Posts by dubla

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

search-

Again,
They have changed the evidence needed from actual weapons to evidence of 'programs'.

and AGAIN, who is "they"? has bush said this? rumsfeld?

It doesn't matter about the size of the haul, as long as some are found, and I really think they will find some soon.

okay, so weve established that you think they will still plant actual weapons....so now we can go back to my original point. if they plant weaopns NOW, it will prove that they DIDNT know there werent any there; that they in fact thought they WOULD find weapons in iraq....otherwise, they wouldve made SPECIFIC plans to plant weapons LONG AGO in order to avoid all this controversy. or maybe they didnt forsee anyone having a problem with no weapons being found? come now, if they knew there werent any weapons there, and they planned to plant them....why wait until now? why not plant them immediately after the war? please show me your logic.....im very interested to hear it.

And yes I do think they are capable of planting it...

read back through my posts to robyn, and youll see that i have already agreed with you on this point.

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

search-

btw, just noticed this statement:

just the perspective changed through the 'prism' of what happened on sept 11th...again totally changing what they said before the war, that there was a clear and present danger to the security of the US and Britain.

thats not "changing" what was said......in fact it makes perfect sense. to me, (someone who doesnt buy into the "bush planned 9/11" theory, mind you), september 11th proved that there was more of a clear and present danger than previously believed. how is this contradictory?

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

search-

you keep skipping over my points and reaffirming points that are out of context.

The evidence of WMD 'programs' could probably be found in every country of the world...that is not what we were told Saddam had. We were told he had the actual Weapons themselves.

exactly, and you said:

There is still time to plant evidence.

so, if what we are trying to prove is that he had actual weapons themselves (as i said, ive yet to hear bush say that we are merely looking for "programs", and i really thing that statement by blair is being blown out of proportion), then what exactly would we need to plant? you said there is still time to plant evidence......what type of evidence are you talking about?

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

search-

They have changed the wording to say WMD 'programs'.

wasnt that just one sentence from blair, or has this come from both sides now (you are saying "they")? i havent heard that from bush or rumsfeld, but maybe i missed it. personally, i think it was just a statement that is being blown way out of proportion.

This evidence can now come in the form of computor disks, dossiers and interviews with scientists.

this doesnt support your opinion that they could still plant evidence.....this type of evidence has already been uncovered. "proof" of the fact that there were weapons "programs" has already been uncovered, many times over....why would they need to plant anything further? the only thing they could possibly need to plant at this point would be actual evidence of wmd, such as a sample of anthrax (that was my example).....and if this was done now, it would only prove that they didnt know there wouldnt be weapons found...otherwise the planting wouldve already taken place....dont you agree?

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

robyn-

Only an idiot would try to plant evidence because it is no doubt that he would be caught doing it.

well, youll have to argue with the conspiracy theorists on that one. they would have us believe that bush was behind 9/11, so if thats true, he could no doubt plant a small specimen of anthrax. (obviously i dont buy into all the conspiracy garbage.)

ive been told by many posters on here that planting evidence in iraq would be a snap for the u.s......honestly, i dont know how hard it would be, but i would guess that if the quantity was small enough, and the people "in the know" were few enough, it wouldnt be that difficult to contain the secret.

I, for one, have never thought that Bush is an idiot.

well, youre one of the few bush opposers that dont then.

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

search-

There is still time to plant evidence.

thats not the point......of course theres always still time. but if they planted evidence now, what would that prove? it would prove that they DIDNT know there werent weapons there to begin with. and isnt that what everyone has been contending...that they flat out lied? if they knew full well there were no weapons in iraq, and there were plans to plant evidence after the war, it wouldve been done WAY before now.

aa

865

WoMD ... so where are they?

by Simon in

now, the war is over, the weapons were not used and of course have not been found.. how threatening could they be if they did not even use them when being invaded by a massive force (of the countries they hate)?!

perhaps, as many suspect, they didn't use them because they didn't have them?.

now we're being told that we'll have to be patient and give them time to find them.

dubla

abaddon-

This theory only works if you assume they could plant WoMD with 100% cast iron secrecy. Maybe they are too afraid having the whistle blown to try and plant them?

i dont know if you were one of them or not, but it wasnt too long ago that the majority of the antiwar crowd on this forum was screaming about how wmd would be planted.........i believe it was realist who contended that it had been done before by the cia, and would be a snap to do it again. personally, i never fully bought into that, as i think it would be way too difficult to plant large quantities of mustard gas or whatever........but, that being said, i do believe that if gwb knew full well that there were no wmd in iraq, he wouldve at least arranged for small quantities of SOMETHING (anthrax or other bio agents for example) to be found IMMEDIATELY following the war. if hes smart enough to mastermind the worlds biggest lie, surely he wouldve been smart enough to plant a petri dish of anthrax.....why didnt he? i still believe (personally) that the search is far from over (just look at the buried centrifuge parts for example).....and the fact that nothing has been found yet only validates any future finds, as any planting of evidence wouldve taken place by now.

teejay-

... supplied by the U.S.

the mustard gas saddam used on his own people was supplied by the u.s.? i honestly didnt know that. do you have any links to back that up? thanks in advance.

aa

90

Williams sisters

by Phil in

jw
friends

i was recently having a discussion with a jw on the extent to which the williams family are jws.

his statement was that only the mother is a jw.

papa?

dubla

i really dont see what the big difference is, baptized or not. they are actively and publicly using "jehovahs name"....isnt that reason enough (from a witness standpoint) for the sisters to be making sure their lives are above reproach (and within chritian guidelines) in every way possible? otherwise, wouldnt they be bringing reproach on jehovahs name? someone from the "it only matters if they are baptized" side please correct me if im wrong in that line of thinking.

also, i remember a while back the sisters were showcased on the back of an awake (i think) magazine as jehovahs witnesses.......it seems that would throw them out there as being publicly jehovahs witnesses, baptized or not. if anyone has access to that article, it might even shed light on the baptism debate....but i dont remember if that was included in it or not, just guessing.

aa

46

Hunt For Missing Boeing

by searchfothetruth in

this is a strange one.

a jumbo jet that had been sitting on a runnway for 14 months, suddenly starts down a runway, takes off and disappears.. nobody knows who took it, or where it is...i didn't know there were scousers in angola!.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3003058.stm

dubla

search-

So it seems that the Boeing that went missing was piloted by an American

you say this as if its a brand new piece of news.?. dont you read your own links? heres a clip from the very first article you posted on this thread (bold/italic mine):

There is also concern about a missing US pilot who had been sent to Angola by a plane-leasing company in Florida.

The US authorities are said to believe he was at the controls when it left Luanda.

The family of the man, Benjamin Padilla, have told ABC News they thought he may have been kidnapped.

hmmmm.......doesnt look like the newest article is exactly a revelation, but thanks for the update anyhow.

aa

7

Getting Dateline or BBC programs?

by drwtsn32 in

.

is there any way to get the dateline program "witness for the prosecution" or the bbc program "suffer the little children"?

dubla

alan-

youve got mail.

aa