We're showing a special theme for the holiday! [ Keep it | Disable it ]
The Shroomery
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

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: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
Scott Ritter predicts the future
    #2143725 -

Scott Ritter said this on March 7 2000. Wonder how he could be so right and the "intelligence" services so wrong?

Think we're being lied to maybe?

What was Iraq hiding? Documentation primarily - documents that would enable them to reconstitute - at a future date - weapons of mass destruction capability....But all of this is useless...unless Iraq has access to the tens, if not hundreds, of millions of dollars required to rebuild the industrial infrastructure (necessary) to build these weapons. They didn't have it in 1998. They don't have it today. This paranoia about what Iraq is doing now that there aren't weapons inspectors reflects a lack of understanding of the reality in Iraq.

"Now after seven years of work by UNSCOM inspectors, there was no more (mass destruction) weapons program. It had been eliminated....When I say eliminated I'm talking about facilities destroyed....

"The weapons stock had been, by and large, accounted for - removed, destroyed or rendered harmless. Means of production had been eliminated, in terms of the factories that can produce this...."There were some areas that we didn't have full accounting for. And this is what plagued UNSCOM.

Security Council 687 is an absolute resolution. It requires that Iraq be disarmed 100 percent. It's what they call 'quantitative disarmament.' Iraq will not be found in compliance until it has been disarmed to a 100 percent level. That's the standard set forth by the Security Council and as implementors of the Security Council resolution, the weapons inspectors had no latitude to seek to do anything less than that - 80 percent was not acceptable; 90 percent was not acceptable; only 100 percent was acceptable.

"And this was the Achilles tendon, so to speak, of UNSCOM. Because by the time 1997 came around, Iraq had been qualitatively disarmed. On any meaningful benchmark - in terms of defining Iraq's weapons of mass destruction on capability; in terms of assessing whether or not Iraq posed a threat, not only to its immediate neighbors, but the region and the world as a whole - Iraq had been eliminated as such a threat....



http://www.converge.org.nz/pma/irscott.htm



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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2143831 -

I know this is slightly off on a tangent, but I had some friends over last week and we were watching an old Bill Hicks video from about 10 years ago. He got to his bit on the first gulf war and one of my friends said "Jesus, it's like nothing fucking changed in 10 years. He might as well be talking about this war." His comments on Bush, and the 'elite' Republican Guard etc... they were so spot-on it was just uncanny.


--------------------
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.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Edame]
    #2143982 -

Tens of millions of dollars to produce WMD's? Hardly. A bioreactor can be purchased for less than 20,000$ today, and that can be used to spawn tons of virulent weapons. Fermentation tanks are used to produce bacteria. I'd say that members of the shroomery, via agar work, would have enough intelligence to produce "WMD's", given a small amount of equipment and a bit of time. I wonder where that link came from, hatebush.com?


--------------------
The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: enimatpyrt]
    #2144546 -

Tens of millions of dollars to produce WMD's?

Minimum.

I'd say that members of the shroomery, via agar work, would have enough intelligence to produce "WMD's",

And as usual you'd be talking out of your fanny. An agar dish is not going to cause mass destruction.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2144597 -

Quote:
Tens of millions of dollars to produce WMD's?

Minimum.



Bullshit.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2144804 -

I'll bet most members of The Shroomery have more chemicals in their backyard sheds than what we found in Iraq.




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


Mp3 of the month: Wild Things- Another Colored Ink Drawing (A.C.I.D.)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Learyfan]
    #2144888 -

Since we may never know how much, if any chemicals are in Iraq, that's just a guess.

And a weak one at that.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2145725 -

You seem too dense to grasp this but it really does bear repeating. A chemical is not a WMD by itself. Running at New York with a beakerful of a chemical is not going to cause mass destruction. You need enormous heavy industry to build long range ballistic missiles.

Incidentally, as the american expert on chemical and biological weapons said in the article I posted several times - the only real WMD are nuclear weapons.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146034 -

I grasp it quite well. Far better than you it seems. Weapons can be delivered in other manners and you know it.


Quote:
Incidentally, as the american expert on chemical and biological weapons said in the article I posted several times - the only real WMD are nuclear weapons.


