dog,' without having a dog," he said, speaking from his home in Sweden.




Zactly.




--------------------
--------------------------------


Mp3 of the month: The Chords - Ghost Power



Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Learyfan]
    #1927249 - 09/18/03 01:40 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Blix: Saddam destroyed his weapons of mass destruction a decade ago
By David Usborne in New York and Nigel Morris in London
18 September 2003


The Government's case for war against Saddam Hussein was undermined further yesterday when the former United Nations chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said that Iraq had probably destroyed its most deadly weapons of mass destruction more than a decade ago.

Mr Blix, who retired in June, told the Australian state broadcaster ABC: "I'm certainly more and more to the conclusion that Iraq has, as they maintained, destroyed all, almost, of what they had in the summer of 1991."

The suggestion comes at a bad time for the Government, as the Hutton inquiry into the apparent suicide of the weapons expert David Kelly nears its conclusion.

Mr Blix, speaking from his home in Sweden, said that he thought it unlikely that non-UN experts deployed by the coalition forces to search for weapons of mass destruction would find anything beyond "some documents of interest". He added: "The more time that has passed, the more I think it's unlikely that anything will be found."

His comments were made as Tony Blair defended his decision to join US-led military action in Iraq and denied ignoring intelligence warnings that the war would increase the risk of terrorism in Britain.

Washington has sent about 1,400 scientists and military experts, the Iraq Survey Group, to searchfor the weapons. But so far nothing appears to have been found and there is mounting speculation that the delivery of a final report to George Bush on what has - or has not - been discovered may be postponed indefinitely.

He also indicated that he thought that the US-led coalition started to backtrack on the issue when it became apparent that nothing was being uncovered in Iraq. He said: "In the beginning they talked about weapons concretely, and later on they talked about weapons programmes. Maybe they'll find some documents of interest." Another weapons expert and former UN inspector, David Albright, said last night that the Iraq Survey Group had apparently failed to find anything significant. They are "not finding the kinds of things the administration expected to find, large quantities of biological and chemical weapons or evidence that they were destroyed prior to the war", he said. Demetrius Perricos, acting head of the UN inspections body Unmovic, said he was unsure that weapons would be found in Iraq. "It's becoming more and more difficult to believe stocks [of WMD] were there," Mr Perricos said. He added that it was unlikely that Saddam could have quickly destroyed the weapons before the war.


http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=444483


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1927250 - 09/18/03 01:40 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Heh,

Wait until the Kay report comes out. That should be a doozy. It's written by the current head of their WMD seeking force. He basically seems to think that the US is nuts and they should have listened to the inspectors all along. Rumor is that it also has a small part about illegal attempts at planting weapons. Someone in the top 10 of the defense department was just fired recently for blowing that whistle. Im too tired to look it up, Ive already read it and it can be found (before anyone even asks) It will surely make next years most censored stories.



--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAutonomous
MysteriousStranger

Registered: 05/10/02
Posts: 901
Loc: U.S.S.A.
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1927267 - 09/18/03 01:42 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Now now, you don't actually believe the total absence of evidence of WMDs and the opinion of Hans Blix over the blood lusting, fear mongering propaganda of our neo-conservatives... do you?


--------------------
"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination."
-- Mark Twain


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Autonomous]
    #1927278 - 09/18/03 01:44 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Don't be hasty Auto,  remember you can't *prove* they didn't exist 6 months ago  :grin:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,244
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1927905 - 09/18/03 05:37 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Alex123 said:
Don't be hasty Auto,  remember you can't *prove* they didn't exist 6 months ago  :grin:



Good to see it finally sunk in.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1927941 - 09/18/03 05:49 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Is that what your reduced to now? "They did have WMD but they destroyed them all just before we got there" If it is - WEAK! LOL!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,244
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1927969 - 09/18/03 06:00 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

GazzBut said:
Is that what your reduced to now? "They did have WMD but they destroyed them all just before we got there" If it is - WEAK! LOL!



Is that what your reduced to now? Making up statements for others?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1927974 - 09/18/03 06:02 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Oh how the mighty have fallen!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,244
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1927976 - 09/18/03 06:04 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I'll repeat....

Is that what your reduced to now? Making up statements for others?


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1927980 - 09/18/03 06:07 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

You are so dense sometimes! I ASKED if that was what you beleived. I didnt make up a statement and say that was what you thought. All that fast food fat must be congealing in your brain I reckon!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1927997 - 09/18/03 06:13 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

The title of this thread is misleading and its another guardian article lol....



--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery


Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,244
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928010 - 09/18/03 06:19 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I'm dense? Hardly. Go back and look again. There is a question, true. It's follwed by a statement in a way which makes it appear I said someting I did not.

LAme.

The tooth rot must be spreading to your brain.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #1928038 - 09/18/03 06:30 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I know what I said and I know what I meant. You as per usual are trailing in my wake.....


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928041 - 09/18/03 06:31 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Hows it misleading? That pretty much what Blix said isnt it?


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928098 - 09/18/03 06:52 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

That pretty much what Blix said isnt it?




Summarisation, and your use of "pretty much".... The title doesn't quote any of Blix's barely coherent statement...


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928111 - 09/18/03 06:57 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Blix's barely coherent statement




LOL thats weak.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928116 - 09/18/03 06:58 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

"I'm certainly more and more to the conclusion that Iraq has, as they maintained, destroyed all, almost, of what they had in the summer of 1991. The more time that has passed, the more I think it's unlikely that anything will be found."






--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928127 - 09/18/03 07:04 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

You find that incoherent? I dont. Obviously you have to take into account that it is conversational English and he is not reading from a prepared statement but it is definitely not incoherent.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineunlikelyhero
Ramblin' Man

Registered: 12/31/02
Posts: 106
Loc: Lancaster (Uni), Darlingt...
Last seen: 16 years, 11 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928160 - 09/18/03 07:16 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Are none of you gonna dissect this article? Or do you concurr that there were on WMDs, the basis on the war was fabricated, and the IRaq was never a threat to us?

UH


--------------------
They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineunlikelyhero
Ramblin' Man

Registered: 12/31/02
Posts: 106
Loc: Lancaster (Uni), Darlingt...
Last seen: 16 years, 11 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928161 - 09/18/03 07:17 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

st0nedphucker said:
The title of this thread is misleading and its another guardian article lol....





Wow, good argument.

UH


--------------------
They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: unlikelyhero]
    #1928167 - 09/18/03 07:19 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

It wasn't an argument it was an observation  :blush:


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: unlikelyhero]
    #1928184 - 09/18/03 07:27 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Whats stopping you dissecting it?!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928187 - 09/18/03 07:27 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

The article?


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928254 - 09/18/03 07:55 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

It wasnt a question to you anyway but whats wrong with the article?


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1928297 - 09/18/03 08:38 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Well the 'house of cards lies' are falling and the big spin for a war has shown up to be just that...a big spin. :laugh:

Wonder how the US public (if they read?!?) will react on this news in light of loss of sons/daughters in Iraq & $87-billion more for nothing, will Bush be booted in 2004?

Probably not, such lemmings bought the lie Sadamme was Sep 11th involved. :rolleyes: 'tards.

I guess Bush will be praying/scheeming for another big terro attack, then he, like that NY Mayor prior Sep 11th, will be popular again. Because it's only so far BS stories like 'Jessica Lynch' can go to pump the flag waving dullards. Man that was a load of shite.

Worse is the morons on the net who believe the WOT crap when TCP/IP gives foreign sources free of the FOX fair and balanced LMAO & CNN TV bullshit. Dumb arse neo-con fundies. They've butt fucked you with the Patriot Act and you still lovedemGOPs. :wink: 


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928418 - 09/18/03 10:30 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Starter said:
Wonder how the US public (if they read?!?) will react on this news in light of loss of sons/daughters in Iraq & $87-billion more for nothing, will Bush be booted in 2004?




