dubla

Joined

• started 31 topics
• posted 2,222 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by dubla

• 
  865

  WoMD ... so where are they?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  for simon and william (bold/italic mine).............

  NEW YORK (CNN) -- Twelve years after the Persian Gulf War began, some American veterans of that conflict are finding new ammunition in their fight to find out who supplied Iraq chemicals that might have made them sick.

  More than 5,000 veterans are plaintiffs in a lawsuit that accuses companies of helping Iraqi President Saddam Hussein build his chemical warfare arsenal. The plaintiffs are among the tens of thousands who came down with "Gulf War Illness," a debilitating series of ailments that can include chronic fatigue, skin rashes, muscle joint pain, memory loss, and brain damage.

  Now, plaintiffs' attorneys have acquired, for the first time, what they believe is strong evidence of which companies supplied Iraq the chemicals that might have been used to produce mustard gas, sarin nerve gas and VX.

  The Iraqi list names 56 suppliers of chemicals and equipment to process them. A majority are based in Europe.

  Germany is home to the most major suppliers listed in Iraq's 1998 U.N. declaration. The Netherlands and Switzerland each are home to three companies on the list. France, Austria and the United States each are home to two. The declaration says Singapore was the largest exporter of chemical weapons precursors. Other countries home to alleged chemical exporters to Iraq include India, Egypt, Spain and Luxembourg, with one each.

  Neither American company listed -- Alcolac International, based in Baltimore, Maryland; and Al-Haddad Trading, based in Nashville, Tennessee -- are still in business.

  No one from Al-Haddad could be reached.

  Alcolac paid a fine in 1989 under U.S. law for one charge of exporting thiodiglycol, a chemical that could be used to make mustard gas, but that shipment was destined for another country.

  http://edition.cnn.com/2003/LAW/01/18/iraq.chemical.suit/

  this hardly supports the statement that the u.s. governement supplied mustard gas to saddam, does it boys? the above allegations (nothing has been proven) dont even back up your fabrications. according to these allegations, the vast majority of the chemical precursors saddam used came from everywhere but the united states, and a grand total of zero of the components came from our government.....and again, the fact that u.s. companies (all TWO of them) were even a part of this has yet to be proven. you got called on a lie, now id appreciate it if both of you would come clean and admit you were twisting the facts.

  aa
• 
  865

  WoMD ... so where are they?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  william-

  You ask for proof of the US suppling weopons to Iraq

  actually, thats not at all what i asked for.........the only proof i asked for was proof that the u.s. government supplied mustard gas to saddam (a statement you and simon both made). you can dance around and create a smokescreen by showing that the u.s. aided iraq during the iraq-iran war, but it doesnt prove we provided the mustard gas that was used on the kurds (which we didnt). that tidbit is simply a blatant fabrication.......which is why i havent heard back from simon on it yet, id presume.

  im not one to yell "anti-american" every time someone is critical of the u.s. government (theres nothing wrong with disagreeing about political policies)......but when you have to go out of your way, as you and simon have, to twist facts and fabricate things like "the u.s. supplied the gas", it definitely shows a very strong anti-american sentiment.....it shows your true colors.

  aa
• 
  865

  WoMD ... so where are they?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  william-

  are you serious? really, that is your proof? the fact that you believe those statements even back up your stance is laughable, and im almost embarrassed for you.

  youve given a statement saying that a small number of companies in the u.s. sold technology to iraq.......the statement has no strong backing as far as i can tell from your link, and even if its true, this supports the u.s. government supplying mustard gas to iraq how?

  and your second statement, about the sting operation......again, how does this support the notion that the u.s. government supplied mustard gas to iraq? in fact, if it was a u.s. customs sting, doesnt this support the exact opposite, that the u.s. was actively trying to stop the components from getting into saddams hands? interesting logic youre using there.

  aa
• 
  865

  WoMD ... so where are they?

  by Simon in

  1. social
  2. current

  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.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  simon-

  ... and why supply the gas

  this is the second time ive seen this statement in this thread. the other time i asked the poster for some proof of this claim (and i got, of course, no reply), and ill do the same this time. do you have any backing for this statement, or is it just another fabrication? more specifically: please supply links showing that the mustard gas saddam used on the kurds was supplied by the u.s.

  aa
• 
  22

  Mike Tyson, misunderstood or misanthropic ass#@!&

  by Thunder Rider in

  1. watchtower
  2. medical

  i was watching one of the sports chanels the other day and saw an hour long story on mr. tyson.

