Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!

From: Ian St. John (istjohn_at_noemail.usa)
Date: 03/12/05 

Date: Sat, 12 Mar 2005 01:39:12 -0500

Fred J. McCall wrote:
> "Ian St. John" <istjohn@noemail.usa> wrote:
>
>> Fred J. McCall wrote:
>>> lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>>
>>>> In article <424746d8.170780128@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>,
>>>> simberg.interglobal@org.trash (Rand Simberg) wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:05:23 -0500, in a place far, far away, "Ian
>>>>> St. John" <istjohn@noemail.usa> made the phosphor on my monitor
>>>>> glow in such a way as to indicate that:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then tell us what we've found.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> They did. In the final report. Nothing.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you're referring to the Duelfer report, you apparently didn't
>>>>> read it, because it didn't say they found nothing. It said in
>>>>> fact that there were WMD, and the clear intent to redevelop them
>>>>> in mass quantities as soon as he could get the sanctions lifted.
>>>>
>>>> Liar. You are a bald-faced liar. It said NO WMD.
>>>
>>> Wrong, Lloyd.
>>
>> Well, that makes Fred a bald faced liar.
>
> Wrong. I already posted the text from the portion of the report that
> mentions them.

And you fail to comprehend that there were at least one or two weapons under
U.N. bond waiting disposal before the invasion. The U.S. cannot claim to
have 'found' weapons which were fully accounted by the regime and the U.N.
and then 'rediscovered' by the U.S. in their desperate search for a cover
story. Fact is that NO NEW WEAPONS were found. NO stockpiles. No capacity
to produce WMDS. The whole pretext for the war was thus shown to be a lie.

>
>> But what do you expect from those
>> who have lost the war over facts and have nothing left to do but
>> either defend the war as 'just plain stupid' or claim some
>> premonition of future crimes.
>>
>> http://www.cia.gov/cia/reports/iraq_wmd_2004/
>>
>> The poliical content of the report must be carefully removed and the
>> facts come to light. No WMDs or facilites to produce WMDs.
>> Everything else is
> :'mindreading' and political figleafing.
>
> "...a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been
> discovered...."

And a small number of chemical weapons were waiting disposal under U.N. bond
before the illegal invasion. These weapons were fully accounted for and do
not constitute 'finding' anything. Nor was the war about a few artillery
shells awaiting disposal under U.N. authority. The claim was for massive
stockpiles of weapons NOT accounted for by the U.N. and the capacity to
produce them. NONE of the claims has been shown to have ANY basis in fact.
>
> So says the report. You keep screaming "None!" Even one is more than
> none. You're wrong. Under your rules, that makes you a bald faced
> liar.

The bald faced liars are still in power and supported by idiots that cannot
distinguish between a few weapons under U.N bond awaiting disposal and
massive stockpiles that posed a threat. Are you too full of *** to use your
brain or has it been numbed by years of disuse?

P.S. NONE were *found*. A few of the tens or score of old munitions awaiting
disposal under U.N authority were 'recovered' after being scattered by the
invasion. About the only other thing that the U.S. did was scatter some old
atomic waste by blundering into a known U.N. disposal site and lose a few
hundred tons of high explosives which probably were diverted to CIA
operations.

Quantcast