They ratted out Uday, but not the WMD?
Bradley K. Sherman
Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
number one reason to start the war.
--bks
Robert
How about this Bradley, let's offer a twenty-five million dollar reward for
anyone telling us where the WMDs are.
"Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
King Pineapple
news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>
> Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> number one reason to start the war.
You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
time?
Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
"I don't think it is reasonable to close the door on inspections after 3 1/2
months," Blix said in his first public appearance since 134 U.N. inspectors
were evacuated from Iraq, effectively ending a 12-year effort to disarm Iraq
through inspections. "I would have welcomed some more time."
MeGourreJe
<...>
>
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
</...>
But you were so sure to find them quickly, even pointing where to find
them,
once upon a time ....
"The documents show that the mines and other weapons of mass destruction
have been secretly developed at sites the UN inspectors have also not
visited." -> where is the result of US investigation?
First you asked for some time, which was refused to UN teams
http://groups.google.fr/groups?hl=fr&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&frame=right&th=ca03e9307290b333&seekm=ARxla.19238%244P1.1727899%40newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net#link3
3 months later, still nothing ....
Next?
Robert
"King Pineapple" <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:IfaUa.119264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >
> > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> > number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
>
>
Blix had about twenty people
We have 150,000
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
wrote:
>Really.
>
>How about this Bradley, let's offer a twenty-five million dollar reward for
>anyone telling us where the WMDs are.
We have advertised rewards for months, and so far no takers.
Raising the payout to millions would just induce someone to make a WMD
and turn it in for the profit.
But we do have a two hundred thousand reward.
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>>
>> Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
>> number one reason to start the war.
>
>You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>time?
>
>Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
Yes. Nicole's real killer is guarding it.
"ROBIN COOK: We have looked through every possible site, and the idea
that there is some big arsenal of weapons that posed that real and
present danger which we haven't found, does not seem to me credible."
http://www.abc.net.au/am/content/2003/s899789.htm
Mr Cook is the former Foreign Minister of UK and was privvy to
security briefings on Iraq.
"Senior UK Whitehall sources no longer believe weapons of mass
destruction will be found in Iraq, the BBC has learned "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/3054549.stm
President Bush, as he did so successfully with the also-at-large Osama
bin Laden, doesn't mention WMD anymore.
"A reliable staple of past addresses, the four words did not cross his
lips during two public appearances in Pennsylvania and Michigan on
Thursday," Reuters reporter Patricia Wilson wrote yesterday. "Nor did
Bush use the phrase on Wednesday in a formal update on the progress
U.S. forces have made in Iraq that he delivered from the White House
Rose Garden."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A42884-2003Jul24.html?nav=hptoc_p
>
>
>
>"I don't think it is reasonable to close the door on inspections after 3 1/2
>months," Blix said in his first public appearance
Was Saddam still in power when this statement was made?
There is no reason for those who know the facts to not bring them
forward for the rewards.
They all say - no WMD, sorry.
They don't like big bucks rewards?
Or the captives who know for a fact what the facts are. They all say -
no WMD, sorry.
Even though we probably torture them.
Not one person in the whole country does'nt want the reward?
Not one captive doesn't want to curry favor?
Yeah, Nicole's killer - he's guarding the WMD.
since 134 U.N. inspectors
>were evacuated from Iraq, effectively ending a 12-year effort to disarm Iraq
>through inspections. "I would have welcomed some more time."
Since Saddam was in control and might have scared folks into not
telling the truth.
No saddam no more.
But still no WMD.
What may we conclude?
>
>
>
John Starrett
>
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:50:23 GMT, "Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
>
> >Really.
> >
> >How about this Bradley, let's offer a twenty-five million dollar reward for
> >anyone telling us where the WMDs are.
>
> We have advertised rewards for months, and so far no takers.
>
> Raising the payout to millions would just induce someone to make a WMD
> and turn it in for the profit.
>
> But we do have a two hundred thousand reward.
Which is well over a million dollars in terms of the real
value of money in their economy.
--
John Starrett
"It does not require a majority to prevail,
but rather an irate, tireless minority keen
to set brush fires in people's minds."
Samuel Adams
Bradley K. Sherman
King Pineapple <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
>news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>>
>> Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
>> number one reason to start the war.
>
>You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>time?
>
>Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
Yawn.
No big deal, I'll be posting the same line in October 2004.
Blix didn't have satellite surveillance, 150,000 troops,
rewards or unfettered access to the scientists and
paperwork, but he managed to find the marginally illegal
missles. BushCo has found zilch.
--bks
Shive
Yes, keep the faith, and you will have 70 virgins to service you in heaven.
"King Pineapple" <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:IfaUa.119264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
King Pineapple
wrote in message news:bfrc7d$oug$1...@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
> But you were so sure to find them quickly, even pointing where to find
> them,
LOL. You'll have to do better than THAT.
Desperately doing Google searches of my old posts in an attempt to discredit
me proves that I'm a threat to what you're trying to brainwash people with
here...you wouldn't waste this much time on ~me~ otherwise.
So, do you have any cigarettes? Or an extra Jerry Lewis movie for me to
watch?
Apres?
"L'évidence par l'opinion, Whineasshole?
Cela ne l'a pas coupé seulement"-
Usenet principal Fromage Manger
la Reddition Singe Gary Roselles
King Pineapple
wrote in message news:0fc2ivs3lo757nqh0...@4ax.com...
>
>
> "ROBIN COOK:
LOL. Robin doesn't count. Next?
"The nuclear threat implicit in these
undeclared wars became explicit last
year, when North Korea openly repudiated
the treaty by which Bill Clinton had tried
to buy them off by essentially paying
blackmail to get their nuclear weapons
off the headlines.
Sweeping the problem under the rug
worked for Clinton, in the only sense
that mattered to him, that it solved his
immediate political problem and left the
dangers to be dealt with by his
successors"
Thomas Sowell
King Pineapple
news:yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
>
> Blix had about twenty people
Really? That's not what the Washington Post said:
Washington Post, 11/28/2002, Page A1
"A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
which now consists of 300 people"
> We have 150,000
No we don't. We have 150,000 TROOPS in Iraq, give or take a few. We don't
have 150,000 WEAPONS Inspectors there.
Now answer the question. Why were you willing to give Blix the extra time,
but not willing to give it to Bush? Checkmate.
The United Nations launched perhaps its most important weapons inspections
ever yesterday with a team that includes a 53-year-old Virginia man with no
specialized scientific degree and a leadership role in sadomasochistic sex
clubs.
The United Nations acknowledged yesterday that it did not conduct a
background check on Harvey John "Jack" McGeorge of Woodbridge, who was in
New York waiting to be sent to Iraq as a munitions analyst. McGeorge was
picked for the diplomatically sensitive mission over some of the most
experienced disarmament sleuths in the world. A U.N. spokesman said McGeorge
was part of a group recommended by the State Department, which in turn said
it was merely forwarding names for consideration.
The disclosures about McGeorge's qualifications come as concerns are being
raised among some former U.N. weapons inspectors that the current team lacks
experience. The former inspectors, who worked for the United Nations Special
Commission created after the Persian Gulf War, say the new inspectors have
been selected in part to avoid offending Iraq. These critics say that Hans
Blix, the executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and
Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), is bypassing some experienced inspectors
because they were opposed by Iraq as too aggressive in the earlier
inspections.
Former inspectors also say that rules requiring applicants to quit their
government jobs meant that some of the best-qualified experts did not apply,
leaving many positions to be filled by applicants, such as McGeorge, from
the private sector. The former inspectors also say the current inspection
team lacks the size, mobility and equipment to do its job adequately, and
that the new U.N. policy of not sharing information with intelligence
agencies could further handicap the team's ability to find weapons sites.
U.N. officials defended their team of inspectors, saying that they are
highly qualified and among the best in the field. But they acknowledged that
they conducted no background checks.
"As the United Nations, with people applying from many countries, we do not
have the capability to do that," said Ewen Buchanan, a spokesman for
UNMOVIC. "How would you check?"
McGeorge is a former Marine and Secret Service specialist who offers
seminars on "weaponization of chemical and biological agents" for $595 a
session. Since 1983, he has been president of his own firm, Public Safety
Group Inc., which sells bioterror products to governments. One online ad
promotes his role as a "certified United Nations Weapons inspector."
McGeorge does not possess a degree in one of the specialized fields -- such
as biochemistry, bacteriology or chemical engineering -- that the United
Nations says it seeks in its inspectors. U.S. and U.N. officials said a
background check apparently was not conducted on McGeorge or any of the
inspector applicants.
An Internet search of open Web sites conducted by The Washington Post found
that McGeorge is the co-founder and past president of Black Rose, a
Washington-area pansexual S&M group, and the former chairman of the board of
the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. He is also a founding officer of
the Leather Leadership Conference Inc., which "produces training sessions
for current and potential leaders of the sadomasochism/leather/fetish
community," according to its Web site. Several Web sites describe McGeorge's
training seminars, which involve various acts conducted with knives and
ropes.
McGeorge said yesterday that a State Department official invited him to
apply for the U.N. team, and officials at State and the United Nations did
not ask about his S&M background. But he said he would tender his
resignation to Blix if The Post printed a story about it.