Well we can read quite well, especially since we are not all decendents of a bunch of exiled inmates. What news are you talking about by the way? Blix saying they had no weapons? That is easy for him to come out and say now. He also said he thought Saddam was making it seem to the rest of the world that he did.

[quoteProbably not, such lemmings bought the lie Sadamme was Sep 11th involved. :rolleyes: 'tards.




Who told us that? I don't remember anyone saying that to us from the administration.

Quote:

I guess Bush will be praying/scheeming for another big terro attack, then he, like that NY Mayor prior Sep 11th, will be popular again. Because it's only so far BS stories like 'Jessica Lynch' can go to pump the flag waving dullards. Man that was a load of shite.




Speaking of 'tards, that is one of the dumbest things you have said yet. Rudy was a very popular Mayor before 9/11 ever happened. You don't know what you are talking about.

Quote:

Worse is the morons on the net who believe the WOT crap when TCP/IP gives foreign sources free of the FOX fair and balanced LMAO & CNN TV bullshit. Dumb arse neo-con fundies. They've butt fucked you with the Patriot Act and you still lovedemGOPs. :wink:




This is a bit incoherent. Again speaking of 'tards. :rolleyes:


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928535 - 09/18/03 11:34 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

>>>Well we can read quite well, especially since we are not all decendents of a bunch of exiled inmates.

It must have hurt eh, the stab of truth on the illiteracy in the US. Your big red buttons are so easy to press. Now take this. :laugh:

The US has a higher illiteracy rate than Australia. Check the stats.

Australian Literacy: 
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
total population: 100%
male: 100%
female: 100% (1980 est.) 

That's right, 100% buster LMAO.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/as.html

V's

US Literacy:
definition: age 15 and over can read and write
female: 97% (1979 est.)
total population: 97%
male: 97%
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/us.html


You'll note US literacy has been falling. :rolleyes:

Quote:


The scope of illiteracy in this country

In September, 1993, the most detailed portrait ever available on the condition of illiteracy in this nation was released by the U.S. Department of Education. The National Adult Literacy Survey (ALS) evaluated the skills of adults in three areas: prose, document and quantitative proficiency. Results showed:

23% - 23% (40 to 44 million adults) were at Level 1, the lowest of five levels. This group is the Adult Literacy Service's primary target population - those we refer to as functionally illiterate.

25% - 28% (50 million adults) were at the second lowest level. According to Executive Summary, "While their skills were more varied than those of individuals in Level 1, their repertoire was still quite limited."

The literary proficiencies of young adults were found to be somewhat lower, on average, than the proficiencies of young adults who participated in a 1985 study (the National Assessment of Educational Progress.)

The statistics make it clear: illiteracy is on the increase in the United States. The Office of Technology Assessment (OAT), an analytical arm of the U.S. Congress, stated in a 1993 report:


http://www.standard.net.au/~jwilliams/cons2.htm





Hang your head in shame shakta. That's a shabby show to say the least ol'boy. :rolleyes:




Now the convict thing.
Little known in the US (because Americans don't read) but they too were a British convict dumping ground. The Independence War saw to the end of it. But what is of interest is the difference in how convicts in the US fared to that of Australia.

Quote:


Convict Systems 1826.America v the English Colonies.

An overview of the system and its uses taken from a newspaper article published in the Colonial Times in the year 1826.
This site created and provided by and, all rights reserved by
?J.Fawcett 2000

Convict System in America v Convict System in the Colonies.

It may not be generally known,that,in America, the Crown servants
[by some designated convicts] not employed by the State,amounting
to several thousands, are let out to contractors for the term of one
year.

Proposals are there received for the employment of any number of them,
in such labour as the contractor may prefer,subject to the regulations
established for the government of the prisons; and persons disposed
to employ them, invariably apply to either the Directors or to the
Warden, or at the prisons; and every information regarding the
prisoners and the work they can perform, with tools belonging to
the State,are readily communicated.
Among this class of people are men of remarkable ingenuity and skill;
and the price at which their time can be let out, makes it an
object worthy of very general consideration. Payment for the labour
of the prisoners is made every quarter, and bonds given for the same.
Thus is appears, that in America those who forfeit their rights as
free men are treated very differently to those either in these Colonies
or in England.

Upon the arrival of prisoners here,[Aust] they are generally assigned
to the services of Settlers, or other respectable inhabitants; and
instead  of working in a state of slavery, as in America, they are
well clothed, and victualled by their employers, and moreover
recieve a compensation in wages for their labour.


If a man is industrious and well disposed to his master, he generally
receives additional encouragement. He throws off the badge of
prison clothing, and appears,literally speaking, the same as a free
man. If he is a good and confidential servant, he is in a few years
rewarded by a ticket of leave, which enables him to work for himself,
in the same manner as those who enjoy freedom. Not so in America; for
if he renders any important services to our Government [and there
are many opportunities for so doing], they are almost sure to
receive a conditional or free pardon.

Upwards of fifty men have experienced this act of clemency even
during the present year; besides as many more in tickets of leave.
This of itself is sufficient to induce the whole class of prisoners
in these Colonies to conduct themselves consistent with their station
in life. IF their services are not rewarded one time, they may be
assured they will not be overlooked at some distant period. It is
the policy of the Government to hold out every possible encouragement
to such of them as evince a feeling to retrieve their former character.
If they could only see this in its true colours, we should seldom
hear of bush-ranging, and its attendant consequences - evil,misery and
death.!  We have been induced to make these observations from the
knowledge we possess on the subject, as regards the difference of the
employment of prisoners in America, in these distant colonies, and on
board the Hulks in England.
Source - CT Sept 1 1826

NB.This article is designed to assist in giving an overview
of the convict system.
All original records should be accessed to confirm any
accounts of the convict system.





You treated your convicts like dogs back then as you do to this day, esp. when today's convicts are all too often non-violent drug offenders!!

In fact, the US is now the largest convict state in the world. Over 2 million behind wire and increasing...much to do with the US WOD. The cost of this "lock 'em up" mentality is monumental. http://www.drugsense.org/wodclock.htm

So sure as shit it's a classic case of projection Shakta, as your nation is the prison nation of the 21stC. A gulag state. I'm not surprised with neo-con filth like you. You're beneath my contempt esp. as great proportion of the people on the shroomery are outlaws. Yes, growers of illegal mushrooms and other ethnobotanicals, you dolt. They'd be made convicts in a flash (if in the US) and busted.


>>>What news are you talking about by the way? Blix saying they had no weapons? That is easy for him to come out and say now. He also said he thought Saddam was making it seem to the rest of the world that he did.

Oh now the boy runs to his mama's tit. "Poor lil'Bushy dun know, he waz juz doin' iz job". The world knew at the jump the Iraq war was a complete lie (the biggest anti-war protests in history is testimony to that) and still there's shameless round worms like yourself who dare to defend the lie. How dare scum like you even appear on counter-culture sites for you're nothing less than agents of the man. I have a good hunch you'd be a good TIPS snitch.

Here's a scenario of what it could have been if that stupid war never happened.

Quote:


What If We'd Never Gone To War With Iraq?

What if the war on Iraq had never happened? What if America and Britain had stepped up to the brink last March, peered over the edge, only to pull back at the very last moment?

Let's say George Bush had been persuaded to give the United Nations inspectors what they wanted: more time.

The British and American soldiers had been told to stand by; the bombs had stayed in their bays.

How different would our world have been? Whose lives would be better, whose worse? Who would still be here, and who would have gone?

Start at the obvious place: Iraq itself.