Well as the links I've posted from your much ballyhooed U.N. have shown, they disagree. Tell then they're wrong and they'll be laughing at you just as hard as many here do.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2146101 -

Weapons can be delivered in other manners and you know it.

Of course they can. You could run at me with a beakerful of anthrax if you like. That would still not qualify as a WMD.

Well as the links I've posted from your much ballyhooed U.N. have shown, they disagree

As a recent poster pointed out, it really is time you changed your name to luvdemlies.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146128 -

There's only one of us that lies Alpo. We both know it's you.

Here's a cut and paste for you from an earlier thread on this very subject.....



Treaties banning the production and stockpiling of other weapons of mass destruction will also be highlighted. Those include the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction (Biological Weapons Convention); and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction (Chemical Weapons Convention).



From the section titled "Committee Work Programme"



So not only are you a liar, but you're lame enough to try and call others liars who, sadly for you, have the ability to back up what they say.

Truly pathetic.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146154 -

And in the words of your idol, the alleged pedophile Scott Ritter....

"Let's talk about the weapons. In 1991, did Iraq have a viable weapons of mass destruction capability? You're darn right they did. They had a massive chemical weapons program. They had a giant biological weapons program. They had long-range ballistic missiles and they had a nuclear weapons program that was about six months away from having a viable weapon. "

From your link in this thread Alpo. Funny you didn't think to paste that here as well.

I wonder why?

:smirk:


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2146215 -

sadly for you, have the ability to back up what they say

Could you point out where that defines a weapon of mass destruction as nothing but a chemical luvdemlies? Are you so dense as to believe a chemical in a test-tube with no means of delivering it constitutes a WMD?

And in the words of your idol, the alleged pedophile Scott Ritter....

No idol of mine. I merely state the fact that he was right and your idol Bush was wrong.

Obviously you are unable to address this fact and have to fall back on personal attacks about Ritter. Nothing ever changes does it luv?  :smile2:

I wonder why?

Because it is now 2003 not 1991. We all know he had chemical weapons in the 80's - he was using them with the full support of Washington remember. 


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146227 -

Sure Alpo, I wouldn't have thought in to be necessary but I guess your even dumber than I thought.




Treaties banning the production and stockpiling of other weapons of mass destruction will also be highlighted. Those include the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological ( Biological ) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction ( Biological Weapons Convention ); and the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production, Stockpiling and Use of Chemical Weapons and on Their Destruction ( Chemical Weapons Convention ).




It can't be any plainer numbnuts, the UN, the group you value so highly, calls weapons besides nukes Weapons Of Mass Destruction.

Even your buddy Ritter calls them that.




"Let's talk about the weapons. In 1991, did Iraq have a viable weapons of mass destruction capability? You're darn right they did. They had a massive chemical weapons program. They had a giant biological weapons program. They had long-range ballistic missiles and they had a nuclear weapons program that was about six months away from having a viable weapon. "



So Alpo, for once be a man and admit you were wrong. It doesn't hurt.


Quote:
Are you denying Ritter was wrong in stating Iraqs WMD capabilities were no longer a threat? Your dishonesty is breathtaking.


I've never said they were Alpo. What I have said is the inability to find something is not proof it doesn't exist.

So before accusing someone of being dishonest, try being honest yourself. Sad that it's so difficult for you to do. I'd have nothing to say if you were merely wrong, everyone is occasionally.I can even forget stupidity from you, it's the lies that stand out. And as long as you keep lying, I'll keep pointing out what a worthless ass you are.

A person is only as good as he is truthful. Sadly, that leaves you in the shitter.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146231 -

Quote:
Nothing ever changes does it luv?


Sure it does Alpo, after all your post changed without it being marked as edited.

And I made no attacks, hence the word "alleged".


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2146234 -

Don't cave in that quick luv, I was just getting interested  :lol:

It can't be any plainer numbnuts

Lets hope a mod calls you on this blatant flaming.

It can't be any plainer numbnuts, the UN, the group you value so highly, calls weapons besides nukes Weapons Of Mass Destruction.

Nope, it refers to "weapons" not "a chemical in a test tube with no means of delivery". Are you really too dense to understand the difference?

I repeat, please point out where that paragraph you posted states a WMD consists of nothing but a chemical in a test-tube.