"I have been very upfront with people in the past about what I do, and it
has never prevented me from getting a job or doing service," McGeorge said.
"I am who I am. I am not ashamed of who I am -- not one bit. But I cannot
allow my actions, as they may be perceived by others, to damage an
organization which has done nothing to deserve that damage."
A State Department official said that the Bureau of Nonproliferation
collected résumés from potential UNMOVIC candidates and then passed along,
without recommendation, those who appeared to meet the general criteria of
the jobs. However, the official said he believes that background checks were
not conducted before the résumés were forwarded.
Half the 100 inspectors picked so far were recommended by governments, and
the other half applied directly to the United Nations. Buchanan added that
the United Nations considers McGeorge's private life irrelevant to his role
as a munitions analyst.
"I believe that Mr. McGeorge is technically very competent," Buchanan said.
"He knows his subject, which is weapons. As a general principle, I think
what people do in their private life, as long as it doesn't interfere with
[their] professional life -- and I'm not aware that it has interfered -- or
doesn't break any rules or laws, shouldn't be a significant issue."
Interviewed by telephone, McGeorge defended his training and experience. "I
was a military ordnance explosive disposal specialist," McGeorge said. "I
was very well trained on chemical and biological agents."
McGeorge's résumé indicates that he trained as an inspector with UNMOVIC in
February 2001 in Vienna. He said he was interviewed in person by Blix and
joined the team as a temporary staff member in December 2001.
McGeorge's professional background reveals he served for a few years each as
a Marine ordnance disposal technician and a munitions countermeasures
specialist with the Secret Service, both stints occurring more than 20 years
ago.
On his résumé, McGeorge lists an honorary doctorate from a Russian institute
in Moscow. McGeorge received an associate's degree in security management
from Northern Virginia Community College in 1983. He also lists numerous
articles on chemical and biological weapons in such publications as Defense
and Foreign Affairs and NBC Defense & Technology International.
One of his most cited achievements is preparing, under contract with the
federal government, a compendium of incidents involving biological and
chemical agents dating back to the 1940s.
Past weapons inspectors have criticized the selection of inspectors, saying
experienced candidates, including former missile inspector Timothy V.
McCarthy, were passed over. The critics say the new team needs seasoning if
it is to find minute evidence of weapons-making in a country the size of
Texas.
"We just knew too much," said Richard Spertzel, former head of the
biological weapons inspection team for the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq.
"They couldn't pull the wool over our eyes."
The two renowned experts retained, Igor Mitrokhin and Nikita Smidovich, will
not be conducting field inspections.
Mitrokhin, a respected Russian chemical weapons expert, has been named the
chief of the agency's health and safety division. Smidovich, a Russian
missile expert whose encyclopedic knowledge of Iraq's missile program has
long made him unpopular in Iraq, has been appointed head of inspector
training.
Smidovich said during a break at recent training session that although there
is a "new culture" at UNMOVIC, the agency still has "very tough inspectors."
He said that the less experienced inspectors can learn everything they need
to know from a massive archive that includes a recording of virtually every
meeting with the Iraqis. "We have it all on tape," he said.
Blix defended the abilities of the new inspectors, saying that his chief
inspector, Demetrius Perricos, "probably has the greatest experience in the
world."
"He has 30 years of inspections behind him," he added. "He handled the whole
North Korea business in the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency]; he
was in Iraq in the beginning of the '90s; he was in South Africa and handled
the verification of the disarming of their nuclear weapons."
A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
which now consists of 300 people. The Bush administration has been pressing
UNMOVIC to move up the date of the next scheduled training session from
January to December. One council official said that Blix was likely to begin
"a sort of worldwide trawl" for new inspectors.
Another council diplomat acknowledged the new inspection agency lacks the
experience of its predecessor and that it will take time to reach full
speed. "A lot of the inspectors are inexperienced, and it's a matter of not
trying to push UNMOVIC to run before it can walk," said a council member.
Former inspectors also were concerned about reports that members of the
current UNMOVIC team work in the private sector and might have products to
sell. A stint on a U.N. inspections team can boost an inspector's profile,
bringing media attention and lucrative business opportunities, as some of
the former inspectors found.
One current inspector works for a company developing a sensor to detect
biological substances, such as anthrax spores.
"I don't know of any technology out there for biology that you could wave
over and say this is a bad building," said former inspector and biological
warfare expert David Franz.
Correspondent Colum Lynch and researcher Alice Crites also contributed to
this report.
Washington Post
Thursday, November 28, 2002; Page A01
z
> Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in
> message news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>>
>> Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
>> number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more
> to find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME
> amount of time?
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the
> stuff.
>
Blix and co were doing it for a hell of a lot less than a billion a week
and a few lives a day
King Pineapple
news:bfrfo6$jo2$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> In article <IfaUa.119264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>,
> King Pineapple <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
> >news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >>
> >> Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> >> number one reason to start the war.
> >
> >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> >time?
> >
> >Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
>
> Yawn.
In other words, "he nailed me dead to rights, and I *can't* answer this
question honestly without exposing myself as a hypocrite".
> No big deal, I'll be posting the same line in October 2004.
"Just wait until the debates!"
"Asscroft will NEVER be confirmed! Neither will Ted Olson"
"Bush will NEVER get his tax cut!"
> Blix didn't have satellite surveillance, 150,000 troops,
> rewards or unfettered access to the scientists and
> paperwork, but he managed to find the marginally illegal
> missles.
LOL. At the time, you people assured us that those were NOT WMDs. Next?
"You should have learned by now that you're incapable of understanding my
posts"- DNC Doofus Gary Ott
Q
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>time?
>
Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
Iraqi "escorts."
>Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
The Lonely Coalition has 175,000 people and free access to the entire
country. Just *when* will we find "the stuff."
Another point: Perception. Just as many in the Arab world do not
believe that Saddam's Rabies Babies are dead, what gives you the
impression that *anyone* will believe so-called evidence turned up at
this late date. The scepticism will extend worldwide.
--
Q
MeGourreJe
> LOL. You'll have to do better than THAT.
Bah, 2 minutes only, not so much !
>
> Desperately doing Google searches of my old posts in an attempt to discredit
> me proves that I'm a threat to what you're trying to brainwash people with
> here...you wouldn't waste this much time on ~me~ otherwise.
No attempt to discredit you here, as you don't need anyone for it !
Brainwash? What with? Foxnews ?
I'm still waiting for Bush to lick France and Germany asses when it will
come to beg for troops in Iraq ! And the worse for you is that it's coming.
>
> So, do you have any cigarettes?
? I don't grab this one, no brain today to understand your pseudo jokes,
what a shame!
> Or an extra Jerry Lewis movie for me to watch?
Nope, we've got a better show on TV : Bush trying to climb out of his
shithole !
>
>
> Apres?
>
> "L'évidence par l'opinion, Whineasshole?
> Cela ne l'a pas coupé seulement"-
Try something better than word to word translators please ! What did you
want to say here?
Whineasshole? Ouaouah, such erotic trick !!!!! I only tried
champagnedick before, I keep this one in mind. But which ? red or white?
> Usenet principal Fromage Manger
> la Reddition Singe Gary Roselles
This one goes better as "Lache singe mangeur de fromages"
>
>
Next ?
uhm
> Blix didn't have satellite surveillance, 150,000 troops,
> rewards or unfettered access to the scientists and
> paperwork, but he managed to find the marginally illegal
> missles.
AND, he didn't kill anyone.
> BushCo has found zilch.
Failure is his middle name
Matthew S. Staben
It is clear the Gov't of Iraq was expecting the Coalition forces and
hid all evidence of WMDs which were already mobile to avoid
inspections for 12 years. It also managed to grab billions of dollars
and run weeks before the Coalition took action, which seems to imply
the Gov't of Iraq also spent much of its WMD development budget to
also develop means of disguising said WMDs from the useless UN
inspectors and other contingencies dreamt by paranoids.
150,000 people spread out across a country the size of California is
not enough to find carefully hidden WMDs. If it wasn't for all the
mass graves being uncovered, the soldiers'd be able to hurry and find
the WMDs!
Frankidadio
Is King Pineapple really Renee aka Barbara Walker?
uhm
saddl...@earthlink.net says...
> Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >
> > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> > number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
They weren't getting Americans killed
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
Your inability to see killing Americans as a bad thing is showing
uhm
saddl...@earthlink.net says...
> Fromage Manger la Reddition Singe "MeGourreJe" <ZorglubA...@yahoo.fr>
> wrote in message news:bfrc7d$oug$1...@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
>
> > But you were so sure to find them quickly, even pointing where to find
> > them,
>
> LOL. You'll have to do better than THAT.
>
> Desperately doing Google searches of my old posts in an attempt to discredit
> me proves that I'm a threat
.. and discredited.
Skip Freeman
> Blix had about twenty people
>
> We have 150,000
Uh, no. The US has 150,000 people plus a bit more. You didn't forget
about those Iraqi scientists rotting away in US custody, did you? You
know, the ones that were supposed to lead the US troops to the WMD
stocks? You didn't forget about them, did you? Yeah, I guess you did.