That statue of Saddam Hussein in central Baghdad's Paradise Square would still be standing, as tall and imposing as ever - and no one would know that, on the inside, it was completely hollow.

The people of Iraq would still be living under Saddam's murderous tyranny.

Those who dared to speak out would lose their tongues, if not their lives.

But the electricity would still be working, and so would the running water and sewers.

There would be no freedom, no marches in the street, no rallies at the mosques. But there would be order.

Those who kept their heads down and their mouths shut could at least count on life's basic services.

The country would be under dictatorship, but not anarchy.

Iraq's National Museum would still contain its priceless collection of mankind's oldest treasures, remnants from the very birth of civilisation.

No looters would have broken the glass cases and hauled off Baghdad's ancient wonders for sale on the international market.

THE United Nations building in the capital would still be intact, along with the Jordanian Embassy and the Imam Ali shrine at Najaf, one of Islam's holiest sites.

The UN envoy Sergio Vieira de Mello would still be alive and so would Mohammed Baqer al-Hakim, the leader Iraq's Shi'ites revered more than any other.

The country would not be a magnet for radical Islamist terrorists, said to be flocking from across the Arab world to take shots at the great American infidel: there would be no US occupation to "resist".

Saddam would still be in charge, cracking down on any hint of al-Qaeda activity within his borders - regarding the organisation as a threat to his own rule.

Hans Blix would still be around, irritating his Iraqi hosts with his daily requests to snoop and probe every factory and laboratory in the country.

The Iraqis would bob and weave, of course, but with the threat of force hanging over them, they would co-operate, no matter how grudgingly.

Whatever programme Saddam once had to devise weapons of mass destruction would now be on hold: thanks to Blix, Saddam couldn't organise a fireworks display, let alone build a nuke, without the world knowing about it. His hands would be tied.

The United Nations would declare that the beast of Baghdad was not dead - but firmly locked in his cage.

In the United States, the landscape would look just as different. George Bush would have shocked his right wing by giving in to the people they regard as whining, limp-wristed, European pinkos. By going through the UN, and delaying war, he would have broken the go-it-alone, gung-ho stance that is holy writ for muscular Republicans.

ONE of that faction - say, Congressman Tom "The Hammer" DeLay - would now be preparing to challenge Bush for the Republican nomination in next year's presidential election.

Donald Rumsfeld would have resigned, along with all the civilian hawks that rule America's defence department. The hardline vice-president Dick Cheney would have quit, too, citing "ill health".

The new star of the administration would be the man who always wanted to give diplomacy more time, the Secretary of State Colin Powell.

He would not be planning to quit next year, as he is now, but lining up to serve as vice-president in the next Bush team. Powell and Bush would be hailed as statesmen everywhere but on the American right. French shopkeepers would hang posters of Bush in the window: bravo to the man who stopped war.

In Britain, impersonators would no longer cast the American president as a simpleton with a monkey walk: he would be hailed as a man of reason and restraint, the greatest US leader since John F Kennedy.

Public opinion in the US would be right behind him, with the polls steady rather than sliding, as they are now.

AMERICANS would have been cheered to see the resources now in Iraq directed instead against al-Qaeda.

With Baghdad safely contained, the US would have concentrated all its might on the hunt for Osama bin-Laden. International allies, anxious to reward Washington for its moderation on Iraq, would have given unprecedented levels of co-operation, leading to success after success in the real war on terror - the campaign to find and capture the killers of al-Qaeda.

Who knows, Bin-Laden himself might be behind bars by now.

If he were, Bush's re-election in 2004 would be safe - with none of those daily headlines about US casualties in Iraq to threaten it. And here in Britain, Tony Blair would look a different man. His determination to stay close to Bush would have paid off: he could claim credit for holding back the US president and averting war. In Europe, he would be a lion among leaders, at the heart of the European Union at last.

By now, he would be launching the Yes campaign for a referendum on the euro.

"Trust me," he could say, and no one would laugh in his face.

AFTER all, he had not gone to war on false pretences. Instead, he had stuck to his word. He had always said that he would be reluctant to go to war without UN backing and - since that backing never came - he had kept the troops at home.

He would style himself as a leader strong enough to influence the world's sole superpower, but humble enough to listen to his people.

They had opposed a war on Iraq, and their voices had been heard.

The Conservatives would be itching to brand him weak - "He threatened force and chickened out" - but they would not find it easy.

After all, if Blair had been weak, then so had Bush - and no Tory wants to badmouth a Republican president.

Iain Duncan Smith wouldn't know what to say.

Blair would be cruising towards a third election victory and all IDS could do is watch.

Alastair Campbell would have gone six months ago.

With no Iraq crisis to manage, he could have quit at a time of his choosing.

By now his diaries would be in the shops, just in time to be a big hit at the Labour party conference later this month.

There, Blair would be feted by activists who had learned to fall in love with their leader all over again.

Lord Hutton would be in his study, poring over law books, weighing up grave, but obscure cases - and almost nobody would have heard of him.

DAVID Kelly would have been announced as a senior member of Hans Blix's on-going inspection team in Iraq, applying his phenomenal expertise to the task of keeping Saddam's hands out of the WMD jar.

After that stint, he would have confidently looked forward to his reward. Most people would not know his name, but those who did would know it as Sir David Kelly.

And somewhere in West Yorkshire, 32-year-old Samantha Roberts would be preparing for a weekend at home with her husband, Steven.

The sergeant from the Royal Tank Regiment would not have been killed at Al Zubayr while trying to calm a civilian riot on the fifth day of the conflict in March.

Tomorrow he would be tinkering with the car or maybe watching a game of rugby.

With autumn underway, maybe he and Samantha would be making plans for Christmas.

But that's not how things turned out, is it?

- Jonathan Freedland is a columnist for The Guardian

? owned by or licensed to Trinity Mirror Digital Media Limited 2001.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnew...13372057_method
=full_siteid=50143_headline=-WHAT%2DIF%2DWE%2DD%2DNEVER%
2DGONE%2DTO%2DWAR%2DWITH%2DIRAQ%2D-name_page.html






And it's all sour grapes ain't it Shakta, your side -- the 'tards -- has made a right pigs ear of it. So get down and lick the world's boots to get the help you need. Read and cry. :smile:


Quote:


Would You Like Some Freedom
Fries With Your Crow,
Mr. President?
By Gary Kamiya
Salon.com
9-6-3

Six months after spitting in the face of the world, the Bush administration is crawling on its belly before the U.N. If the world doesn't rush to help it, the White House has only itself to blame.

Let me make sure I've got this right. After being insulted, belittled and called irrelevant by the swaggering machos in the Bush administration, the United Nations is now supposed to step forward to supply cannon fodder for America's disastrous Iraq occupation -- while the U.S. continues to run the show?

In other words, the rest of the world is to send its troops to get killed so that a U.S. president it fears and despises can take the credit for an invasion it bitterly opposed.

The rest of the world may be crazy, but it ain't stupid.

The Bush administration's humiliating announcement that it wants the U.N. to bail it out officially confers the title of "debacle" upon the grand Cheney-Rove-Wolfowitz adventure. Not even the world-class chutzpah of this administration can conceal the fact that by turning to the despised world body, it is eating a heaping plate of crow. This spectacle may give Bush-bashers from London to Jakarta a happy jolt of schadenfreude, but it does nothing to help Americans who are stuck with the ugly fallout of the Bush team's ill-conceived, absurdly overoptimistic attempt to redraw the Middle East.

The bitter truth is that everything the administration told us about Iraq has turned out to be false.

