BS: The news

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 04:27 PM

Naah, it was the Litle Green Men from Sars.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 04:22 PM

By China, not Iraq

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: mexican
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 12:15 PM

Biological weapon unleashed already - SARS

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 12:11 PM

The only legal justification for the war was that Saddam had a stockpile of Weapons of Mass Destruction he was getting ready to unleash on the world duirectly or by proxy, and that he resolutions passed bybteh Security Council entitle member states to take immediate action to get rid of them.

Getting rid of Saddam was just a bonus, not the legal ground for the invasion.

At present it's looking as if that claim just wasn't true. If so it was either a lie or a serious failure of intelligence. And that matters.

Saying thta it's all right anyway because it got rid of a wicked dictator is a bit like saying that a lynch mob is ok because, on a particular occasion, it lynches a real crimninal.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 11:11 AM

I've also said before, "I do not hate George W. Bush. I've never hated Mortimer W. Snerd either."

Now, don't go branding me one party extremist, in the last local election, I voted for the republican because I knew the democrat was a crook. I voted for Nixon, also a crook, I voted for Bush 1 when he ran against the actor. That was in the primary when I was a republican.
Did you ever vote for a member of the opposite party, Doug? Or, do you think that all republicans are better than all democrats? Do you sense the trap?

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 11:04 AM

Doug, I'm waiting for you to tell me how the dead are better off.

Also, one of the things I hate about conservatives who back that phoney liar, is your way of thinking in extremes. Black and white, no middle ground. I am glad Saddam is gone, but, and I say again, although it is not heard, WAR WAS NOT NECESSARY. We took out Allende in Chile without war.
The fact is, Bush needed to put them in their place, and he did. The final bill is not here yet.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: katlaughing
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 01:42 AM

HOW in the world did ABC poll Iraqi people, Doug? In a country with few amenities, war-ravaged and in chaos, how in the world do you really think they did such a thing?

You are taking one issue and ignoring what I have pointed out. They are two separate things. I pointed out, that by his own advisors' admissions, and his own words, GWB lied as to his reasons for going to war. He didn't give a rat's ass about freeing the people of Iraq. IF you read the article, you will see that his main motivation was to act the bully, to flex the US muscles and put fear into the rest of the world.

Other have answered you as for whether the Iraqis are better off or not. I frankly don't know and I think it is too soon to be making any judgement calls. I do know that, as I said, OUR country is NOT better off, nor are those Iraqis who lost their lives, homes, loved ones and the priceless treasures of their country.

Now, how about you take those blinders off and address the issue of GWB lying?

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: DougR
Date: 30 Apr 03 - 01:30 AM

And the motivations for war, whatever they were, were not worth it, right kat? Better that the Iraqi people remain subjugated by the oppressive regime of Saddam, right? Let them eat kake, right? So sad. Rather than admit that the Iraqi people are better off with Saddam gone, you, kendall, and others of your kin, would prefer that Saddam still be dictator of Iraq! Well, the majority of the people of Iraq polled by ABC don't agree with you. Fifty-four percent of those polled praised the U. S. government and GWB for setting them free. But what do they know, right?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 04:43 PM

You believe what you want to Doug, his man til the end, eh? I read his own words and those of his advisors and know that they did not tell the truth about the motivations for going to war. It's there in black and white, which you would see if you took off the rose-coloured glasses.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 12:34 PM

"How about some proof from YOU that Bush is a liar?"

My belief has always been that you start from the assumpton that any politician can be expected to lie when it suits them. There are probably some exceptions, but that's the way to bet.

We were told that Saddam Hussein had a whole range of weapons of mass detruction which he was able to unleash on the world whenever he wanted to, and that any delay in getting in there and destroying them was too great a risk to take.

Whatever real (or contrived) evidence might be revealed, it is now crystal clear that this picture we were given, on the basis of which our representatives were induced to back the war, was not the truth.

This leaves open two possibilities. (a) The people who told us this actually believed what they said, but had been misled by incompetent intelligence; or (b) they were lying. (All right - a third option, theoretically anyway - (c) the intelligence knew the truth, but lied, and the politcians believed the lies. The old trick, blame the king's advisers, not the king.)

You pays your money and you takes your choice.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: DougR
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 12:33 PM

kat, kendall: Your dislike for GWB is as blind as is my support of him. Your charge, kat, is a bit like calling the kettle black.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST,pdc
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 12:05 PM

I hope this is the right thread for this link. Make sure you click on the joker.