Even your buddy Ritter calls them that

Nope, learn to read. He refers to "WEAPONS" not "a chemical in a test tube with no means of delivery".

Odd you missed this on your trawl through the archives too...

Brian Jones, the MoD's former assistant director, intelligence, with responsibility for nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, gave possibly the most significant evidence to date on the dossier.

The very title of it, Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction, was for the first time called into question. Dr Jones said although the phrase applied to nuclear bombs, many biological and chemical weapons would "struggle to fit in that category". He said many biological weapons were designed to incapacitate rather than kill; they were lethal mainly in enclosed spaces, such as in the nerve gas attack on the Tokyo underground in 1995. Chemical weapons were even more difficult because they would need to be produced in large quantities to have any effect in battle, Dr Jones said.

Given that the phrase "weapons of mass destruction" came fully into the public consciousness last autumn as a result of the dossier, his evidence was startling. Mr Blair, Alastair Campbell and most ministers, frequently used the term, and its WMD initials, as a shorthand for what they saw as an unwieldy "nuclear, chemical and biological weapons". It also conjured up the spectre of horrifying attacks launched by Saddam Hussein. Yet here was the Government's most senior official dealing with such issues saying the term was inaccurate. Asked whether he felt there was a difference between missiles and artillery shells with chemical warheads, Dr Jones replied: "I think I would struggle to describe either as a true weapon of mass destruction." 

http://www.shroomery.org/forums/showflat...rue#Post1879809


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146243 -

I saw it oh dishonest one, it doesn't change the fact that all are considered WMD's by the many. It doesn't change the fact that most definitions I have seen decribe them like this.....

weapon of mass destruction
Noun 1. weapon of mass destruction - a weapon that kills or injures civilian as well as military personnel (nuclear and chemical and biological weapons)
W.M.D., WMD
bioarm, biological weapon, bioweapon - any weapon usable in biological warfare; "they feared use of the smallpox virus as a bioweapon"
chemical weapon - chemical substances that can be delivered using munitions and dispersal devices to cause death or severe harm to people and animals and plants
nuclear weapon - a weapon of mass destruction whose explosive power derives from a nuclear reaction
weapon, weapon system, arm - any instrument or instrumentality used in fighting or hunting; "he was licensed to carry a weapon"
armed forces, armed services, military, military machine, war machine - the military forces of a nation; "their military is the largest in the region"; "the military machine is the same one we faced in 1991 but now it is weaker"
high explosive - a powerful chemical explosive that produces gas at a very high rate

Link


Or the dozens on this page...
Definitions of WMD



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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2146249 -

But as I keep pointing out, those all refer to WEAPONS.

A chemical warhead in a long range ballistic missile (although most experts would disagree with this) could at a stretch be considered a WMD. There is however no way a chemical in a test tube with no means of delivery can be considered a WMD.

Do you understand the difference or will I need to repeat this again?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: Xlea321]
    #2146255 -

Quote:
There is however no way a chemical in a test tube with no means of delivery can be considered a WMD.


Point out where I said a test tube of chemicals is one.


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Scott Ritter predicts the future [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #2146360 -

So what exactly are you arguing about?


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

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore Cultivation Supplies, North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Scott Ritter - Facing the Enemy on the Ground
( 1 2 all )		 SquattingMarmot 3,899 22 07/13/04 06:29 AM
by Phred
* Scott Ritter Interview on the current war.... RonoS 890 6 03/26/03 11:12 AM
by luvdemshrooms
* Scott Ritter
( 1 2 3 all )		 Phred 3,862 41 10/11/04 05:47 PM
by EonTan
* Scott Ritter: What happened to Iraq's WMDs SquattingMarmot 1,161 9 12/09/05 11:49 AM
by Alex213
* Weapons of Minimum Destruction Ravus 949 6 08/23/04 03:55 PM
by retread
* Saddam's 500-ton Uranium Stockpile Los_Pepes 541 3 11/08/05 06:24 PM
by Rono
* coretta scott king dies...
( 1 2 all )		 Annapurna1 2,303 22 02/03/06 11:54 AM
by Alex213
* Another 4 years, destruction and economic loss fft2 1,134 7 08/25/04 05:10 AM
by fft2

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
2,359 topic views. 0 members, 43 guests and 27 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:
Happy Halloween from The Shroomery!

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.