The biggest falsehood, of course, concerns the reason we went to war in the first place. President Bush's recent hints that we invaded Iraq to get rid of the evil tyrant Saddam are patently false: The administration's entire prewar argument, until it began to grasp desperately for other explanations on the eve of the invasion, was that Iraq represented an imminent threat to our security. That was, of course, a lie. Iraq never had any connection to al-Qaida (not even the ever-serviceable Tony Blair tried to claim that) and if it had weapons of mass destruction -- which in any case there is no reason to believe it would have used against the U.S. -- none have been found. (In this light, Bush's somewhat peculiar attack on "revisionist historians" appears to have been a Freudian slip.)

However, the Bush administration has succeeded in making its fears come true: Iraq now does harbor enemies who represent an imminent threat to the lives of the 140,000 American servicemen who are hunkered down there. By removing Saddam's dictatorial regime, the U.S. turned a nation that borders Saudi Arabia, Iran, Jordan and Syria into a lawless, anarchic swamp, open to every jihadi and America-hater who wants to blow up the Yankee infidels who invaded a sovereign Arab state. A G.I. dies almost every day, and 10 more are wounded, and there is no end in sight, and the reasons why are beginning to seem even murkier than the reasons we were in Vietnam.

The Bush administration is probably hoping that the American people won't notice that the invasion created the very problem it was supposed to solve. After all, half of all Americans believe that Iraq was behind 9/11 -- the result of months of the administration's repetitive, hypnotic demonizing of Saddam and total silence about the embarrassingly uncaught Osama bin Laden. Why not go for an even bigger lie and claim that the Iraq nightmare shows that the invasion was needed because now we see just how evil those terrorist ragheads really are?

Perpetual war for perpetual reelection: According to this master strategy, even a losing "war on terror" is a winning hand for Bush, because it makes the world a scarier place and when people are scared they vote for the tough guys. Even if the tough guys don't know what they're doing.

The administration, which in its supreme arrogance regarded postwar planning as beneath it (that's for sissy nation-builders), never acknowledged or even considered that the war and occupation could be messy, long and ruinously expensive -- and it silenced those who tried to warn that it was living in a fool's paradise. When straight-shooting Gen. Eric Shinseki, the Army chief of staff, warned that "several hundred thousand soldiers" would be needed to pacify Iraq, the insufferably smug Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld squashed the now-departed officer like a bug: "Any idea that it's several hundred thousand over any sustained period is simply not the case."

Sober contingency analysis could not be allowed to derail the administration's carefully timed new product rollout. The misgivings and warnings of professionals could not be allowed to spoil the grand visions of inspired amateurs embarked on a grand crusade.

Bush said the U.N. must sanction his war on Iraq or "become irrelevant." It did not. Yet today he is crawling on his belly to the supposedly irrelevant U.N., begging it to bail him out of the quagmire he created.

The administration said that America was so omnipotent that it could afford to spit in the face of the rest of the world. Indeed, for the ideologues who run the Bush show, flouting our solo might almost seemed to be a sign of God's special favor. Now, having burned our bridges to all of our allies except Britain, the America ?ber alles crowd is reduced to sputtering in rage as the rest of the world -- surprise! -- declines to rush forward with open checkbooks.

Had the U.S. worked with the U.N. to deal with Iraq, as Bush's considerably more world-wise father did in 1991, we would not be facing this problem. The community of nations would have regarded Iraq as its shared responsibility and stepped forward. But by alienating the world -- and squandering the unparalleled goodwill created by 9/11 -- the Bush administration created a powerful disincentive to even those nations that understand the vital necessity of rebuilding Iraq. The unpleasant truth is that for much of the world, helping this shattered nation, even if understood to be a worthy and necessary goal, now equals lending aid and comfort to an American regime that is perceived as blustering, simplistic, addicted to violence, self-righteous, and dangerously out of control.

In a nobler world, France and Turkey and Germany and Russia would forget all those nasty things that Bush officials (and their mouthpieces in the Murdoch media empire) said about them and send tens of thousands of troops to bail us out. But the real world does not work that way. The "axis of weasels" is now enjoying every minute of it while the Bush regime squirms.

By insisting that any U.N. forces be placed under U.S. control, the Bush administration is trying to save what little face it has left, but also making it that much harder to enlist the help of other nations. Moreover, no one at the United Nations is likely to have forgotten that the bombing that blew up the U.N. headquarters in Baghdad could never have been carried out except in the power vacuum that followed the ouster of Saddam. Had the Bush administration not poured contempt upon the U.N., that fact might not have led to acrimony and finger-pointing -- after all, it is unreasonable to blame the U.S. for that vile deed. But the Bush team is reaping what it has sowed.

To be sure, some kind of deal may yet be worked out. But if the terms of that deal are more niggardly than the Bush administration would like, if much of the world stands on the sidelines and watches the bully twist in Iraq's deadly breeze, it will have only itself to blame.

- Gary Kamiya is Salon's executive editor.

http://www.informationclearinghouse...article4625.htm









--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: unlikelyhero]
    #1928587 - 09/18/03 11:50 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Can you believe these bastards lie through their teeth and kill thousands of innocent people with absolutely zero comeback?

Surely shak should be calling for "public execution" for Bush or Cheney after this.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928589 - 09/18/03 11:53 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Well done you win the award for the longest inane post


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928590 - 09/18/03 11:53 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Actually I would like to see you call me filth to my face you smug limey bastard.

Edit: I just read your post again, and I will buy you the ticket fucker. I have refrained from flaming since the new rules went into effect, but I can't stand it no more. Come over to this side of the pond and bring it on you stupid bastard. You never admit when you are wrong and continually lie and exagerate to support your points. You post the most biased articles that can be found, and take them as gospel. If someone posts something you disagree with you clame it is nonsense and don't supply any facts to back it up, or you put this cute little guy as a response :rolleyes: instead of backing it up. You are the worst member in this forum, and I hope you choke on your tea and biscuits fucker.

Edit2: Fuck the both of you hows that. I am done here. The disengenuous ramblings of you pinko bastards has driven me insane.


Edited by shakta (09/18/03 12:12 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928611 - 09/18/03 12:05 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

The title of this thread is misleading and its another guardian article lol....

Here it is in the Independent stoned. Out of interest, which newspaper would you like to see it in?

Blix: Saddam destroyed his weapons of mass destruction a decade ago
By David Usborne in New York and Nigel Morris in London
18 September 2003


The Government's case for war against Saddam Hussein was undermined further yesterday when the former United Nations chief weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said that Iraq had probably destroyed its most deadly weapons of mass destruction more than a decade ago.

Mr Blix, who retired in June, told the Australian state broadcaster ABC: "I'm certainly more and more to the conclusion that Iraq has, as they maintained, destroyed all, almost, of what they had in the summer of 1991."

The suggestion comes at a bad time for the Government, as the Hutton inquiry into the apparent suicide of the weapons expert David Kelly nears its conclusion.

Mr Blix, speaking from his home in Sweden, said that he thought it unlikely that non-UN experts deployed by the coalition forces to search for weapons of mass destruction would find anything beyond "some documents of interest". He added: "The more time that has passed, the more I think it's unlikely that anything will be found."

His comments were made as Tony Blair defended his decision to join US-led military action in Iraq and denied ignoring intelligence warnings that the war would increase the risk of terrorism in Britain.

Washington has sent about 1,400 scientists and military experts, the Iraq Survey Group, to searchfor the weapons. But so far nothing appears to have been found and there is mounting speculation that the delivery of a final report to George Bush on what has - or has not - been discovered may be postponed indefinitely.