Deck of Evil

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 11:15 AM

kendall doesn't have to provide proof, DougR. I've already provided it in the links I posted earlier in this thread. Bush lied when he used the forged Niger document as proof of Saddam's WMDs in his State of the Union speach, after he'd been warned by the Intelligence people that it was a forgery.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Amos
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 10:43 AM

Kendall,

I don't think the Shiites are being excluded. I think the only constraint being imposed is that they can't just vote the democracy into a theocracy right off the bat. Personally I think this is a reasonable constraint, especially for a population unaccustomed to democracy. Obviously, sooner or later, they may vote themselves out of democracy -- that's the big risk of a democracy, that too many idiots will gather together and destroy it using its own processes. We've seen a certain amount of that right here. But at least let us give it a little breathing room during its birth struggles.

Aside from that, as far as I have seen, they are siotting in on the conventions and speaking their piece.


A

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 06:24 AM

Why bother with proof? You wont face it anyway.

I have seen and heard the free Iraqis; the Shiites, the 60% majority who are going to be excluded from the new government while the robber barons claim to be setting up a democratic form of government. LIES! Blatent, bold faced lies! shallow transparent lies that anyone who is not blinded by party loyalty can see through.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: katlaughing
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 01:36 AM

Doug, did you even read the article I linked? Shrub has once again changed his claims...making his earlier claims lies...he is losing credibility fast and now his own party members are thwarting him on teh domestic tax cut agenda. More and more people are figuring out just how shallow and empty-headed he is...we have a moronic schoolboy who's been caught in the headlights. Now, he will lie any which way he can to get out of any impending trouble.

Your seeming blind faith is misplaced, imo.

kat

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: DougR
Date: 29 Apr 03 - 01:31 AM

Kendall: don't expect to hear from the innocents who are dead. You won't hear from them. They are the casualties of war. You might tune in, just a little bit though, to those Iraqis who survived. You think they are not better off than they were before the war? Iteresting but not one aginer is willing to tackle that question.

You are asking Guest for proof, Kendall. How about some proof from YOU that Bush is a liar?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Amos
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 08:54 PM

Oh and the nuclear program that spelled major threat to all things American, and the threat of giving all these WMDS to other terrorists. It's been one plank after another in order to support his desire to attack. Only one of those planks carried any freight at all, which was yammering about liberating the people of Iraqw from a despot. Couldn't agree more, terrific concept, glad its done for those whose lives are still intact. But why was it the last item on the list of possible rationales? And if any one of them could have served as long as the war went ahead, what was the REAL one? Goddam shell game with life and death.

A

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 08:40 PM

First it was WMD, a threat to us, now, it's "laboratories, CAPable of MAKING chemicle weapons"
Then he tells us that Halliburton is the only company that is able to stop oil fires, but, that turned out a lie also. It's the sweetheart deal of the century for the new robber barons. They will be billinbg us twice what the job could have been done for, and Cheney will be even richer, while that party pisses and moans about a fraction going to the needy.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: katlaughing
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 11:27 AM

AP continues to feed last Thursday's report to all of the major news outlets, in which shurb raised the "possibility" that no WMDs would ever be found. The latest also quotes him as saying that Saddam may be dead or at least "severely wounded" which, according to the shrub would explain why some oil fields were left intact. How many times does he think we want to hear him speculate on the demise of his enemy? Anyway, here's a bit from the latest report:

Senior administration officials began this week to scale back expectations that weapons of mass destruction would be found. Bush's spokesman Ari Fleischer said Wednesday that success of the search effort depends on information provided by Iraqis who might have been involved in such programs.
    Bush did not say how likely it was that weapons had been destroyed, rather than hidden.
    "One thing's for certain, Saddam Hussein no longer threatens America with weapons of mass destruction," he said.

REMEMBER, FOLKS, YOU READ IT HERE. Prez says Saddam no longer has WMDs to threaten us with! (even if they are hidden or no longer exist, or, ummmm...I think this guy should be the "waffle" in Doonesbury!)

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 08:31 AM

The impression I got from that story about the supposed connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda was that it was a bit like being accused of having a connection with a crooked double-glazing firm, because one of their representatives had tried to sell you some double-glazing.