If any of those scientists knew where any WMD were at, they would have
already been tortured or bribed into spilling the beans. Don't you
think so?
-Skip
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Nick Danger Wannabee "George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr." <po...@commiemartyrs.edu>
>wrote in message news:0fc2ivs3lo757nqh0...@4ax.com...
>>
>>
>> "ROBIN COOK:
>
>LOL. Robin doesn't count. Next?
Cook counts - to zero. You just don't like his sum.
AS to next, you mean the ones you snipped in abject terror of what
they said?
The ones you couldn't even think up a dumb rebuttal for?
Such as Mr Cook's successor as foreign minister?
The reporter who went on the air to report that "high officials" in
Whitehall ALSO think we will never find WMD was spotted by other
reporters talking to UK's current Foreign Minister just minutes before
he went on the air to report that "high officials at Whitehall" think
we'll never find WMD.
This fellow gets all the intelligence, he knows the score.
Or Secretary Rumsfeld? EVEN HE has tossed in the towell, conceding
that we might never find WMD. If he makes that concession, you know
the odds of finding them are slim.
This guy gets all the intelligence, he knows the score.
Or all those who have changed their lingo? Like President Bush who now
is afraid to even say the words "weapons of mass destruction" in his
speeches?
Or the change from "weapons" to "programs" to "evidence of programs?"
They know the score. I know the score.
And you know the score too but won't admit it.
You're in the Nicole's Real Killer school of denial.
You know it.
We all know it.
Iraq was no more a threat to us than Luxembourg is.
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
They aren't WMD.
Iraq was no more a threat to us than Luxumbourg is.
Bush either knew that and lied to us, or he's a complete moron who
made the biggest military blunder since McArthur disobeyed orders
bringing the Chinese into the Korean War.
It really is the worst military blunder since then.
Or he went to war on a lie.
Which do you think it is?
Bush said they had wmd because he lied?
Or because he's a moron unable to figure out the truth?
It's one or the other.
johnny
> news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >
> > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> > number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
The U.N. also asked for more resouces, more teams of inspectors,
support staff and additional security details. The U.S. said: "What's
the point?".
Now it appears that 160,000 heavily armed troops aren't even enough to
get the job done. And pResident Maverick said the war was over months
ago (just after his dramatic, sexy tailhook landing on an aircraft
carrier.)
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
Pardon, but your hypocrisy/double standards/idiocy are showing. There
isn't any "stuff" to find - unless we plant it there first.
Raymond Luxury-Yacht II
They were on the take along with Kofi Annan and the rest of the UN.
One of the inspectors, Scott Ritter, is a child molester.
> We have 150,000
The troops #1 is not searching for WMD.
Keep trying.
Ashland Henderson
> news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >
> > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> > number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
Don't be a bigger idiot than necessary. We basically swore we knew where
it was. Pointed to it in pictures shown at the UN. Said that defectors
had shown us where it was. And so we invaded and now can't find a thing
with 150,000 troops on the ground and all of the other tools still available.
Can't even find people willing to show it to us for large rewards. Sheesh.
> "I don't think it is reasonable to close the door on inspections after 3 1/2
> months," Blix said in his first public appearance since 134 U.N. inspectors
> were evacuated from Iraq, effectively ending a 12-year effort to disarm Iraq
> through inspections. "I would have welcomed some more time."
And now you conservative nuts have had three months, massive manpower,
rewards offered, and all of the normal tools of intelligence and satellite
photography and can't find a thing.
John Willimans
Are you saying that a missile that travels over 93 miles is a WMD?
Because the UN, Bush and the rest of the world doesn't think so. They think
they were banned missiles. Maybe a method of delivering WMD, but no, not
WMDs themselves.
You need to first understand what a WMD is before you can say that we have
or have not found them and your ascertation that missiles are WMD is proof
that you still need to work at gaining this understanding.
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Paid Political Hack "Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>news:yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
>
>>
>> Blix had about twenty people
>
>Really? That's not what the Washington Post said:
>
>Washington Post, 11/28/2002, Page A1
>
>"A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
>number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
>which now consists of 300 people"
>
>
>> We have 150,000
>
>
>No we don't. We have 150,000 TROOPS in Iraq, give or take a few. We don't
>have 150,000 WEAPONS Inspectors there.
Troops know what a weapon looks like, and as they roam about they
might be expected to come across some.
If they were there.
>Now answer the question. Why were you willing to give Blix the extra time,
>but not willing to give it to Bush? Checkmate.
In chess, you have to look more than one move ahead.
I doubt you'd ever check mate any player older than six or seven.
Blix said he thought he needed another few months.
He said that a few months ago.
And the circumstances are completely different. The argument made for
why Blix didn't find any wmd was that the Saddam regime was hiding
weapons, so it might take time to find them.
But now there is no Saddam regime. The workers who were previously
allegedly involved in hiding are free to talk to us now. We advertise
big rewards for info on these wmd.
Why wouldn't at least one person involved in the hiding or destruction
of the WMD come forward for the easy money? We could keep him
anonymous.
You have no sane answer to that question.
We have captive people who know about wmd for sure. Reports are that
each and every one has denied that Iraq had WMD.
We use torture-light with prisoners now (it's the new
any-method-is-justified-by-the-ends Bush administration), and are
willing to loan some to full-blown torturing allies.
Alternatively we can offer a break on sentencing in return for
information.
Not one person has led us to any wmd.
Why don't the captives talk?
You have no sane answer to that question.
We have 1500 weapons searchers, with extremely high-tech equipment
searching day and night.
Why haven't they fourd a WMD?
The new head of the weapons searching team has the advantage of our
having "disappeared" into our jails lots of Iraqi scientists who
would know about these weapons.
He says that none will say where the WMD are in return for a reduced
sentence.
Why is that? Not one.
You have an answer?
No you have no sane answer for that question either.
Blix didn't have money for rewards, didn't have Saddam to keep people
quiet, didn't have scientists and military figures in jail where he
can torture them, or just let them rot until they rot. And they know
that someone would talk, so why not them first?
You have no sane explanaitons for the failure to find even one WMD.
You know the real reason we haven't found any WMD.
But don't want to admit the obvious answer.
You are in deep denial, or you're just dishonest.
>The United Nations launched perhaps its most important weapons inspections
>ever yesterday with a team that includes a 53-year-old Virginia man with no
>specialized scientific degree and a leadership role in sadomasochistic sex
>clubs.
Wow. You really are nuts.
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
wrote:
>"Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:<yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com>...
>> "King Pineapple" <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
>> news:IfaUa.119264$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
>> > Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
>> > news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
>> > >
>> > > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
>> > > number one reason to start the war.
>> >
>> > You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>> > find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>> > time?
>> >
>> > Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
>> >
>> >
>>
>> Blix had about twenty people
>>
>> We have 150,000
>
>It is clear the Gov't of Iraq was expecting the Coalition forces and
>hid all evidence of WMDs which were already mobile to avoid
>inspections for 12 years.
No, that is not clear.
There is no rational reason to make weapons, at great cost, just to
hide them when they're needed.
That is not clear at all.
It also managed to grab billions of dollars
>and run weeks before the Coalition took action,
Which we found. If they can't hide a billion dollars in cash from us,
or a billion in gold from us, how come they CAN hide things far
bulkier?
which seems to imply
>the Gov't of Iraq also spent much of its WMD development budget to
>also develop means of disguising said WMDs from the useless UN
>inspectors and other contingencies dreamt by paranoids.
Why?
>
>150,000 people spread out across a country the size of California is
>not enough to find carefully hidden WMDs. If it wasn't for all the
>mass graves being uncovered, the soldiers'd be able to hurry and find
>the WMDs!
We advertise rewards for those who hid them to come forward.
Why do you think Iraqis don't want a quick $200,000?
We would be glad to keep the tipster anonymous.
We have people held captive who know the facts for sure. They all say
that there were no WMDS. Why? At this time, why would they care if we
found WMD or not?
There is no rational reason for them not to be willing to trade the
information for a pack of cigarettes, let alone for what we probably
offer - freedom from execution, freedom from continued torture.
It's just impossible to explain why those who know the truth won't
tell it to us now. The war's over. The regime is over. There is no
reason on earth not to tell us about the weapons now.
Yet they don't. None of them talk. All say the same thing, that they
didn't have WMD.
Why?
Or the middle level scientists. We have many of them in jail, snatched
from their homes without charges, with their families not knowing
whether they are dead or alive. We treat them the same way Saddam
treated his enemies. Yet none of them talk either. They all say the
same thing, that there were no WMD.
Why?
They have no earthly reason to not tell us the truth so that they can
get back to their families.
We would be glad to make them heros, if they would just talk to us
about these alleged WMD.
Those who still expect to find WMD are clearly not rational people.
mongoose
> Desperate DNC Dweeb "Bradley K. Sherman" <b...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:bfr7il$7le$1...@panix3.panix.com...
> >
> > Still no WMD, still no trace, not a whisper about the
> > number one reason to start the war.
>
> You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> time?
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
The "stuff" was an empty pretext. This war was planned behind closed
doors by Cheney and his friends at the Project for the New American
Century (PNAC) back in 1997, see
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0716-10.htm .