"I mean, you can put up a sign on your door, 'Beware of the Dog', without having a dog." He also indicated that he thought that the US-led coalition started to backtrack on the issue when it became apparent that nothing was being uncovered in Iraq. He said: "In the beginning they talked about weapons concretely, and later on they talked about weapons programmes. Maybe they'll find some documents of interest." Another weapons expert and former UN inspector, David Albright, said last night that the Iraq Survey Group had apparently failed to find anything significant. They are "not finding the kinds of things the administration expected to find, large quantities of biological and chemical weapons or evidence that they were destroyed prior to the war", he said. Demetrius Perricos, acting head of the UN inspections body Unmovic, said he was unsure that weapons would be found in Iraq. "It's becoming more and more difficult to believe stocks [of WMD] were there," Mr Perricos said. He added that it was unlikely that Saddam could have quickly destroyed the weapons before the war.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=444483


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928613 - 09/18/03 12:05 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I'd love to take you up on that shakta, I've never backed down in straight fight in my life.

But I'm in Australia and you're in the US. So unless you wish to come over -- seeing you want to blue me -- then by all means, I'm open to meeting you here in Oz. :smile:

So is that the best you have shakta? I crushed you intellectually. I smashed to obliteration all your weak paradigms. And I would do that to you physically, if you were here. No love lost.

Alios
Starter.


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928617 - 09/18/03 12:08 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Starter said:
I'd love to take you up on that shakta, I've never backed down in straight fight in my life.

But I'm in Australia and you're in the US. So unless you wish to come over -- seeing you want to blue me -- then by all means, I'm open to meeting you here in Oz. :smile:

So is that the best you have shakta? I crushed you intellectually. I smashed to obliteration all your weak paradigms. And I would do that to you physically, if you were here. No love lost.

Alios
Starter. 




Fuck off, I wasn't even responding to you. Learn to read since you all are so literate. You crushed me intellectually? That is a fucking laugh. Your post was full of inane ramblings, and complete bullshit.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928619 - 09/18/03 12:08 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Actually I would like to see you call me filth to my face you smug limey bastard

Edit: I just read your post again, and I will buy you the ticket fucker. I have refrained from flaming since the new rules went into effect, but I can't stand it no more. Come over to this side of the pond and bring it on you stupid bastard. You never admit when you are wrong and continually lie and exagerate to support your points. You post the most biased articles that can be found, and take them as gospel. If someone posts something you disagree with you clame it is nonsense and don't supply any facts to back it up, or you put this cute little guy as a response instead of backing it up. You are the worst member in this forum, and I hope you choke on your tea and biscuits fucker. .


Where did all this hostility come from? Where on earth did i call you "filth"?

Get a grip shak.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928620 - 09/18/03 12:08 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

The title of this thread is misleading and its another guardian article lol




Sorry I just get a little giddy at times  :shocked:


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928629 - 09/18/03 12:13 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I thought shakta was directing that at me? If he feels that way towards me, he's welcome to come to Oz.


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928633 - 09/18/03 12:15 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I've no idea who he was directing it to. Neither of us have called him "filth". He seems to have completly snapped.

EDIT:

Ah, all is revealed:

Quote:

Shakta: Fuck the both of you hows that. I am done here. The disengenuous ramblings of you pinko bastards has driven me insane.





--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928637 - 09/18/03 12:17 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I gave links shakta to back up what I said. You on the other hand pulled generalizations out of your arse, I then dealt them a mortal blow.

On track, this whole thread screams the big screw up Bush, his crew and their war...and here you are defending the indefensible.


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928644 - 09/18/03 12:19 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Who knows what shaktas' story is, he'll die with his secret. :laugh: 


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928652 - 09/18/03 12:26 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I accidentally directed it at Alex instead of you and yes you called me filth, and said my country was full of 'tards. So again, go fuck yourelf. You started the namecalling, and I will finish it. I am tired of trying to debate things with the likes of you two.

For the record I was being a smart ass with the whole inmate thing. You do illustrate a good point though. Anytime someone challenges your delusions both of you either ignore it, or change the subject. Blix said he thought that they had probably destroyed their weapons in '91, and people like you take it as if God himself said it. Again I am sick of it and I will not be posting in this forum again. I have always admitted when I was wrong in the past. One more thing, why does your lunacy give you some superior right to post your opinion on this board?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928657 - 09/18/03 12:29 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

They're libbies dont let their misguidedness get to you....

They simply post sources and then jump around proclaiming their correctness, we however at least analyse what has been written and give the other side of the story ....


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928676 - 09/18/03 12:41 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

What a wanker. Shakta says it wasn't directed at me, then changes his mind in the next post along that it is, if not the other post before where he edited, but Alex caught him on it LMAO.

With that sort of convenient post shifting what other BS spins does he emply in his game plan? Food for thought.

You're a sore loser and a little boy shakta. Go mash your pimples, you're not up to this.

Edited: For the record, no I said neo-cons are 'tards and you specifically "filth", so don't go doing what your masters so conveniently do, wrap themselves in a national flag to shepherd an agenda to whip up the lemmings...you sad sap.


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928796 - 09/18/03 01:41 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Stop flaming, if you cant debate normally then go back to nursery


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1928826 - 09/18/03 01:55 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Look who started the flaming for pitys sake, don't get on starters case after shak's just twisted his panties all to hell.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928865 - 09/18/03 02:08 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Alex123 said:
Look who started the flaming for pitys sake, don't get on starters case after shak's just twisted his panties all to hell.




Your damn right I got pissed. I originally thought you posted it. Your bullshit crawling on the belly crap pisses me off too. He started the flaming by calling me filth and a ringworm. He also insulted my country, and then claimed he intellectually beat me, when in fact the first post I responded to sounded like a drunk bum wrote it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928877 - 09/18/03 02:17 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

shakta said:

Again I am sick of it and I will not be posting in this forum again.




Can't you make good on what you say? umm. :laugh:


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928880 - 09/18/03 02:18 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Your damn right I got pissed. I originally thought you posted it. Your bullshit crawling on the belly crap pisses me off too. He started the flaming by calling me filth and a ringworm. He also insulted my country, and then claimed he intellectually beat me, when in fact the first post I responded to sounded like a drunk bum wrote it.

Easy shak, easy. We're complete strangers on a shroom board. There's no need to get your blood pressure up over this. As the buddhists teach, the person you think has done you the most wrong can often be your greatest teacher.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1928881 - 09/18/03 02:18 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

It is already proving difficult not to respond. I won't be the first on this forum to get pissed and then get over it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928886 - 09/18/03 02:21 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I am sure some of you will say I am stupid for this, but I apologize for the flames. Starter and Alex just really pissed me off. If I need to be banned or whatever that is fine.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928887 - 09/18/03 02:21 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

It is already proving difficult not to respond

What, to a pair of "pinko bastards?"?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928896 - 09/18/03 02:25 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Shakta, this is just the net, not a contact sport. So go have a chill pill or whatever your GP prescribes and I'll catch up flip side after some kip. Nite.

Take care Alex. :smile:


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1928910 - 09/18/03 02:28 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Remember we love you shak.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1928922 - 09/18/03 02:33 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Alex123 said:
It is already proving difficult not to respond

What, to a pair of "pinko bastards?"?




I will try to just think that in the future instead of saying it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1929250 - 09/18/03 03:58 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Starter, your name is appropriate. You instigated the name-calling. Shakta, you and I have had words on this before.

This is an official warning to both of you. Next time it happens, I will recommend to the Admins that the offender be banned.

I suggest both of you re-read the sticky post at the top of the first page of this forum.

pinky



--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineunlikelyhero
Ramblin' Man

Registered: 12/31/02
Posts: 106
Loc: Lancaster (Uni), Darlingt...
Last seen: 16 years, 11 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Phred]
    #1931734 - 09/19/03 09:11 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Boys, boys... calm down. No more flaming. Let's not turn this into a name-calling fest when it's way more fun to ask someone to try and deny what was said by Hans Blix and what has been discovered of late. Let's clarify:
There never were WMDs.
Iraq was never a threat.
The whole war was based on a lie.