The present situation in Iraq must be a lot more satisfactory to Al Qaeda than the previous one. The same way that the defeat of the Nazis was a lot more satisfactory to Stalin.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 07:29 AM

I'm still waiting for the war mongers to explain how much better off the innocents who are now dead are.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 05:28 AM

The Sunday Telegraph Reporter was interviewed on BBC night before last with the documents. He said initially he was sceptical about Iraq Secret Service - AlQuaeda links, until he saw the attempts in paper work to erradicate references to Bin Laden in the documentation.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Apr 03 - 12:08 AM

Last Updated on April 27, 2003, 7:48 PM (GMT+02:00)

Sunday Telegraph reports documents revealing 1998 meetings between al Qaeda envoy and Iraqi officials found in bombed out Iraqi intelligence headquarters in Baghdad.

If it's the Telegraph in the UK that you're referring to, I checked their website, and that one's not there.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 08:56 PM

A healthy dose of scepticism about anything found by the occupying powers, obviously.

And the bottom line is that, pretty clearly, if they had any "weapons of mass destruction", they weren't much use in a war, which is normally the reason people have weapons in the first place.

It's a bit like a man who starves to death, and then they find he's apparently got a larder stacked full of food. Something funny going on, that's what you'd think.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 08:21 PM

When Bush says no UN weapons inspectors allowed, I get even more suspicious. What they don't find, they will create. They have to in order to "save face."

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Bobert
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 08:17 PM

Well, I reckon if onw were to search the backhills of Wes Ginny or Ohio or New Jersey, they'd find lots of barrels of toxic stuff that folkseither can't afford to be sanitized or don't care to. Heck, I had two such 55 gallon drums on my commercial property, Had dirt in'em but the haz mat companies wanted about $2000 a barrel to dispose of 'em. Yeah, that makes $4000 for two old oil drums filled with, ahhh, dirt. Well, I did a little more checkin' on 'em and learnt that this dirt was taken from two monitoring wells dug on my property years before to test for oil contamination from several submerged tanks on properties up hill from me. But them two barrels looks real scary under the focus of the governemnt... Hmmmm.....

Now if there's one thing I've learnt about the goverment is that when they want to turn something into a Federal case, then, by golly, they are gonna do just that. This is exactly what they are gonna do in Iraq. They're gonna find evidence that the Iraqia do the same thing as their American counterparts. They put nasty stuff in barrels and hide 'em. Now is this stuff that was found, ahhhh, weapons grade stuff. I seriously doubt it. And I think, unless the Bush folks can pull off one the *switches of the century*, I am of thre belief that independent inspectors will find nothing more sinister than the same crap that occurs 'round these parts with folks hidin' nasty stuff, but not WMD.

And as for the Al Qeudi connection, GUEST, your evidence is no more than smoke and mirrors. This entire peice has been looked at be so many folks that it is beyond amusing and your *facts* just don't hold up under scrutinty.

And, lastly, yeah, Bush is a big time liar. The fact that he may be manipulated by folks who satnd to profit enormously from his lies, does not excuse him. Supidity is not a justification for lieing.

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Don Firth
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:53 PM

Try the National Enquirer. . . .

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:47 PM

Last Updated on April 27, 2003, 7:48 PM (GMT+02:00)

Sunday Telegraph reports documents revealing 1998 meetings between al Qaeda envoy and Iraqi officials found in bombed out Iraqi intelligence headquarters in Baghdad.

New suspected chemical weapons lab find near Iraqi capital investigated

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:28 PM

In the past, when they've conducted "initial tests", after more conclusive testing, the substances have turned out to be something other than what was initially suggested. So I guess time will tell on that one, also, GUEST,reuters.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:26 PM

Why don't you show me what you think is conclusive about the article in the Toronto Star, and I'll see if I agree with you. Right now, as far as I can see, there is a possibility that an emissary of Bin Laden was in Iraq looking to establish a connection. That's about it. I also was not able to find anything about this "document" in any other major news sources. Maybe they don't consider it credible. Like I said, I think time will tell about that one, as it has with so many other "smoking guns" that have been "found" re: Iraq in the last several months.

As far as the Bush administration lying is concerned, maybe you ought to check out what these people have to say about it:

Some Worry U.S. May Bend Facts for Policy

Cooking Intelligence for War, by Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST,reuters
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:18 PM

An American television network reported that initial tests on a 55-gallon barrel of chemicals found by U.S. forces in northern Iraq had detected nerve and blistering agents.

Quoting Pentagon officials, ABC News said special forces had found 14 unmarked barrels, at least a dozen missiles and 150 gas masks at a site 112 miles northwest of Baghdad.