That's why the WMD excuse is called a lie. The truth is out there
though - you just have to be willing to open your eyes.
From http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/8353
A hint of such orchestration came in a June interview between Meet the
Press host Tim Russert and former Gen. Wesley Clark, as publicized by
the press watchdog Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR):
Clark: "There was a concerted effort during the fall of 2001, starting
immediately after 9/11 to pin 9/11 and the terrorism problem on Saddam
Hussein."
Russert: "By who? Who did that?"
Clark: "Well, it came from the White House, it came from people around
the White House. It came from all over. I got a call on 9/11. I was on
CNN, and I got a call at my home saying, 'You got to say this is
connected. This is state-sponsored terrorism. This has to be connected
to Saddam Hussein.' I said, 'But -- I'm willing to say it -- but
what's your evidence?' And I never got any evidence."
--
These are some very dangerous people running our coutry now and they
are no friends of democracy.
King Pineapple
message news:fxfUa.72669$0v4.4...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>
> >
> Are you saying that a missile that travels over 93 miles is a WMD?
No, the person above me on the thread did.
-
"The President has been fund-raising at a frenetic rate"
The Irish Times on Clinton "doing
the peoples' business", 1997
King Pineapple
news:9jn2ivkvvpc76cdih...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:28:08 GMT, "King Pineapple"
> <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
> >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> >time?
> >
> Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
> Iraqi "escorts."
LOL. Stop changing the subject and answer the question. WHY were you OK with
giving them more time, and not not OK with giving Bush more time?
> >Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the stuff.
> The Lonely Coalition
LOL. Define "lonely". The only ones out there who'll be lonely are you
idiots who don't think he's got the stuff.
>has 175,000 people
Really? Source for your number? I thought it was something like 140,000.
> and free access to the entire
> country.
Since when have they had "free access to the entire country"? And since when
have ALL of those hundred thousand plus troops been spending ALL of their
time in the search for said weapons?
>Just *when* will we find "the stuff."
We may have *already* found it. If so, why release the info now? It would be
more politically expedient for Bush to release the proof in October 2004.
> Another point: Perception. Just as many in the Arab world do not
> believe that Saddam's Rabies Babies are dead,
And you're basing your statement on what "facts", exactly? You obviously
missed THIS:
"Arab television and newspapers on Friday gave top billing to the question
"is it really them?" But following the release of television footage by the
US forces in Baghdad, they generally concluded that Uday and Qusay Saddam
Hussein had indeed been killed earlier in the week.
The Qatari-based Al-Jazeera satellite news channel went live to the mortuary
tent at Baghdad airport where the two bodies were shown yesterday to
reporters and cameramen.
Back in Doha the presenter apologised for the grisly imagery of the
reconstructed corpses on display but the detail - lingering on what appeared
to be a bone in Uday's leg held together by pins - and subsequent commentary
were considerable.
Regular viewers of Al-Jazeera are used to gruesome images following the US
invasion launched in March and from the nearly three years of the
Palestinian uprising against Israel.
The station's Baghdad correspondent, Waddah Khanfar, commented that Iraqi
colleagues who had known the two men, Uday in particular, and saw the bodies
on Friday positively identified them as the sons of the former Iraqi
dictator.
Mr Khanfar said that, by putting the bodies on display, the US wanted to
demonstrate to Iraqis that the Ba'athist regime had come to an end and was
trying to open a new page in Iraq's history.
On Al-Jazeera and other Arab news channels and in newspapers on Friday there
was little of the questioning that Uday and Qusay should have been taken
alive either for humanitarian reasons or so that more information could be
extracted from them"
http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c
=StoryFT&cid=1058868174334
> what gives you the
> impression that *anyone* will believe so-called evidence turned up at
> this late date. The scepticism will extend worldwide.
Well GEE, I don't expect YOU to believe it...but since you're already on the
losing side, who cares?
Aloha...
King Pineapple
news:Xns93C365DB140...@206.127.4.22...
>
> Blix and co were doing it for a hell of a lot less than a billion a week
> and a few lives a day
Last time I checked, NONE of the American casualties were sustained as a
result of our looking for WMDs. Are you privy to classified data, or just
shoveling bullshit as usual?
Why do we american keep get the most idiotic canidates to chosen from?
DNC Deep Thought
"xombi13"
Bradley K. Sherman
King Pineapple <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Dim Bulb"Q" <WallyI...@erewhon.not> wrote in message
>news:9jn2ivkvvpc76cdih...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:28:08 GMT, "King Pineapple"
>> <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>> >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>> >time?
>> >
>> Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
>> Iraqi "escorts."
>
>LOL. Stop changing the subject and answer the question. WHY were you OK with
>giving them more time, and not not OK with giving Bush more time?
Bush can have all the time he wants. Unfortunately for you,
his team has stopped looking, having run out of places to look.
--bks
King Pineapple
news:MPG.198b3046d...@news.newsguy.com...
>
> >
> > You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> > find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount
of
> > time?
>
> They weren't getting Americans killed
Please cite the names of all of the Americans who have been "killed" while
actually looking for weapons of mass destruction.
> Your inability to see killing Americans as a bad thing is showing
The American military, something you obviously know nothing about, is an
all-volunteer force. They knew there was a chance of them going to war (and
dying) when they signed up.
Nice try.
"I took a Semtex today. I feel fantastic"-Liberal dim-bulb Bill Maher,
babbling about plastic explosives.
King Pineapple
news:50ad9c25.03072...@posting.google.com...
> Is King Pineapple really Renee aka Barbara Walker?
Yes, dear, I am.
Actually, you're thinking of one of the "fake" King Pineapples, a new one of
which is now appearing on another newsgroup.
"Show me. Nothing personal but your word does not mean shit."-Willie PF
King Pineapple
news:dd1837d7.03072...@posting.google.com...
> The U.N. also asked for more resouces, more teams of inspectors,
> support staff and additional security details. The U.S. said: "What's
> the point?".
Actually, if you check another post I made today, I provided a cite showing
where Bush had, in fact, asked the UN to DOUBLE Blix's team of inspectors.
This was in January of this year.
> Now it appears that 160,000
LOL. You Dims should get your numbers straight. One of your Kopmrades above
said it was "175,000". Get together with Begala and make a consensus, OK?
> heavily armed troops aren't even enough to get the job done.
Only if you can prove, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that ALL of those
American troops have spent ALL of the past 2 months looking for WMDs. But
you can't prove that, so you lose again.
> And pResident Maverick
LOL. DU kid, right?
>said the war was over months ago
No he didn't. He said "major combat" or "major hostilities" were over.
Clinton taught you to parse words well. What's the meaning of "is" today,
anyway?
>(just after his dramatic, sexy tailhook landing on an aircraft
> carrier.)
LOL. You're just jealous because Carville didn't think of it while Clinton
was in office (Clinton himself made FIVE visits to aircraft carriers while
in office, without a peep out of you hypocrites.
You have to admit, it was GREAT PR work. Brilliant, as a matter of fact.
Hey, other Presidents, including those from the Democratic Party, have done
the exact SAME thing. A LOT of them, as a matter of fact. In fact, the Dem
Presidents have made MORE visits to said ships since 1940 than the Repub
ones have, according to the list below:
http://www.history.navy.mil/faqs/faq49-1.htm
Presidential Visits to Naval Ships
This list includes ship visits by presidents, during their terms as
president, presently known to the Ships History Branch. There have
undoubtedly been others; any additional information would be appreciated.
Commissioned presidential yachts are included though these were not,
strictly speaking, "visits to Navy ships" since these yachts were not part
of the operating forces. The yacht Sequoia is listed under F.D. Roosevelt
only, the only period during which she was in commission. Small craft, such
as the motor boats used by a number of presidents after World War II, are
not included. Individual ship histories are included in the Dictionary of
American Naval Fighting Ships.
John Tyler (1841-45) Steam sloop Princeton (1844)
Franklin Pierce (1853-57) Steam frigate Wabash (1856)
William McKinley (1897-1901) Yacht Sylph (1898-1901)
Theodore Roosevelt (1901-09) Yacht Sylph (1901-09)
Battleship Illinois (1902)
Yacht Mayflower (1905-09)
Submarine Plunger (1905)
Battleship Louisiana (1906)
Battleship Connecticut (1907; 1909)
Battleship Mississippi (1907)
William H. Taft (1909-13) Yacht Sylph (1909-13)
Yacht Mayflower (1909-13)
Battleship Arkansas (1912)
Woodrow Wilson (1913-21) Yacht Sylph (1913-210
Yacht Mayflower (1913-21)
Transport George Washington (1919)
Warren G. Harding (1921-23) Yacht Mayflower (1921-23)
Calvin Coolidge (1923-29) Yacht Mayflower (1923-29)
Battleship Utah (1928)
Battleship Texas (1928)
Herbert C. Hoover (1929-33) Battleship Maryland (1928-29)
Battleship Utah (1928-29)
Battleship Arizona (1931)
F. D. Roosevelt (1933-45) Yacht Sequoia (1933-36)
Cruiser Houston (1934; 1935; 1938; 1939)
Yacht Potomac (1936-45)
Cruiser Indianapolis (1933; 1936)
Destroyer Phelps (1937)
Cruiser Philadelphia (1938)
Cruiser Tuscaloosa (1939, 1940)
Cruiser Augusta (1941)
British battleship Prince of Wales(1941)
Battleship Iowa (1943)
Cruiser Memphis (1943)
Cruiser Baltimore (1944)
Destroyer Cummings (1944)
Cruiser Quincy (1945)
Harry S. Truman (1945-53) Yacht Williamsburg (1945-52)
Cruiser Augusta (1945)
Battleship Missouri (1945, 1947)
Destroyer Lansdowne (1945)
Submarine U-2513 (1946)
not yet identified (1946-47)
Dwight D.Eisenhower (1953-61) Yacht Williamsburg (1953)
Carrier Saratoga (1957)
Submarine Seawolf (1957)
Cruiser Des Moines (1959)
Cruiser Saint Paul (1960)
Submarine (unidentified)
Submarine Patrick Henry (year?)