Can someone argue against that with reputable sources?

UH


--------------------
They lie about marijuana. Tell you pot-smoking makes you unmotivated. Lie! When you're high, you can do everything you normally do, just as well. You just realize that it's not worth the fucking effort. There is a difference - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: unlikelyhero]
    #1931757 - 09/19/03 09:28 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

If it was a reputable argument to begin with maybe. Blix said that they probably destroyed them all in '91. He doesn't know anymore than the rest of us do in truth. As far as the whole war being based on a lie, that remains to be seen as well. Even if there are no weapons left we don't know if our intelligence was falsified, or if anyone knowingly lied. Blix also said that Saddam has kept up appearances of having these weapons. So, if he made the rest of the world think he had them still, even if he didn't, he made himself look like a threat to the outside world. Saddam did have a highly sophisticated security infrastructure, and I don't think it is unreasonable to assume that he was able to make everyone think he had them still even if he didn't.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineDava
journeyman
Registered: 03/03/03
Posts: 80
Loc: Belgium
Last seen: 8 years, 3 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1931786 - 09/19/03 09:58 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I d love to work for the intelligence services.
Highly paid and the only thing you ve got to do is believeing Saddam and other scum.


--------------------
"These psychedelic substances cause hysterical psychoses in people who have not taken them..."
- Timothy Leary


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1931811 - 09/19/03 10:13 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Here are some facts:
There are currently 44 million citizens of the United States of America that are illiterate.
Four cents from every pay cheque earned in the US goes to fund Israeli occupation of the Palestinean territories.
This is going directly to a country that only 37% of US citizens polled, could actually identify on a map.
Of the pardons provided by the Oval Office since George W frauded his way in, 95% were to corporate directors who represent the top 5% of the population of the united states, yet 75% of the wealth.
The top three richest people in the US have assets that could feed every starving child in the world (those below the poverty line) four times, and represent more wealth in value than the assets of every nation in Asia, Africa and South America combined.
The US is only one of a few nations - the only developed one - that refused to ratify the UN convention on the rights of the Child. This would undermine to state policy of sending children (some as yhoung as 15 when the crime was committed) to death.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Dava]
    #1931817 - 09/19/03 10:16 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

Dava said:
I d love to work for the intelligence services.
Highly paid and the only thing you ve got to do is believeing Saddam and other scum.





That doesn't make any sense. What are you trying to say?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleZen Peddler
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/18/01
Posts: 6,379
Loc: orbit
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1931820 - 09/19/03 10:16 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

There was a recent study published in various journals of psychology that demonstrated a link between right-wing or conservative political philosophy and various personality flaws - principly the narcisistic and psychopathic personalities.
They often exhibit compulsive and anal behaviours, do not have the developed emotional responses required for empathy, and have paranoid tendencies.
Its fact.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #1931823 - 09/19/03 10:18 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Thats if you believe pyschology to be an accurate basis for comparison of personality types...


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #1931824 - 09/19/03 10:18 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

bluemeanie said:
There was a recent study published in various journals of psychology that demonstrated a link between right-wing or conservative political philosophy and various personality flaws - principly the narcisistic and psychopathic personalities.
They often exhibit compulsive and anal behaviours, do not have the developed emotional responses required for empathy, and have paranoid tendencies.
Its fact.




Oh yeah, the one that was done by the liberals at Berkeley? That is a credible source.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleAutonomous
MysteriousStranger

Registered: 05/10/02
Posts: 901
Loc: U.S.S.A.
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #1931916 - 09/19/03 11:14 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quite a few assertions, no sources. Care to present them?


--------------------
"In religion and politics people's beliefs and convictions are in almost every case gotten at second-hand, and without examination."
-- Mark Twain


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #1932047 - 09/19/03 12:22 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

There was a recent study published in various journals of psychology that demonstrated a link between right-wing or conservative political philosophy and various personality flaws - principly the narcisistic and psychopathic personalities.They often exhibit compulsive and anal behaviours, do not have the developed emotional responses required for empathy, and have paranoid tendencies.


Certainly very accurate in regards to the right-wingers on this board. Maybe auto and randallflag are the exceptions that prove the rule.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Xlea321]
    #1932055 - 09/19/03 12:25 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

LOL, a nice generalisation there :wink:


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Zen Peddler]
    #1932218 - 09/19/03 02:00 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Are you saying it's a fact that the study was published, or fact that 'right-wingers' have these personality types (or are you saying both)?


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineBhairabas
Stranger

Registered: 07/21/03
Posts: 889
Loc: Toronto Canada
Last seen: 14 years, 8 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Edame]
    #1932281 - 09/19/03 02:19 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Maybe not all of them but there's hell of alot on this board which fit that to a tee..


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisiblePsiloKitten
Ganja Goddess

Registered: 02/13/99
Posts: 1,617
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Bhairabas]
    #1932304 - 09/19/03 02:24 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Heh.

There didnt need to be a study done. I dunno why links are being called for. People, look around you.


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Bhairabas]
    #1932327 - 09/19/03 02:29 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Maybe, but my bullshit-o-meter is still flying off the scale (and I posted that study here).


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Edited by Edame (09/19/03 02:30 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Edame]
    #1943732 - 09/23/03 10:44 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Well, glad to be vindicated by a neo-con inaugurated thread (irony is delightful) :laugh:

America's Shameful Schools
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat...;o=&fpart=1

...in contest to...

Quote:

shakta said:
Well we can read quite well, especially since we are not all decendents of a bunch of exiled inmates.





...LMAO. The thread ^above points out the US ranks 14th in high school levels to the world. That's piss poor. Just what I have said earlier in this very thread :rolleyes: and got flamed for pointing it out LOL :laugh:

Quote:

shakta said:
Rudy was a very popular Mayor before 9/11 ever happened. You don't know what you are talking about.





Haha, no he wasn't!! If Sep 11th never happened, he'd have been a second rate. He found fame, like Bush, on Sep 11th. (as a side note, let's not forget Bush only scraped in and even that's questionable).

Quote:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/wtccrash/story/0,1300,595523,00.html
Before September 11 Rudolph Giuliani was yesterday's man. Now he's a national hero.





Quote:


http://www.abc.net.au/am/s448780.htm
In the wake of September 11, Rudolph Giuliani has been born again as America's hero. Most people forgetting or ignoring that he's been a mixed success as Mayor. He slashed crime and homelessness but made enemies among minority groups and anti-development lobbyists. He hit the headlines for scandal in his personal life, including the collapse of his marriage and his battle with prostate cancer but there aren't many city mayors who are international celebrities and Rudy Giuliani's leadership after September 11 has assured him a note in the history books of America and the hearts of its citizens.






Quote:


http://www.cnn.com/CNN/Programs/people/shows/giuliani/profile.html
Rising from the ashes
Giuliani was limping toward the end of his second term as mayor of New York when an airliner crashed into Manhattan's World Trade Center the morning of September 11.





Finally pinky, when 7 out of 10 people believe a lie...

7 out of 10 Americans still see Hussein - 9/11 link
http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat...rt=all&vc=1

...I believe they're 'tards. In fact, they're neo-con drones. They bought the lie like good patriots. :rolleyes: If that's not PeeCee for you, then tough. I don't suffer thin skinned people who obfuscate the truth to an agenda, not that I'm impugning. :smile:

But hey I have to chuckle as the spin from the neo-con camp in how to deal with this is positively priceless. They just won't come out and say "ok folks, we screwed up and kicked off a war all based on a lie". :biglaugh:

Quote:

unlikelyhero said:
Boys, boys... calm down.  No more flaming.  Let's not turn this into a name-calling fest when it's way more fun to ask someone to try and deny what was said by Hans Blix and what has been discovered of late.  Let's clarify:
There never were WMDs.
Iraq was never a threat.
The whole war was based on a lie.

