Posts by dubla

48

Israel rejects truce with terrorists

by Hamas in

it was reported today that islamic jihad and hamas have offered a truce in an attempt to push for peace in israel.

instead of accepting this, israel has declined it.

rather, they are prepared to continue targeting more innocent palestinians in the region.

dubla

hamas-

Instead of accepting this, Israel has declined it. Rather, they are prepared to continue targeting more innocent Palestinians in the region.

i hadnt seen anything to that affect....any links?

aa

865

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

President Bush skipped quickly past the niceties and went straight to his chief political obsession: Where are the weapons of mass destruction?

why is bush even asking that? after all, he knew all along they werent there, didnt he?

aa

31

All-time Worst Movie Sequels

by teejay in

e-online recently compiled

no question about it ... there have been some stinkers.

here's e-online's list.

dubla

matrix reloaded is definitely in my top 10 .....along with men in black 2, and most likely t3 if i decide to subject myself to actually watching it......im thinking of just preserving the feel of the first two and pretending this latest one doesnt exist.

the phantom menace is actually a prequel, but since its being mentioned in this list, ill just say that i agree with dedalus.....attack of the clones was about 3000 times worse than phantom menace. at least menace had some decent acting (liam neeson) and a great villain (darth maul). clones was so painful i actually wanted to walk out, and i was one of the idiots standing in line on opening night......a mistake i dont intend to repeat for episode 3.

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

realist-

it is absolutely ok to correct wrong statements but it is not ok to try to disqualify everything said based on a few mistakes.

well, i certainly have never tried to disqualify everything youve said based solely on your fabrications. the fact that you twist the truth when its convenient does devalue your overall argument, but it certainly doesnt disqualify it. youve got the best point of all so far on your side, namely: no wmd have been found.

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

realist-

its funny since you cannot win in the big picture you try to adhere to unimportant details in my posts.

first off, let me just say: to that comment. its a nice way to try and devalue my points, but its completely false. personally, i dont consider intentional fabrications and fact twisting to be "unimportant details", and i think its valuable to debunk those statements as soon as i notice them.

the latest team still says they are NOT sites for WMD production.

the "latest team" was undecided, so lets not get back to word twisting (thats quite the talent you have).

since i am not a native speaker perhaps you can explain the term " more senior analyst " to me.

i would guess they are analysts that have more seniority than the others.

LOL you weisenheimer...it could also mean 1 to 20! LOL

the article specifically said that only "several" of the analysts were skeptical. i suppose "several" could mean 20, but its usually used to mean 3 or 4, and ive never heard anyone use it for a large number.

LOL a very small minority??? since you are demanding proof for every assumption please show me a link that proves this point! LOL you know even 51 to 49 is a majority! LOL

yes, to me "several" compared to all the groups of analysts that examined the trucks is no doubt a very small minority.....i think most anyone would agree to that.

i guess they should have declared every driving vehicle in the entire country! LOL

the vehicle factories, yes. wouldnt this seem logical to you, considering the implications?

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

realist-

if i remember correctly the first guys were no specialists on fermenters for bioweapons.

as i suspected, this was just another attempt to paint an untrue picture. i found the article you posted on this thread regarding the mobile labs, and i found that the majority of experts that have examined them do indeed believe they were used for bioweapons, as ive been saying all along (and i cant find any statement that claims the original experts werent "specialists on fermenters for bioweapons"). ill give you a quick recap of your article....lets start with the title:

Some Analysts of Iraq Trailers Reject Germ Use

http://www.jehovahs-witness.com/14/50669/769916/post.ashx#769916

notice the word "some"? that suggests a minority right off the bat.