John F. Kennedy (1961-63) Destroyer Joseph P Kennedy Jr (1962)
Coast Guard training ship Eagle (1962)
Submarine Chopper (1962)
Submarine Thomas A. Edison (1963)
Missile test ship Observation Island 1963)
Carrier Kitty Hawk (1963)
Carrier Oriskany (1963)
Lyndon B. Johnson (1963-69) Carrier Enterprise (1967)
Richard M. Nixon (1969-74) Carrier Hornet (1969)
James E. Carter (1977-81) Submarine Los Angeles (1977)
Carrier Dwight D Eisenhower (1978)
Ronald Reagan (1981-89) Carrier Constellation (1981)
Battleship New Jersey (1982)
Battleship Iowa (1986)
George H. W. Bush (1989-92) Carrier Forrestal (1989)
Guided Missile Cruiser Belknap (1991)
William J. Clinton (1992-2001) Carrier Carl Vinson (1993; 1995)
Carrier George Washington (1994)
Carrier Independence (1996)
Carrier Harry S. Truman (1998)
George W. Bush (2001- ) Carrier Abraham Lincoln (2003)
> > Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the
stuff.
>
> Pardon, but your hypocrisy/double standards/idiocy are showing. There
> isn't any "stuff" to find - unless we plant it there first.
Clinton said they had it. So did the UN. How come you believed *them*?
Next?
King Pineapple
news:441d41d1.03072...@posting.google.com...
>
> Don't be a bigger idiot than necessary.
Answer my question, Ashcan.
>We basically swore we knew where
> it was. Pointed to it in pictures shown at the UN. Said that defectors
> had shown us where it was. And so we invaded and now can't find a thing
> with 150,000 troops on the ground and all of the other tools still
available.
> Can't even find people willing to show it to us for large rewards. Sheesh.
Answer my question.
> > "I don't think it is reasonable to close the door on inspections after 3
1/2
> > months," Blix said in his first public appearance since 134 U.N.
inspectors
> > were evacuated from Iraq, effectively ending a 12-year effort to disarm
Iraq
> > through inspections. "I would have welcomed some more time."
>
> And now you conservative nuts have had three months, massive manpower,
> rewards offered, and all of the normal tools of intelligence and satellite
> photography and can't find a thing.
Answer my question.
"You can change the outcome of any election you want" -Bill Clinton
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Dim Bulb"Q" <WallyI...@erewhon.not> wrote in message
>news:9jn2ivkvvpc76cdih...@4ax.com...
>> On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:28:08 GMT, "King Pineapple"
>> <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>> >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>> >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
>> >time?
>> >
>> Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
>> Iraqi "escorts."
>
>LOL. Stop changing the subject and answer the question. WHY were you OK with
>giving them more time, and not not OK with giving Bush more time?
Blix thought he needed a couple more months.
It's been a couple more months.
And Blix was there when allegedly the govt was hiding things.
Now there is no govt to hide.
Now we can just ask people - where are the WMD? And there is no reason
for them to not tell us.
In fact, we will give them $200,000 for taking us to one.
We advertise the reward offer throughout Iraq.
Blix couldn't do that - Saddam, if he were hiding the things, would
have shot the person.
Not the case now.
You're in deep denial.
It's funny to watch.
You guys make the Nicole's Real Killer crowd seem sane.
>
z
$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net:
> DNC Dipstick "z" <z...@yada.yada.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns93C365DB140...@206.127.4.22...
>>
>> Blix and co were doing it for a hell of a lot less than a billion a week
>> and a few lives a day
>
> Last time I checked, NONE of the American casualties were sustained as a
> result of our looking for WMDs. Are you privy to classified data, or just
> shoveling bullshit as usual?
>
We went to war because Saddam was going to use WMD on us right? So our
troups are there because Blix and the UN failed. At least that was the
story. So any deaths in Iraq are due to us invading that country to stop
the WMD threat. Turns out Blix may have been doing a fine job without
costing us 1 billion a week or losing any GI's
Naturally I cannot comment about classified information, but I'll admit to
shoveling bullshit from time to time. If the barn is dirty you gotta get
in there and clean it out.
-z
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Dipstick "z" <z...@yada.yada.com> wrote in message
>news:Xns93C365DB140...@206.127.4.22...
>>
>> Blix and co were doing it for a hell of a lot less than a billion a week
>> and a few lives a day
>
>Last time I checked, NONE of the American casualties were sustained as a
>result of our looking for WMDs. Are you privy to classified data, or just
>shoveling bullshit as usual?
It's a really big country, as big as California.
There could easily be thousands of US soldiers killed looking for WMD
who we could not yet find.
That you can't find one certainly does not prove that there aren't
any.
Julie
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>Leftist Laugh and a Half "John Willimans" <jo...@no-spam-ever.com> wrote in
>message news:fxfUa.72669$0v4.4...@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
>>
>> >
>
>> Are you saying that a missile that travels over 93 miles is a WMD?
>
>No, the person above me on the thread did.
No one is "above" you on this thread. YOU started the thread, moron.
The fact that you began this thread by cutting and pasting someone
elses post, then changing the subject line thereby making it a new
thread, is beside the point.
Everyone is aware you like to do that so you don't have to be
confronted by the original poster directly.
You remind me of that moron that shot up all those people on the train
in Long Island a number of years ago. Acting as his own attorney, he
would ask an eyewitness on the stand "point to the person in this
court room you saw do the shooting", then he would quickly duck down
behind the podium so he "couldn't" be pointed out.
You learn that technique from him?
man o' leisure
"King Pineapple" <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:TadUa.119490$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
| Fromage Manger la Reddition Singe "MeGourreJe"
<ZorglubA...@yahoo.fr>
| wrote in message news:bfrc7d$oug$1...@news-reader2.wanadoo.fr...
|
| > But you were so sure to find them quickly, even pointing where to find
| > them,
|
| LOL. You'll have to do better than THAT.
|
| Desperately doing Google searches of my old posts in an attempt to
discredit
| here...you wouldn't waste this much time on ~me~ otherwise.
|
Bloated ego on display.
| So, do you have any cigarettes? Or an extra Jerry Lewis movie for me to
| watch?
|
|
| Apres?
|
| "L'évidence par l'opinion, Whineasshole?
| Cela ne l'a pas coupé seulement"-
| Usenet principal Fromage Manger
| la Reddition Singe Gary Roselles
|
|
Bradley K. Sherman
King Pineapple <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Dipshit "johnny" <john...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:dd1837d7.03072...@posting.google.com...
>
>> The U.N. also asked for more resouces, more teams of inspectors,
>> support staff and additional security details. The U.S. said: "What's
>> the point?".
>
>Actually, if you check another post I made today, I provided a cite showing
>where Bush had, in fact, asked the UN to DOUBLE Blix's team of inspectors.
>This was in January of this year.
Fine. We'll still be here next January reminding you that there
were no WMD.
--bks
man o' leisure
The President is fund raising at a frantic rate while the world turns to
shit,
US soldiers are killed daily in Iraq, and his economic policies ruin our
future. What a leader.
-- Man o' leisure
July 25, 2003
man o' leisure
| DNC Dim Bulb"Q" <WallyI...@erewhon.not> wrote in message
| news:9jn2ivkvvpc76cdih...@4ax.com...
| > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:28:08 GMT, "King Pineapple"
| > <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
| >
| > >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more
to
| > >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount
of
| > >time?
| > >
| > Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
| > Iraqi "escorts."
|
| LOL. Stop changing the subject and answer the question. WHY were you OK
with
| giving them more time, and not not OK with giving Bush more time?
|
|
I'm OK with giving them all the time they want. But, I don't think we'll
find anything. I also wanted to give Blix all the time he needed because it
seemed a easier way to insure Saddam was impotent as a threat to us. We now
know with reasonable certainty that he was indeed impotent as a threat to
the US. After all, we weren't after regime change per se, were we? Of
course the reasons for taking him out continue morph.
| > >Pardon, but your hypocrisy/desperation are showing. We'll find the
stuff.