Can someone argue against that with reputable sources?

UH 




unlikelyhero, I agree and yes, I'd like to see them argue (against your post) :wink: 


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1943741 - 09/23/03 10:48 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

unlikelyhero, I agree and yes, I'd like to see them argue (your post)




Alrighty then. Show me proof Bush knwingly lied to us. You are the one who claims this, so the burden of proof is on you.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1943751 - 09/23/03 10:54 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Read unlikelyhero's post ^above *again*. That's the gist of the thread. (Seeking to throw the thread off into orbit has been a tidy game you enjoy shakta).

btw, I changed in my ^above post, the "(your post)" to "(against your post)" for clarity. No biggie.


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGernBlanston
unintended sideeffect
Male

Registered: 05/28/03
Posts: 842
Loc: OR
Last seen: 6 months, 23 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1943756 - 09/23/03 10:57 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Again, I call bullshit.

It was not a single person on this board who claimed that Iraq DID have WMD, or that they were an imminent threat to the US. It was our "president" who claimed these things, and used these claims to INVADE a soverign nation.

I believe the onus is thus on the Bush administration to fess up to the FACT that they lied.

I quit.


--------------------
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
  --  Howard Zinn


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1943757 - 09/23/03 10:57 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Not at all. Who lied, and were is the proof. The problem with this thread to begin with is the fact Blix said they probably got rid of their WMDs after '91, and that Saddam kept up the appearance of having them to prevent an attack.

Having said that, how is Bush at fault? If Saddam gave the appearance of having them, why should anyone have believed he didn't. You have no proof he lied.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Starter]
    #1943761 - 09/23/03 11:00 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

As for proving Bush knowingly lied to the world to start the war, well we'll either have to wait a long time before the secret papers are out (ha if we get that lucky) or we never will, because they'll be long since memory holed...sort of like finding papers of the "Final Solution".


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 5 years, 9 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GernBlanston]
    #1943773 - 09/23/03 11:08 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

GernBlanston writes:

It was not a single person on this board who claimed that Iraq DID have WMD, or that they were an imminent threat to the US. It was our "president" who claimed these things, and used these claims to INVADE a soverign nation.

Not only did George W. Bush claim Hussein had not destroyed his existing bio and chem weapons stocks, it was the belief of every single intelligence agency in the world, as well as the UN Security Council.

And, as has been pointed out here before, George W. Bush did not claim Iraq was an imminent threat.

Those two points aside, there were other arguments to be made against deposing Hussein through the use of military force. We have all seen them presented here many times. It appears agreement will never be reached on whether or not those arguments were compelling ones.

pinky


--------------------


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGernBlanston
unintended sideeffect
Male

Registered: 05/28/03
Posts: 842
Loc: OR
Last seen: 6 months, 23 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Phred]
    #1943783 - 09/23/03 11:15 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

That would, indeed, seem to be the case.


--------------------
There is no flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people.
  --  Howard Zinn


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleStarter
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 1,148
Loc: Australia
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GernBlanston]
    #1943805 - 09/23/03 11:29 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Today's Sydney Morning Herald (AM edition) front page story.

Quote:


http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/23/1064082997799.html
Poll: majority of Australians 'feel misled' by Howard
Almost 70 per cent of Australians believe John Howard misled them on his case for war in Iraq, a new poll shows.





Most perculiar how one tribe of 70% drones buy the spin and over my way, more informed and without the Prez hype, are exactly the opposite. Give it time, it will sink in over there, err if that high school education level wasn't a drama. :rolleyes: 


--------------------
Convert Metric and Imperial.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Phred]
    #1943815 - 09/23/03 11:32 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

it was the belief of every single intelligence agency in the world, as well as the UN Security Council.





This would be the same intelligence agencies whose information led to Colin Powell and Condoleeza rice claiming, in 2001, that Iraq was effectively disarmed and that Saddam posed no threat? Oh how the story changed...

So did the intelligence agencies really believe what Bush and Co told the world? Well it has become apparent in the UK at least that only "useful" intelligence was released/changed while that which didnt strengthen the cause for war was basically disregarded.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1943818 - 09/23/03 11:34 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Would you care to detail these ommissions?


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1943829 - 09/23/03 11:42 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

How about the Rice and Powell claims?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1943838 - 09/23/03 11:46 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Well here is a link from 2001 in which Powell mentions Iraq is pretty much contained.
link


The incident Im talking about however was shown in the John Pilger documentary on ITV last night. It was footage of Powell in a press conference where he made the statements regarding containment and lack of threat.
Contrast this with what Tony Blair told Parliament a year ago: "Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction programme is active, detailed and growing.

"The policy of containment is not working. The weapons of mass destruction programme is not shut down. It is up and running now."

WTF is going on??? These people are not fit to lead us or kill in our name.



--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1943839 - 09/23/03 11:46 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Well here is a link from 2001 in which Powell mentions Iraq is pretty much contained.
link


The incident Im talking about however was shown in the John Pilger documentary on ITV last night. It was footage of Powell in a press conference where he made the statements regarding containment and lack of threat.
Contrast this with what Tony Blair told Parliament a year ago: "Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction programme is active, detailed and growing.

"The policy of containment is not working. The weapons of mass destruction programme is not shut down. It is up and running now."

WTF is going on??? These people are not fit to lead us or kill in our name.



--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1943847 - 09/23/03 11:50 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I see your point. Iraq was thought to be contained. After the events of 9-11 the threats were reassessed obviously.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinest0nedphucker
Rogue State
Male
Registered: 04/17/03
Posts: 1,047
Loc: Wales (yes it is a countr...
Last seen: 12 years, 3 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1943856 - 09/23/03 11:53 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Unfortunately I missed the Pilger "documentary" im sure it would have been very entertaining....

As for what Blair stated he did so based on intelligence reports, the reliability of the intelligence services does not reflect the integrity of the PM


--------------------
The punishment which the wise suffer, who refuse to take part in government, is to live under the government of worse men.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1943860 - 09/23/03 11:56 AM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Exactly. I think that the real questions should be directed to the intelligence agencies themselves. Forget about little details that were added or removed. How the hell did none of us know he didn't really have these things if he didn't? Did his maintaining of the appearance fool them all? Saddam was a smart guy. He did have a very intricate security infrastructure.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1943912 - 09/23/03 12:22 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

How the hell did none of us know he didn't really have these things if he didn't?

Because saying he had them served Bush's purpose. There were plenty of independent experts like Scott Ritter saying Iraq had no WMD.

Incidentally, this is why no-one but Bush has ever waged a war of aggression based solely on so-called "intelligence". Because everyone knows there's a high probability it will be complete bollocks.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1943917 - 09/23/03 12:25 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

The incident Im talking about however was shown in the John Pilger documentary on ITV last night

I taped it Gazz, I'll watch it tonight!  :smile:


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: st0nedphucker]
    #1944546 - 09/23/03 03:37 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Blair as ever is just part of the sideshow. How did the US intelligence agencies manage to change their evaluation of Iraq in just over 12 months?

As for Pilger being "entertaining" he was indeed. You should have seen him interviewing Feith, Bolton and Kristol. He made them look like fools. The interview with Feith was terminated by a Colnel off camera when Pilger touched the sensitive subject of civilian casualties.

Just because you think Pilger is a libbie do you instantly dismiss him? He wasnt lying about Powell's statement on Iraq in 2001. The evidence was recorded for prosperity. The words came from Powell himself.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944552 - 09/23/03 03:40 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I already explained the reason for the change in attitude.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleXochitl
synchronicitycircuit
Registered: 07/15/03
Posts: 1,241
Loc: the brainforest
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944576 - 09/23/03 03:49 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Sept 11th was a ripe opportunity for Bush Inc. to launch the radical agenda set forth in the PNAC statement that was written a decade ago.