The United States said destroying Iraq's alleged chemical arms and other weapons of mass destruction was a main goal when it invaded Iraq last month. Iraq denied having such weapons.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 02:12 PM

Carol C. I guess that the only credible way to satisfy a Mudcatter, one must have Max or Joe Offer verify the source?   I forgot that on being given facts and references, they are all just a CIA misinformation plot, and Bush is still lying about everything.
Gawd, stick to music folks.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 01:48 PM

I checked out the Star's website pretty carefully, and I didn't see anything even remotely conclusive of anything. I guess we'll just have to see how events continue to unfold, and maybe then we'll know something. Then again, maybe we won't.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 12:42 PM

Oops. That was the Toronto Sun we were talking about. Ok. I'll Google the Star.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 12:35 PM

The Toronto Star, eh? I was just talking to JtS about that. He said the Toronto Star is a wing-nut tabloid. Do you have a more credible source?

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 12:31 PM

Carol C. Call the Toronto Star.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 12:06 PM

GUEST, can you provide any documentation (links) so we can verify for ourselves that what you're saying is correct? Without documentation, your assertions lack credibility.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 11:57 AM

Fact #1 A portable bio=chemical Lab was discovered buried in sand
several days ago, near an ammunition/weapon storage area.

Fact #2 The link to Osama Bin Laden was established by Canadian Journalist Mitch Potter of the Toronto Star. Potter found papers in the bombed out HQ of the Mukhabarat (secret police)

Fact#3 A training camp for Jihadis associated with al-Qaida in northern Iraq was attacked earlier in the campaign.

Fact#4 A Senior Iraqi Scientist recently captured has already confessed to knowledge of the biological weapons capability of Saddams regime.

You have the audacity to say Bush lied???

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 09:14 AM

What fact?
Bush lied to get us into war. Now, what are your facts?

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 27 Apr 03 - 06:24 AM

My mind is open Kendall, unlike the vast majority on this forum who consistently refuse to allow fact to enter in.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 10:36 PM

The get real comes from his mind, obviously.
"On a dead man's door, you can knock forever."

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 09:25 PM

Ahhh, GUEST, where does the "get real" come from? Was there ever any doubt that the world's only super power would dismantle a third rate military? Maybe you had your doubts but this campaign won't go down in history as some kinda stategic breakthrough. The Iraqi military wasa shown to be what many of us thought it was: game at best! Yeah, I doubt if in years to come any of the decisions that were during this war will be studied over and over for its genius. I mean this wasn't like Stonewall Jackson taking a handfull of men and afew artillery pieces to Harpers Ferry and bluffing 10,000 Union troops into surrendering!

But, GUEST, if you want to think becuase plans had to be changed that this qualifies as some great military victory, knock yourself out!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 05:41 PM

"...the only thing he was running short of was opposition."

Well, from the news tonight that shortage seems to be on the way to being sorted out.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 05:20 PM

Screw Up? hardly. The fact that they had to improvise and make major changes to plans, when Turkey reneged on the deal to allow troops access to northern Iraq was a factor they had not forseen.
Some disagreements over timing and unit placements hardly constitutes a screw up. The enemy fought back? oh heaven forbid Kendal, who'da thunk that? Get real man!

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 05:04 PM

Guest, I'm very pleased that our forces were ablr to take them down with minimal loss of life. However, it's nothing to brag about, now is it?
Apparently, you don't know about the disagreement among the senior officers concerning the conduct of the war. Even THEY said it was a screw up. Seems like the enemy fought back or something.

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: Bobert
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 03:34 PM

Bored, Dougie? You know what ol' Kendall is saying. Yer just trying to poke fun 'cause deep down inside, though you'll never admit it, you know he's right. The problems with whuppin' up on improverished countries with third rate armies is that once you do it you're stuck there havin' to occupy them. Eventually folks get tired of being occupied. Kinda like company that won't go home and resentment settles in, like in Palestine, and folks get to a desperation point where they will fight tanks with stones. Stay tuned...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: GUEST
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 03:08 PM

Whatever action those people choose to take, we can take enormous satisfaction from the outstanding performance of our military establishment. The news media made every effort to denigrate our conduct in the field, even to inventing failures which never took place. When some journalists reported that our eastern arm on our approach to Baghdad was running short of supplies, one battalion commander suggested that the only thing he was running short of was opposition. Now there is a statement in the Chesty Puller tradition!

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: DougR
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 02:49 PM

Are we at war with Israel, Kendall? :>)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: The news
From: kendall
Date: 26 Apr 03 - 12:46 PM

It's only the beginning folks, get used to living in an armed camp with no rights or freedom. We hit them, they hit us, we hit them, on and on ad nauseum. I wonder if our superior weapons and arrogance will be enough to protect us? It hasn't worked in Israel.