We won't find the stuff. It ain't there.
man o' leisure
| DNC Dipstick "z" <z...@yada.yada.com> wrote in message
| news:Xns93C365DB140...@206.127.4.22...
| >
| > Blix and co were doing it for a hell of a lot less than a billion a week
| > and a few lives a day
|
| Last time I checked, NONE of the American casualties were sustained as a
| result of our looking for WMDs. Are you privy to classified data, or just
| shoveling bullshit as usual?
|
|
Remember we invaded to get the WMD out of Saddam's hands. Supposedly the
only way to be sure was to get rid of Saddam in the process. So, the deaths
and $$$$ are in fact the result of what looks more and more like a fictional
WMD search.
Julian D.
<po...@commiemartyrs.edu> wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:55:44 GMT, "King Pineapple"
><saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>Paid Political Hack "Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>news:yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
>>
>>>
>>> Blix had about twenty people
>>
>>Really? That's not what the Washington Post said:
>>
>>Washington Post, 11/28/2002, Page A1
>>
>>"A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
>>number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
>>which now consists of 300 people"
>>
>>
>>> We have 150,000
>>
>>
>>No we don't. We have 150,000 TROOPS in Iraq, give or take a few. We don't
>>have 150,000 WEAPONS Inspectors there.
>
>Troops know what a weapon looks like, and as they roam about they
>might be expected to come across some.
You don't seem to get it George. Bush wins either way. No wmd found
after a few years? They were shipped and hid in Syria, Iran, etc.
Iraq is known to hide things in other countries.
Bush wins. The left is STILL arguing against the removal of Hussein.
We did find 2 wmd so far: Hussein's 2 maniac homicidal rapist sons.
http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/072303p.htm
"THE HOWARD DEAN campaign was forced to cancel events this week in
response to events in Iraq. Donations to the Odai and Qusai Hussein
Memorial Fund can be submitted directly to the Dean campaign.
Dean responded to the passing of these martyrs to American jingoism by
angrily announcing that the ends don't justify the means. This is a
war we're talking about. Why don't the ends justify the means? (Note
to the Democrats: Just because you defended Bill Clinton doesn't mean
you have to defend every government official who is reliably reported
to be a rapist.) "
Ashland Henderson
> DNC Drone "Ashland Henderson" <macea...@astound.net> wrote in message
> news:441d41d1.03072...@posting.google.com...
>
> >
> > Don't be a bigger idiot than necessary.
>
> Answer my question, Ashcan.
You've had months, enormous resources and unlimited access. You lose.
> >We basically swore we knew where
> > it was. Pointed to it in pictures shown at the UN. Said that defectors
> > had shown us where it was. And so we invaded and now can't find a thing
> > with 150,000 troops on the ground and all of the other tools still
> available.
> > Can't even find people willing to show it to us for large rewards. Sheesh.
>
> Answer my question.
I just did.
> > > "I don't think it is reasonable to close the door on inspections after 3
> 1/2
> > > months," Blix said in his first public appearance since 134 U.N.
> inspectors
> > > were evacuated from Iraq, effectively ending a 12-year effort to disarm
> Iraq
> > > through inspections. "I would have welcomed some more time."
> >
> > And now you conservative nuts have had three months, massive manpower,
> > rewards offered, and all of the normal tools of intelligence and satellite
> > photography and can't find a thing.
>
> Answer my question.
I did. You are attempting to equate 134 inspectors with 150,000 troops and
absolutely unlimited access. You are showing off your stupidity. Or more
accuratly your blindness to the errors of your political leaders.
Sid9
==================================
==================================
For the most stupid among us it takes longer...or maybe forever....
==================================
==================================
George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
wrote:
>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:05:29 -0700, George Leroy Tyrebiter Jr.
><po...@commiemartyrs.edu> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 16:55:44 GMT, "King Pineapple"
>><saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>
>>>Paid Political Hack "Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>>news:yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blix had about twenty people
>>>
>>>Really? That's not what the Washington Post said:
>>>
>>>Washington Post, 11/28/2002, Page A1
>>>
>>>"A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
>>>number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
>>>which now consists of 300 people"
>>>
>>>
>>>> We have 150,000
>>>
>>>
>>>No we don't. We have 150,000 TROOPS in Iraq, give or take a few. We don't
>>>have 150,000 WEAPONS Inspectors there.
>>
>>Troops know what a weapon looks like, and as they roam about they
>>might be expected to come across some.
>
>
>You don't seem to get it George. Bush wins either way.
That's a different issue.
I don't know if Bush wins or loses.
I think it's too early to know..
No wmd found
>after a few years? They were shipped and hid in Syria, Iran, etc.
>Iraq is known to hide things in other countries.
>Bush wins. The left is STILL arguing against the removal of Hussein.
>We did find 2 wmd so far: Hussein's 2 maniac homicidal rapist sons.
You mean - assuming what President Bush told us about them is true.
He said they had WMD and that was bullshit.
He said these guys were horrible.
Why in the world should we believe a thing President Bush says?
>
>
>http://www.anncoulter.org/columns/2003/072303p.htm
Ann Coulter is a fraud, a liar, a plagiarist, doesn't believe what she
says.
Why read her?
I mean - you demean yourself.
Julie
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Crank "uhm" <7r76...@9j7dr8yr8.8jrd> wrote in message
>news:MPG.198b3046d...@news.newsguy.com...
>>
>> >
>> > You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>> > find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount
>of
>> > time?
>>
>> They weren't getting Americans killed
>
>Please cite the names of all of the Americans who have been "killed" while
>actually looking for weapons of mass destruction.
Marines Capt. Ryan Anthony Beaupre
Marines Maj. Jay Thomas Aubin
Marines Cpl. Brian Matthew Kennedy
Marines Staff Sgt. Kendall Damon Waters-Bey
Royal Marines Warrant Officer Mark Stratford
Royal Marines Sgt. Les Hehir
Royal Marines Color Sgt. John Cecil
Royal Marines Marine Sholto Hedenskog
Marines Lance Cpl. Jose Gutierrez
Marines 2nd Lt. Therrel S. Childers
Royal Marines Operator Mechanic 2nd Class Ian Seymour
Royal Marines Capt. Philip Guy 29 Bishopdale
Royal Marines Lance Bombardier Llywelyn Evans
Royal Marines Maj. Jason George Ward
Navy Lt. Thomas Mullen Adams
Marines Lance Cpl. Eric J. Orlowski
Army Capt. Christopher Scott Seifert
Air Force Maj. Gregory Stone
Royal Navy Lt. Philip D. Green
Royal Navy Lt. Marc Lawrence
Royal Navy Lt. Philip West
Army Spc. Brandon S. Tobler
Royal Navy Lt. James Williams
Royal Navy Lt. Cmdr. Antony King
Marines Sgt. Michael E. Bitz
Marines Sgt. Brendon Reiss
Army Sgt. George Edward Buggs
Marines Cpl. Randal Kent Rosacker
Marines Lance Cpl. David K. Fribley
Marines Cpl. Jorge A. Gonzalez
Marines Staff Sgt. Phillip A. Jordan
Marines 2nd Lt. Frederick E. Pokorney
Marines Lance Cpl. Brian Rory Buesing
Army Pvt. Brandon Sloan
Army Pfc. Lori Piestewa
Army Spc. James Kiehl
Marines Lance Cpl. Michael J. Williams
Royal Air Force Flight Lt. Kevin Main
Royal Air Force Flight Lt. David Rhys Williams
Army Sgt. Donald R. Walters
Marines Lance Cpl. Thomas J. Slocum
Marines Lance Cpl. Donald J. Cline
Army Spc. Jamaal R. Addison
Marines Pfc. Tamario D. Burkett
Marines Cpl. Kemaphoom A. Chanawongse
Marines Cpl. Robert M. Rodriguez
Marines Pvt. Jonathan L. Gifford
Royal Army Staff Sgt. Simon Cullingworth
Royal Army Sapper Luke Allsopp
Army Pfc. Howard Johnson
Army 1st Sgt. Robert J. Dowdy
Marines Pvt. Nolen R. Hutchings
Army Sgt. Edward J. Anguiano
Marines Lance Cpl. Patrick R. Nixon
Army Pvt. Ruben Estrella-Soto
Army Chief Warrant Officer Johnny Villareal Mata
Royal Army Lance Cpl. Barry Stephen
Army Spc. Gregory P. Sanders
Marines Lance Cpl. Thomas A. Blair