--------------------
As we know, there are known knowns. There are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns. That is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns, the ones we don't know we don't know.

-Donald Rumsfeld 2/2/02 Pentagon


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944591 - 09/23/03 03:53 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

shakta said:
I see your point. Iraq was thought to be contained. After the events of 9-11 the threats were reassessed obviously.




You keep implying some kind of a connection.


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Edame]
    #1944621 - 09/23/03 03:58 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

I implied no such connection. I am just saying the level of acceptable risk after 9-11 to our country became much lower.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944653 - 09/23/03 04:04 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

I see your point. Iraq was thought to be contained. After the events of 9-11 the threats were reassessed obviously.




Powell actually said: ""He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

Powell went further and said that Saddam Hussein had not been able to "build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction" for "the last 10 years". America, he said, had been successful in keeping him "in a box".

Two months later, Condoleezza Rice also described a weak, divided and militarily defenceless Iraq. "Saddam does not control the northern part of the country," she said. "We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt."

Link

Now bearing these statements in mind please explain to me how 9/11 had any bearing on the legitamacy of attacking Iraq. How did the evaluation of Iraq change so dramatically? According to the US govt, Iraq went from a weak country with no active weapons program to a country on the verge of building a nuclear bomb, who possesed chemical weapons and posed a serious threat to world security.
In light of what we now know it seems the sober assesments of Powell and Rice made in 2001 are alot closer to the truth than the near hysterical hype we were presented with by the US and UK governments prior to this war. Your arguement that the threat was reassesed after 9/11 doesnt make much sense. The main thrust of the case for war was always the WMDs. Dont forget your own President has admitted they have never found any links between Iraq and Al-qaeda. So for 9/11 to have had any efect on the threat assesment of Iraq your government would have been going to war on a hunch. Its funny how you still bring this mythical link up. They sure got that idea into alot of peoples heads without actually saying it themselves. A piece of first rate propaganda.
The only link between 9/11 and Iraq is that 9/11 gave the US govt an opportunity to take control of Iraq.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944679 - 09/23/03 04:10 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Gad Damnit. You need to read slowly I guess, since you just don't get it. OUR ACCEPTABLE RISK TOLERANCE WENT DOWN AFTER 9-11. This does not mean Saddam had anything to do with it. It just means that we became less comfortable with him being in power. The same thing happened with the Saudis. Before 9-11 we pressured them to leave a group of 'dissidents' alone because of human rights worries. Now it turns out these guys are more terrorist than dissident. Our outlook on the world changed after 9-11. That does not mean I am claiming there is a link.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944689 - 09/23/03 04:12 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

So you are basically caricaturing your country as an uninformed, paranoid bully of the world? Why didnt you just say so I would have agreed immediately!


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944703 - 09/23/03 04:15 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Why mention Iraq and 9/11 in the same comment if you're not implying some kind of connection? There's no proof that the two had anything to do with each other, so how would that relate to such an about-face from Powell?

"He (Saddam Hussein) has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours."

to

"We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more."


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944718 - 09/23/03 04:18 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

GazzBut said:
So you are basically caricaturing your country as an uninformed, paranoid bully of the world? Why didnt you just say so I would have agreed immediately!




LAME.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944733 - 09/23/03 04:23 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

At least im dealing in facts. Can you provide any sources for your claim that Iraq was attacked becasue the US government had lowered their risk assesment levels? I quoted memebers of your own government to prove my point. You are just quoting yourself.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944771 - 09/23/03 04:32 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

That's fine. I think it is fairly obvious that we were willing to deal with the situation in Afghanistan before 9-11. After 9-11 the threat their was not tolerable to us. It is pretty simple. I think someone should ask Powell and Rice why there is such a difference in the two statements for sure though.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944868 - 09/23/03 05:01 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Quote:

I think it is fairly obvious that we were willing to deal with the situation in Afghanistan before 9-11. After 9-11 the threat their was not tolerable to us.




Sorry I dont really follow that. Why are you bringing up Afghanistan?

Quote:

I think someone should ask Powell and Rice why there is such a difference in the two statements for sure though.





Individuals like Powell and Rice dont make statements like that off their own backs. They are simply the mouthpieces for the government. You are right though, this is a serious questiom that needs to be answered. Cant see it getting much airtime though. Ask the majority of people about this u-turn and they wouldnt even remember it has happened.


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlineshakta
Infidel
Registered: 06/03/03
Posts: 2,633
Last seen: 16 years, 5 months
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944876 - 09/23/03 05:03 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Do you really not understand why the US is less tolerant of terrorists, than it was before 9-11?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleEdame
gone

Registered: 01/14/03
Posts: 1,270
Loc: outta here
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: shakta]
    #1944898 - 09/23/03 05:11 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

What does that have to do with Iraq?


--------------------
The above is an extract from my fictional novel, "The random postings of Edame".
:tongue:

In the beginning was the word. And man could not handle the word, and the hearing of the word, and he asked God to take away his ears so that he might live in peace without having to hear words which might upset his equinamity or corrupt the unblemished purity of his conscience.

And God, hearing this desperate plea from His creation, wrinkled His mighty brow for a moment and then leaned down toward man, beckoning that he should come close so as to hear all that was about to be revealed to him.

"Fuck you," He whispered, and frowned upon the pathetic supplicant before retreating to His heavens.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineGazzBut
Refraction

Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 10 months, 26 days
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: Edame]
    #1944964 - 09/23/03 05:35 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

Thats what I want to know!  :confused: 


--------------------
Always Smi2le


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleinfidelGOD
illusion

Registered: 04/18/02
Posts: 3,040
Loc: there
Re: Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991 [Re: GazzBut]
    #1944993 - 09/23/03 05:43 PM (17 years, 1 month ago)

it's sickening. 9/11 has become the catch-all justification for whatever boneheaded military adventure our president wants.

I think this constant mentioning of 9/11 to justify our foreign policy verges on exploitation. I doubt the victims of that day would appreciate it.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6  [ show all ]

Shop: PhytoExtractum Buy Bali Kratom Powder, Maeng Da Thai Kratom Leaf Powder   Kraken Kratom Kratom Capsules for Sale, Red Vein Kratom   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract, Kratom Powder For Sale   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds, Feminized Cannabis Seeds   Amazon ½ Pint Jars, Scales

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Blix: "Iraq war was illegal" Xlea321 486 1 03/06/04 02:44 AM
by orion
* Blix - "No WMD since 1991" Xlea321 822 8 12/25/03 11:46 PM
by enimatpyrt
* Ex-CIA says sacked for not faking Iraq WMD reports
( 1 2 3 all )
LearyfanS 3,652 56 12/14/04 06:23 PM
by Imagican
* Think tank report: Iraq WMD not imminent threat
( 1 2 3 all )
LearyfanS 2,409 43 01/11/04 07:40 PM
by Mushmonkey
* Iraq WMD-OMETER
( 1 2 all )
Xlea321 4,242 26 05/17/04 10:55 PM
by Baby_Hitler
* Iraq WMD inspectors "watching films" Xlea321 474 3 06/16/03 02:51 PM
by Azmodeus
* Bush Wants $600 Million to Keep Hunting Iraq WMD Zahid 635 7 10/04/03 01:38 PM
by afoaf
* A year in the life of the WMD-ometer
( 1 2 all )
Xlea321 1,611 26 07/31/04 01:38 AM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
4,971 topic views. 5 members, 3 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
MushroomCube.com
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2020 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.178 seconds spending 0.013 seconds on 16 queries.