  there were several segments showing different prefight interviews.

  his behavior at these gatherings was incorrigable.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  money talks, period. as long as mike isnt in jail, and he still wants to fight, there will be a venue and an opponent available. the bottom line is, no matter what tyson does, he is still by far the biggest draw in boxing....people want to watch him, and will pay good money to do so. i cant tell you how many times ive watched a tyson fight and listened to numerous people talking about how much they hate iron mike.........yet there they are watching the fight. so, every time he enters the ring, not only does he have his hoards of fans waiting for the next big knockout punch, but he also has his millions of haters waiting for his next blunder.......and theyre all beefing up the ratings and keeping mike in the spotlight.

  aa
• 
  6

  Our glorious right to free speech

  by Euphemism in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  .

  otherwise known as "the best legal brief ever": (warning: constant and repeated use of a vulgar synonym for coitus).

  http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/fword1.html

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  lol

  aa
• 
  46

  "God views apostacy as a much graver sin than pedophilia"

  by Yizuman in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  warp wrote this on the forum......"god views apostacy as a much graver sin than pedophilia, and that is a biblical fact.".

  http://www.touchstoneforum.com/htdocs/dcforum/dcforumid2/81.html.

  that's pretty sick coming from a jw in good standing!

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  heres another bit from that thread........

  Chris it is disquieting to hear a person assign gravity to apostasy over pedophilia.

  Unfortunately Covia, it is not me that is doing so, it is God. Please find me one text in the Bible that equates child abuse as grave as apostacy. Do you think child abuse and pedophilia did not exist in ancient years?

  Large parts of the Bible, in particular it's condemnations against Judah and false religion, are directed to those who have apostacized the truth of God. Do you not think that it signals something in particular that such large percentages of the Bible deal with his hatred of apostacy? I can quote you literally scores of texts that do so. Can you quote me one that deals with child abuse as being hated as much by God in any way?

  I am not trying to diminish the hurt this sinful act causes. It is deceptive to equate my statement as somehow approving this sin. However, the plain fact shows that although there is no doubt God hates this sin as a perversion of his natural laws, his hatred of apostacy is far more clear in the Bible. If you do not feel this is accurate, then I suggest you prove otherwise.

  aa
• 
  117

  Letter from a friend in Iraq

  by Yerusalyim in

  1. social
  2. current

  ok, i won't give his name, but he is a major with an engineer unit in iraq.

  here's what he has to say on iraq, i've highlighted a few interesting points.

  it has been a while since i have written to my friends about what's really going on here in iraq.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  t h-

  Actually the troops that were sent over are a security force, not peace-keepers, and no decision has been made about us sending troops there, for peacekeeping purpouses.

  the decision (that we already knew was coming), has officially been made now.

  Bush Orders U.S. Troops to Liberia Coast

  http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=515&e=2&u=/ap/20030725/ap_on_re_af/us_liberia

  and as i said before, these troops are NOT going over there simply to protect the embassy.

  aa
• 
  94

  Saddam's Sons Confirmed Dead

  by DevonMcBride in

  1. social
  2. current

  .

  cnn is reporting that saddam's sons, oudai and qusay are confirmed to be dead.

  .

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  did anyone watch david letterman last night? about half way through his monologue, he looks down at his watch and says, "well, right about now odai and qusai should be arriving in HELL"........lol.

  aa
• 
  17

  Clinton on WMD flap: 'Everybody makes mistakes'

  by Yizuman in

  1. social
  2. current

  bill clinton on bush uranium line: 'everybody makes mistakes' former president accepts explanation on state of the union

  wednesday, july 23, 2003 posted: 1:31 pm edt (1731 gmt).

  washington (cnn) -- the white house, attacked by critics for a now-retracted line about iraq seeking uranium from africa in president bush's state of the union address, has gotten some surprising support from former president clinton.. "i thought the white house did the right thing in just saying 'we probably shouldn't have said that,' " clinton told cnn's larry king in a phone interview tuesday evening.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  dubla

  Clinton and Bush had pretty much the same agenda when it comes to war and the policy in the Middle East.

  i dont doubt that one bit.......in fact, thats what ive been saying all along. it made no difference who was in the white house (democrat, republican), saddam was going to be taken out of power, and for good reason imo. it just gets tiring hearing about how this whole war was/is bushs evil plot, and how bush lied to us all (notice clinton believed bushs "lies" before bush even told them!), etc, etc..........the vast majority of the antiwar crowd cannot see the fact that this war had very little to do with bush....he just pushed the final button.

  aa