Royal Army Sgt. Steven Roberts
Marines Sgt. Bradley S. Korthaus
Marines Cpl. Evan T. James 20 La Harpe
Royal Army Lt. Andrew S. Wilson
Marines Staff Sgt. Donald C. May
Marines Lance Cpl. Patrick T. O'Day
Marines Pfc. Francisco A. Martinez Flores
Royal Army Trooper David Jeffrey Clarke
Royal Army Cpl. Stephen John Allbutt
Navy Hospital Corpsman 3rd Class Michael Vann Johnson
Marines Maj. Kevin G. Nave 36 White
Army Sgt. Roderic A. Solomon
Marines Sgt. Fernando Padilla-Ramirez
Army Spc. William A. Jeffries
Royal Army Lance Cpl. of Horse Matty Hull
Marines Gunnery Sgt. Joseph Menusa
Army Sgt. Eugene Williams
Marines Lance Cpl. William W. White
Army Pfc. Diego Fernando Rincon
Marines Lance Cpl. Jesus A. Suarez del Solar
Army Spc. Michael Edward Curtin 23 Howell
Army Pfc. Michael Russell Creighton-Weldon
Marines Staff Sgt. James W. Cawley 41 Roy
Marines Sgt. Michael V. Lalush
Royal Marines Christopher R. Maddison
Royal Army Lance Cpl. Shaun Andrew Brierley
Marines Sgt. Brian D. McGinnis
Marines Capt. Aaron J. Contreras
Army Spc. Brandon J. Rowe
Royal Army Staff Sgt. Chris Muir
Marines Lance Cpl. Joseph B. Maglione
Army Sgt. Jacob L. Butler
Royal Army Lt. Alexander Tweedie
Royal Army Lance Cpl. Karl Shearer
Marines Lance Cpl. Brian E. Anderson 26 Durham
Marines Pfc. Christian D. Gurtner
Army Capt. James F. Adamouski
Army Master Sgt. George A. Fernandez
Army Spc. Mathew G. Boule
Army Chief Warrant Officer Erik A. Halvorsen
Army Chief Warrant Officer Scott Jamar
Army Sgt. Michael F. Pedersen
Army Chief Warrant Officer Eric A. Smith
Navy Lt. Nathan D. White
Army Capt. Edward J. Korn
Army Staff Sgt. Nino D. Livaudais
Army Spc. Donald S. Oaks
Army Sgt. Todd J. Robbins
Army Sgt. 1st Class Randall S. Rehn
Army Spc. Ryan P. Long
Marines Cpl. Mark A. Evnin
Army Staff Sgt. Wilbert Davis
Marines Cpl. Erik H. Silva
Marines Pfc. Chad E. Bales
Army Capt. Russell B. Rippetoe
Marines Capt. Benjamin W. Sammis
Army Capt. Tristan N. Aitken
Marines 1st Sgt. Edward Smith
Marines Cpl. Bernard G. Gooden
Marines Capt. Travis A. Ford
Army Pfc. Wilfred D. Bellard
Marines 1st Lt. Brian M. McPhillips
Army Pvt. Devon D. Jones
Army Sgt. 1st Class Paul R. Smith
Marines Sgt. Duane R. Rios
Army Spc. Daniel Francis J. Cunningham
Army Spc. Larry K. Brown
Army Staff Sgt. Stevon A. Booker
Army Pvt. Kelley S. Prewitt
Royal Army Lance Cpl. Ian Keith Malone
Army Pfc. Gregory P. Huxley
Royal Army Piper Christopher Muzvuru
Royal Army Fusilier Kelan John Turrington
Marines Lance Cpl. Andrew Julian Aviles
Air Force Maj. William R. Watkins
Air Force Capt. Eric B. Das
Army Pfc. Anthony S. Miller
Army Staff Sgt. Lincoln D. Hollinsaid
Army 2nd Lt. Jeffrey J. Kaylor
Marines Cpl. Jesus Martin Antonio Medellin
Army Spc. George A. Mitchell
Army Staff Sgt. Robert A. Stever 36 Pendleton
Marines Pfc. Juan Guadelupe Garza
Army Pfc. Jason M. Meyer 23 Howell
Army Sgt. 1st Class John W. Marshall
Army Cpl. Henry L. Brown
Air Force Staff Sgt. Scott D. Sather
Army Staff Sgt. Terry W. Hemingway
Marines Gunnery Sgt. Jeffrey E. Bohr
Marines Staff Sgt. Riayan A. Tejeda
Marines Lance Cpl. David Edward Owens
Marines Cpl. Jesus A. Gonzalez
Army Spc. Gil Mercado 25 Paterson
Army Pfc. John E. Brown
Army Spc. Thomas A. Foley
Army Pfc. Joseph P. Mayek
Army Spc. Richard A. Goward
Marines Cpl. Armando Ariel Gonzalez
Marines Cpl. Jason David Mileo
Army Sgt. Troy Jenkins
Marines Lance Cpl. Alan Dinh Lam
Army Spc. Roy Russell Buckley
Marines Chief Warrant Officer Robert William Channell
Marines Chief Warrant Officer Andrew Todd Arnold
Army 1st Lt. Osbaldo Orozco
Army Spc. Narson B. Sullivan
Army 1st Sgt. Joe J. Garza
Royal Army Lance Cpl. James McCue
Army Pfc. Jesse A. Givens
Army Sgt. Sean C. Reynolds
Army Pvt. Jason L. Deibler
Royal Army Pvt. Andrew Kelly
Army Pfc. Marlin T. Rockhold
Army Cpl. Richard P. Carl
Marines Lance Cpl. Cedric E. Bruns
Army Chief Warrant Officer Hans N. Gukeisen
Army Chief Warrant Officer Brian K. Van Dusen
Marines Lance Cpl. Matthew R. Smith
Marines Lance Cpl. Jakub Henryk Kowalik
Marines Pfc. Jose Franci Gonzalez Rodriguez
Marines Lance Cpl. Nicholas Brian Kleiboeker
Air Force Staff Sgt. Patrick Lee Griffin
Marines Sgt. Nicolas M. Hodson
Royal Marines Maj. Stephen A. Ballard
Army Cpl. John T. Rivero
Ben Lock
300 as opposed to 150000 and yes there's 150K troops crawling around
in Iraq and yes they're keeping their eyes open and are you telling me
they're not told to look for weapons? We're no longer inspecting
sites we're going in and ransacking every building there's no
restrictions so why haven't they found it? Sure they can take all the
time they want but how long is too long, are you going to concede that
if they don't find it by the end of this year it's not there? OH
wait, you insist it's there so if they don't find it in 3 years do
they still occupy and continue to search??? Your argument doesn't
have a leg to stand on buddy.
"King Pineapple" <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<kidUa.119499$Io.10...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net>...
> Paid Political Hack "Robert" <wayne_s...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:yzaUa.6530$4o1....@newssvr16.news.prodigy.com...
>
> >
> > Blix had about twenty people
>
> Really? That's not what the Washington Post said:
>
> Washington Post, 11/28/2002, Page A1
>
> "A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
> number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
> which now consists of 300 people"
>
>
> > We have 150,000
>
>
> No we don't. We have 150,000 TROOPS in Iraq, give or take a few. We don't
> have 150,000 WEAPONS Inspectors there.
>
> but not willing to give it to Bush? Checkmate.
>
>
> ever yesterday with a team that includes a 53-year-old Virginia man with no
> specialized scientific degree and a leadership role in sadomasochistic sex
> clubs.
>
> background check on Harvey John "Jack" McGeorge of Woodbridge, who was in
> New York waiting to be sent to Iraq as a munitions analyst. McGeorge was
> picked for the diplomatically sensitive mission over some of the most
> experienced disarmament sleuths in the world. A U.N. spokesman said McGeorge
> was part of a group recommended by the State Department, which in turn said
> it was merely forwarding names for consideration.
>
> The disclosures about McGeorge's qualifications come as concerns are being
> raised among some former U.N. weapons inspectors that the current team lacks
> experience. The former inspectors, who worked for the United Nations Special
> Commission created after the Persian Gulf War, say the new inspectors have
> been selected in part to avoid offending Iraq. These critics say that Hans
> Blix, the executive chairman of the U.N. Monitoring, Verification and
> Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), is bypassing some experienced inspectors
> because they were opposed by Iraq as too aggressive in the earlier
> inspections.
>
> Former inspectors also say that rules requiring applicants to quit their
> government jobs meant that some of the best-qualified experts did not apply,
> leaving many positions to be filled by applicants, such as McGeorge, from
> the private sector. The former inspectors also say the current inspection
> team lacks the size, mobility and equipment to do its job adequately, and
> that the new U.N. policy of not sharing information with intelligence
> agencies could further handicap the team's ability to find weapons sites.
>
> U.N. officials defended their team of inspectors, saying that they are
> highly qualified and among the best in the field. But they acknowledged that
> they conducted no background checks.
>
> "As the United Nations, with people applying from many countries, we do not
> have the capability to do that," said Ewen Buchanan, a spokesman for
> UNMOVIC. "How would you check?"
>
> McGeorge is a former Marine and Secret Service specialist who offers
> seminars on "weaponization of chemical and biological agents" for $595 a
> session. Since 1983, he has been president of his own firm, Public Safety
> Group Inc., which sells bioterror products to governments. One online ad
> promotes his role as a "certified United Nations Weapons inspector."
>
> McGeorge does not possess a degree in one of the specialized fields -- such
> as biochemistry, bacteriology or chemical engineering -- that the United
> Nations says it seeks in its inspectors. U.S. and U.N. officials said a
> background check apparently was not conducted on McGeorge or any of the
> inspector applicants.