In all, at least three teams of Western experts have now examined the trailers and evidence from them. While the first two groups to see the trailers were largely convinced that the vehicles were intended for the purpose of making germ agents, the third group of more senior analysts divided sharply over the function of the trailers, with several members expressing strong skepticism, some of the dissenters said.

ill break down this paragraph for you. three total teams have examined the trailers. the first two teams concluded they were solely biolabs. the third team was DIVIDED, meaning even half (or more) of the "senior analysts" also concluded the trailers were intended for germ agents. notice that only "several members" expressed skepticism? "several" normally means three, so in this instance, out of all the "experts" that examined the trucks, THREE whole people were skeptical! WOW....i dont know about you, but three skeptics is proof positive to me that these trucks were simple bakeries.

heres another tidbit i found interesting (bold/italic mine):

"I have no great confidence that it's a fermenter," a senior analyst with long experience in unconventional arms said of a tank for multiplying seed germs into lethal swarms. The government's public report, he added, "was a rushed job and looks political." This analyst had not seen the trailers himself, but reviewed evidence from them.

well, this guy has "no great confidence that its a fermenter", but hasnt even looked at the truck first hand! again, rock solid proof in my mind, i dont need anything further.

A senior administration official conceded that "some analysts give the hydrogen claim more credence." But he asserted that the majority still linked the Iraqi trailers to germ weapons.

as ive said all along, its a very small minority that believe otherwise, and there will be a debate on any wmd issue, even if 100,000 tons of mustard gas are found (there will ALWAYS be "skeptics").

He added that Iraq, which declared several classes of mobile vehicles to the United Nations, never said anything about hydrogen factories.

hmm, why not declare the "hydrogen factories"? nothing to hide, right?

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

realist-

i did not miss that part. i just found your counting explanation kind of weird.

hmmm, weird that we took inventory of the weapons we actually found? i was simply stating that part of the numbers blix was going off of was known inventories from when inspectors were actually there to take them. and as far as your earlier comment, i wouldnt put it past iraq to move weapons (between 1998 and 2003) that had already been inventoried. none of their antics would surprise me.

i don't think i claimed the numbers from the UN report are faked.

youve alluded all along that you arent sold on their accuracy..........i dont see much of a difference.

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

realist-

ill try to make this quick, as i think for all intents and purposes we are getting nowhere.

if i remember correctly the first guys were no specialists on fermenters for bioweapons.

id love to see links to that affect, this is the first time ive heard of it.

so the iraqis had layed down the weapons infront of the inspectors ...the inspectors counted them and then watched as the iraqies carried them away to hide them again? hmmmm

you missed a major part of my statement, seemingly even as you reposted it....curious, but ill try to help you out:

part of the original inventory (as stated on the '95 u.n. report you referred to) was iraqs ADMITTED stockpiles that had yet to be inspected....lets not forget that (and ive maintained that its common sense that the actual numbers would be considerably higher than the admitted numbers)......

ill try to explain in smaller words. iraq, at the time, admitted to having specific quantities in their wmd stockpiles. these quantities are on the u.n. report i supplied. not all of these stockpiles had been inspected (and counted) as of '98, mainly, id guess, because of non-cooperation by iraq. its pretty simple, but im sure youll just claim the numbers are all a big lie, which, once again, you have no credible backing for.

still i don't see why iraq is not allowed to have WMDs while the US......

an entire seperate issue, which has nothing to do with this thread.

what irrational things by the way?

must i go back and show you where YOU stated you didnt understand why saddam was irrational about kuwait?

i can just say you are a sweet innocent kid if you really think bush cares about africa.

i didnt say i thought he did, i just dont think (regardless of political implications) you can sit here and tell me what any human being feels or doesnt feel in their heart about someone elses suffering. you can paint bush as a person with no feelings for anyone but himself and his own agenda, but it wont make it so. we arent mind readers, and i dont personally claim to be one.

aa

6

HAMAS, Have you Been Visiting Columbus, Ohio?!

by teenyuck in

jw
friends

hamas, is this you?!

did you come to columbus and not tell me?

enemy agent: working for al-qaeda, faris, a truck driver from columbus, ohio, scoped out the brooklyn bridge for a possible attack.

dubla

His ex-wife is stunned that he was working for and meeting with Osama bin Laden.

what? everyone knows that osama bin laden is as much of a fairy tale as santa claus.

