Re: Runaway Global Warming Possible!

From: Ian St. John (istjohn_at_noemail.usa)
Date: 03/08/05 

Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2005 22:05:23 -0500

Lloyd Parker wrote:
> In article <1lfm21tklofdvffunqviivq6qa2agktvri@4ax.com>,
> Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote:
>> lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>
>>> In article <2qfa21p0n857dqfk1lb3g17vqb11o4nalq@4ax.com>,
>>> Fred J. McCall <fmccall@earthlink.net> wrote:
>>>> lparker@emory.edu (Lloyd Parker) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <42416fc7.999432908@newsgroups.bellsouth.net>,
>>>>> simberg.interglobal@org.trash (Rand Simberg) wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 28 Feb 2005 11:11:37 -0500, in a place far, far away,
>>>>>> "Vendicar Decarian" <VD@Pyro.net> made the phosphor on my
>>>>>> monitor glow in such a way as to indicate that:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "Rand Simberg" <simberg.interglobal@org.trash> wrote in message
>>>>>>> news:424068e1.997667530@newsgroups.bellsouth.net...
>>>>>>>> He has made neither of those claims (unless by "about to be"
>>>>>>>> you mean many years from now).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> "We found WMD. We found em." - George Bush (congenital liar.)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think you're the congenital liar here. WMD doesn't have to
>>>>>> include nuclear weapons. One can "find WMD" by finding simply
>>>>>> chemical weapons.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which we've not done either.
>>>>
>>>> Except, of course, that we have.
>>>
>>> You are lying.
>>
>> Wrong.
>>
>>> We have found none.
>>
>> Wrong again.
>
> Then tell us what we've found.

They did. In the final report. Nothing.

>
>>
>>> Of course, since 2/3 of Republicans
>>> believe we have, your delusion is quite normal for you.
>>
>> This says that 2/3 of Republicans can actually read, which apparently
>> puts them well ahead of you.
>>
>>>> What we haven't done is found them in large quantities.
>>>
>>> Or small, or medium.
>>
>> I'd say you're merely ignorant, but given your vehemence I think it's
>> out and out lying.
>>
>> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
>>
>> http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2004-01/11/content_297802.htm
>>
>> http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3448.html
>>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A24403-2004Jul2.html
>>
>> http://english.pravda.ru/main/2002/12/05/40413.html
>>
>> How many would you like?
>>
>> Liar, Ian. You're merely a liar.
>>
>
> None of which say we've found WMD since we haven't. (OK, maybe Faux
> News would say that.)

Main point is that even the U.S. final report admits that their were no
stockpiles or capabilities, only a risk of 'someday' which is meaningless as
anyone might do something someday. It was not the necessary 'smoking gun'
that would justify a 'retaliatory strike' but merely a selective
interpretation of badly flawed intelligence selected to support a private
war.

Relevant Pages