>
> An Internet search of open Web sites conducted by The Washington Post found
> that McGeorge is the co-founder and past president of Black Rose, a
> Washington-area pansexual S&M group, and the former chairman of the board of
> the National Coalition for Sexual Freedom. He is also a founding officer of
> the Leather Leadership Conference Inc., which "produces training sessions
> for current and potential leaders of the sadomasochism/leather/fetish
> community," according to its Web site. Several Web sites describe McGeorge's
> training seminars, which involve various acts conducted with knives and
> ropes.
>
> McGeorge said yesterday that a State Department official invited him to
> apply for the U.N. team, and officials at State and the United Nations did
> not ask about his S&M background. But he said he would tender his
> resignation to Blix if The Post printed a story about it.
>
> "I have been very upfront with people in the past about what I do, and it
> has never prevented me from getting a job or doing service," McGeorge said.
> "I am who I am. I am not ashamed of who I am -- not one bit. But I cannot
> allow my actions, as they may be perceived by others, to damage an
> organization which has done nothing to deserve that damage."
>
> A State Department official said that the Bureau of Nonproliferation
> collected résumés from potential UNMOVIC candidates and then passed along,
> without recommendation, those who appeared to meet the general criteria of
> the jobs. However, the official said he believes that background checks were
> not conducted before the résumés were forwarded.
>
> Half the 100 inspectors picked so far were recommended by governments, and
> the other half applied directly to the United Nations. Buchanan added that
> the United Nations considers McGeorge's private life irrelevant to his role
> as a munitions analyst.
>
> "I believe that Mr. McGeorge is technically very competent," Buchanan said.
> "He knows his subject, which is weapons. As a general principle, I think
> what people do in their private life, as long as it doesn't interfere with
> [their] professional life -- and I'm not aware that it has interfered -- or
> doesn't break any rules or laws, shouldn't be a significant issue."
>
> Interviewed by telephone, McGeorge defended his training and experience. "I
> was a military ordnance explosive disposal specialist," McGeorge said. "I
> was very well trained on chemical and biological agents."
>
> McGeorge's résumé indicates that he trained as an inspector with UNMOVIC in
> February 2001 in Vienna. He said he was interviewed in person by Blix and
> joined the team as a temporary staff member in December 2001.
>
> McGeorge's professional background reveals he served for a few years each as
> a Marine ordnance disposal technician and a munitions countermeasures
> specialist with the Secret Service, both stints occurring more than 20 years
> ago.
>
> On his résumé, McGeorge lists an honorary doctorate from a Russian institute
> in Moscow. McGeorge received an associate's degree in security management
> from Northern Virginia Community College in 1983. He also lists numerous
> articles on chemical and biological weapons in such publications as Defense
> and Foreign Affairs and NBC Defense & Technology International.
>
> One of his most cited achievements is preparing, under contract with the
> federal government, a compendium of incidents involving biological and
> chemical agents dating back to the 1940s.
>
> Past weapons inspectors have criticized the selection of inspectors, saying
> experienced candidates, including former missile inspector Timothy V.
> McCarthy, were passed over. The critics say the new team needs seasoning if
> it is to find minute evidence of weapons-making in a country the size of
> Texas.
>
> "We just knew too much," said Richard Spertzel, former head of the
> biological weapons inspection team for the U.N. Special Commission on Iraq.
> "They couldn't pull the wool over our eyes."
>
> The two renowned experts retained, Igor Mitrokhin and Nikita Smidovich, will
> not be conducting field inspections.
>
> Mitrokhin, a respected Russian chemical weapons expert, has been named the
> chief of the agency's health and safety division. Smidovich, a Russian
> missile expert whose encyclopedic knowledge of Iraq's missile program has
> long made him unpopular in Iraq, has been appointed head of inspector
> training.
>
> Smidovich said during a break at recent training session that although there
> is a "new culture" at UNMOVIC, the agency still has "very tough inspectors."
> He said that the less experienced inspectors can learn everything they need
> to know from a massive archive that includes a recording of virtually every
> meeting with the Iraqis. "We have it all on tape," he said.
>
> Blix defended the abilities of the new inspectors, saying that his chief
> inspector, Demetrius Perricos, "probably has the greatest experience in the
> world."
>
> "He has 30 years of inspections behind him," he added. "He handled the whole
> North Korea business in the IAEA [International Atomic Energy Agency]; he
> was in Iraq in the beginning of the '90s; he was in South Africa and handled
> the verification of the disarming of their nuclear weapons."
>
> A U.N. Security Council diplomat said that Washington wants to increase the
> number of inspections and double the size of the inspection team's roster,
> UNMOVIC to move up the date of the next scheduled training session from
> January to December. One council official said that Blix was likely to begin
> "a sort of worldwide trawl" for new inspectors.
>
> Another council diplomat acknowledged the new inspection agency lacks the
> experience of its predecessor and that it will take time to reach full
> speed. "A lot of the inspectors are inexperienced, and it's a matter of not
> trying to push UNMOVIC to run before it can walk," said a council member.
>
> Former inspectors also were concerned about reports that members of the
> current UNMOVIC team work in the private sector and might have products to
> sell. A stint on a U.N. inspections team can boost an inspector's profile,
> bringing media attention and lucrative business opportunities, as some of
> the former inspectors found.
>
> One current inspector works for a company developing a sensor to detect
> biological substances, such as anthrax spores.
>
> "I don't know of any technology out there for biology that you could wave
> over and say this is a bad building," said former inspector and biological
> warfare expert David Franz.
>
>
> Correspondent Colum Lynch and researcher Alice Crites also contributed to
> this report.
>
> Washington Post
> Thursday, November 28, 2002; Page A01
Warren Stupidity
wrote:
>Checkmate?? hahaha
>300 as opposed to 150000 and yes there's 150K troops crawling around
>in Iraq and yes they're keeping their eyes open and are you telling me
>they're not told to look for weapons? We're no longer inspecting
>sites we're going in and ransacking every building there's no
>restrictions so why haven't they found it? Sure they can take all the
>time they want but how long is too long, are you going to concede that
>if they don't find it by the end of this year it's not there? OH
>wait, you insist it's there so if they don't find it in 3 years do
>they still occupy and continue to search??? Your argument doesn't
>have a leg to stand on buddy.
The argument is essentially circular. It assumes its conclusion: WMD
exist in Iraq, and then restates all objections based on this
assumption. Weapons not found yet? They will be because they are
there. Weapons not in Iraq? Because they exist they must have been
moved out of Iraq. After we invade Syria and Iran, and they don't have
any of Iraq's WMD, what then? Space Aliens Are hiding Them?
See Occam's Razor.
==
Mark Roddy
"Further, the process of transformation,
even if it brings revolutionary change, is
likely to be a long one, absent some
catastrophic and catalyzing event like a
new Pearl Harbor."
-- Project for a New American Century,
-- the neocon cabal's blueprint for world empire.
http://www.newamericancentury.org
Charlie Board
>
> DNC Dim Bulb"Q" <WallyI...@erewhon.not> wrote in message
> news:9jn2ivkvvpc76cdih...@4ax.com...
> > On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 13:28:08 GMT, "King Pineapple"
> > <saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
> >
> > >You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
> > >find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount of
> > >time?
> > >
> > Enlighten us: How many people were on Blix's team? Did they have
> > Iraqi "escorts."
>
> LOL. Stop changing the subject and answer the question. WHY were you OK with
> giving them more time, and not not OK with giving Bush more time?
>
a) Because Bush claimed to "know" that he had them. A claim that could only
be truthfully made with solid, verifiable intelligence on where they were. Something Blix
never claimed to have and we obviously didn't have. As far as I know, Blix never
lied to us. Bush has done nothing but lie.
b) American soldiers weren't dying every day when Blix was doing the looking.
c) It wasn't costing us billions when Blix was doing the looking.
d) Blix could've kept looking without the US having to kill more innocent
civilians than Osama did on 9/11. Bush "looking" required slaughter
and destruction on a very large scale. And hasn't been any more effective.
Shall we keep going?
I answered your question, now you answer mine. In February you guys were screaming
that the three months the UN inspectors had to find something was plenty and the fact
that they han't proved their incompetence. Why aren't you holding Bush (who , as you
note, has infinitely freer access) to the same standard?
Tom Jong Il
wrote:
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That's probably not quite true. Blix didn't seem totally unhappy with
the access he was getting.
There were ever bigger anti-war demonstrations and, with Saddam's
cooperation, it was increasinly apperent that there were no 'WMD's
that were a remote threat to us, and possibly not any at all. Cheney
knew that he had to start the war when he did, and he banked on the
fact that when it came time to pay the piper for all the lies, it
still wouldn't require us leaving all that oil. Sure enough, I have
yet to hear anyone call for bailing out on either side.
Julie
<saddl...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>DNC Crank "uhm" <7r76...@9j7dr8yr8.8jrd> wrote in message
>news:MPG.198b3046d...@news.newsguy.com...
>>
>> >
>> > You were willing to let Blix and the UN stay in there for MONTHS more to
>> > find the stuff. How come you're not willing to give US the SAME amount
>of
>> > time?
>>
>> They weren't getting Americans killed
>
>Please cite the names of all of the Americans who have been "killed" while
>actually looking for weapons of mass destruction.
>
Notice how the pineapple person ran away and hid after I posted the
names he asked for.
Typical.