PS Just as an addendum to what Phoenix and blatham have stated - citations to sources are expected here. If anyone here is prepared to make assertions, then they should be equally prepared to back up said assertions with documentation. Since we are in cyberspace, the logical way to document said assertions is with cites to web pages, so that the other participants can judge the sources for themselves (e. g. to see if the sources may be biased, to note if the assertions being made are complete, if the context is correct, etc.). Blanket statements without backup should be treated as opinion/bluster and not assertions of fact. This is why you will often see me asking people for cites.
Many thanks!
Steve, Thanks for that correction! "Hear, hear!" The sad news is, I was going deaf long before I thought I lost my hearing...... c.i.
Walt
She loves you Yeah Yeah Yeah (repeat)
Hear Hear old Boy!
In Hamburg 1960 Yeah! (Black leather)
CI Pardon? All that music down the Cavern Club has affected my earsight.
Steve, Thanks for the Parlimentarian Poli Sci insight. It is much appreciated!
BillW
Back to topic
Bush wants his war, but he also wants an excuse for starting it. If he tells Blix what he already knows about the location of nerve gas that the US has sold Saddam, Blix and his team might find it. If he finds it and removes it, Bush loses his excuse to start a war. So for different reasons, the US UK and Iraqi governments are all doing everything they can to ensure the survival of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (at least for now). There is a word for this type of behaviour, but cynicism doesn't quite match its mendacity.
How about "political fraud?" c.i.
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:Back to topic
Bush wants his war, but he also wants an excuse for starting it. If he tells Blix what he already knows about the location of nerve gas that the US has sold Saddam, Blix and his team might find it. If he finds it and removes it, Bush loses his excuse to start a war. So for different reasons, the US UK and Iraqi governments are all doing everything they can to ensure the survival of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction (at least for now). There is a word for this type of behaviour, but cynicism doesn't quite match its mendacity.
I would like to reply to this but instead I refer you to something you said on Page 14, Dec,2002, 12:39 PM. of this same thread.
C.I.
This may also apply to you
Perception
Perception
Don't see why this stops you from replying. I don't make any pretence that the statements above are my opinions, but they are opinions that accord with the facts as I understand them.
Hans Blix has castigated the US and UK for not coming forward with intelligence that could help him uncover the whereabouts of VX nerve agent. Isn't the name of the game identifying and destroying Iraq's WMD? I can understand why Saddam would want to obstruct Blix and his team, but it only makes sense for the US and UK to be doing this if they don't actually want them found, or at least not all of them and not just yet.
Steve
It was your insulting implication about Bush's motives---Since you nor C.I. are privy to anyone's motives it might be wise to wait until those motives are actually exposed before voicing your sarcasm and or cynicism.
Glad to see your logic is not as faulty as your as your tendency to be a psychologist----We are not ready to go to war so I also suspect the US and the UK are withholding the "evidence" until we are ready.
It is also my opinion that Blix must publicly criticize(not sure if castigate is not too strong) the with-holding of information because he does not want to appear to be puppet.
We are very glad to have the opinions of our most reliable ally and you certainly have the right to say anything you want about our President and his administration. Just don't be surprised if some of us take it rather personally. Some of the others on this forum feel exactlyl as you do and are laughing at my thin skin so don't be alarmed.
Looking forward to more good natured exchanges if you so desire.
Steve
BTW I ignored your insult that the US sold the nerve gas to Saddam. I would ask that you supply proof of this charge or apologize.
Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.
dyslexia
I sorry, but you must give me more proof than just making a statement---Please give document title/links so that I can read it for myself.
congressional record sept 20, 2002 submission of records of CDC
There's only one thing can be said for certain. There's gonna be a war.
perception: if you would like i believe i can find the photocopy of the CDC invoice listing the exact pathogins and amounts that were shipped to Iraq and the dates therein which is also in the congressional record.
We armed Iraq during the Iraq/Iran war and I remember thinking at the time that it was going to come back to haunt the U.S., just like the abortive CIA assassination attempt in 1985 - Sheikh Mohammed Hussein Fadlallah, Lebanese Shiite leader where 80 people were killed in the attempt). I've not been able to find any evidence that the U.S. sold any chemical or biological agents to Iraq. It seems more possible that U.S. companies were able to ship chemical components but it's more possible that they obtained them from other countries. This would make us appear to be complicent by the lack of investigation and/or a secrecy surrounding what was uncovered. This just compounds the suspicions of not just our government but any government in the free world who isn't properly overseeing what private enterprise will do to make a buck.
Well, I have to go out Christmas shopping but have scanned over the links dyslexia posted -- looks like a rather good piece of evidence.