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

realist-

if i remember correctly early inspections came to the result that the labs were bio weapon labs. however the real experts

the "real experts"? you mean, anyone disagreeing with the original "expert" opinions can be the only "real experts"? um, okay.

does this bastard give a cold rats ass about africa??? certainly not.

your mind-reading ability is nothing short of astounding.

who counted them? the inspectors? how did they do that? and why weren'T the weapons distroyed right after they were counted?

how did they count them? um, 1, 2, 3, 4, etc..........it takes some time to destroy weapons, and they were in the process of doing that when they left in 1998. part of the original inventory (as stated on the '95 u.n. report you referred to) was iraqs ADMITTED stockpiles that had yet to be inspected....lets not forget that (and ive maintained that its common sense that the actual numbers would be considerably higher than the admitted numbers)......thus the "unaccounted for" weaopns.

one thing seems clear though ...the US was interested in keeping the conflict boiling.

if youre referring to scott ritter (your first article), i think we can all agree that his allegations havent been backed by anything solid.

and lets look at your second article....a timeline from the non-biased (according to the antiwar crowd) bbc:

28 February 1991: Gulf War ends, leaving Iraq subject to UN sanctions and arms inspections.

29 October 1997: Iraq bars US weapons inspectors, provoking a diplomatic crisis which is defused with a Russian-brokered compromise.

13 January 1998: Iraq blocks an inspection by a US-dominated team and accuses its leader, Scott Ritter, of spying for America.

23 February 1998: UN Secretary General Kofi Annan announces a deal on weapons inspections after meeting Saddam Hussein in Baghdad.

31 October 1998: The Iraqi leadership says it has ceased all co-operation with Unscom, the United Nations Special Commission set up for weapons inspections in Iraq.

14 November 1998: Baghdad tells the UN it is willing to allow inspections to resume.

17 November 1998: Unscom inspectors return to Iraq.

16 December 1998: The UN orders weapons inspectors out of the country after Unscom chief Richard Butler issued a report saying the Iraqis were still refusing to co-operate. US air strikes on Iraq begin hours later.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2167933.stm

um, yeah, that surely looks like it was the u.s. who wanted to keep things brewing, and doesnt at all show any lack of cooperation from saddam on any of the inspections issues.

i wont bother commenting on the obviously heavily biased propaganda in article three, from the "socialst worker on-line".

imo gave iraq the right to disagree on further resolutions about inspections.

well then, its your opinion that saddam had every right to keep inspectors out of his country.....again, you are on an island with this one, compared to the majority of the world.

i think we should wait until more neutral sources report about this case. uranium centrifuges are huge machines and a couple of parts burried 12 years ago in a garden hardly constitute a smoking gun.

i said specifically that it wasnt a smoking gun, did you miss that? the point i was making is that any parts of any centrifuges should have been declared somewhere in that 13,000 page report. any non-declaration constitutes non-compliance, as im sure you know. why should they lie about anything? after all, they didnt have anything to hide, right?

why would he have risked that?

why is north korea risking it? why did hussein do any of the irrational things he did? hmmm, the word madman pops back to mind, but weve already been down that path.

if bush lied (and that part of the reports were poor fabrications is an established fact) about one aspect of the WMDs in iraq why are you so eager to believe he would tell the truth about the other aspects?

i think if bush was wrong, he didnt know it. i believe that bush, along with every country in the world, truly believed saddam still had wmd. i love how bush is, when convenient, painted as a complete dunce with half a brain.....but when its convenient, he surely couldnt have been dumb enough to think those reports were credible. which is it? is he a mastermind that pulled the wool over everyones eyes? or is he the idiot that didnt think about the criticism that would no doubt follow after the u.s. failed to find what he knew full well wasnt there? you cant have it both ways.

PS: by the way...one question...what does dubla mean?

my initials, a.a......."double a", shortened to dubla.

aa