Pleasuredome

Joined

• started 241 topics
• posted 2,473 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Pleasuredome

• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  im not in iraq, its only my opinion.

  search.... thats all it is. just let him wallow in his opinions. like anything has changed since the start of this thread because of them.
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  dubla

  the issue's always closed where you're concerned

  did you not come to the conclusion of agreeing to disagree?

  none of us are going to prove anything on this subject. it's just opinions. but you keep going on all the time like you've got something to prove, like as if you're more superior and more knoweldable than anyone else and when it comes to relate what you actually know without pasting a load of links or copying text from another site you fail miserably. you're fast becoming a complete bore.

  you're right in your eyes, i'm right in mine.
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  if you have to wonder what planet you are on, its time to get help.

  i better rush to the doctor straight away, hey dub? while i'm there i can ask why some prats dont understand what a metaphor is.
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  clause 10 speaks of providing information on iraqs programs to unmovic and the iaea......are there specifically non-permanent members in unmovic or the iaea that were not provided this information? if so, please provide links to back this up....im unaware of it.ive often wondered exactly that after reading your conspiracy fantasies.

  i often wondered which planet i was on after reading you government BS

  but you told me in a previous post that if ANY other country had removed these pages (other than the u.s.),

  what i said was 'a document like this'. what i should have made clear was a situation like this, which the US were on the wrong side of. so dont put words in my mouth

  personally, im glad that the nuclear "how to" manuals arent displayed on a public website......obviously that censorship bothers you.

  yes, wouldnt want groups like al-qaeda using that info would we?

  Diplomats and U.N. officials said the shorter report lacked any information that might assist in the production of nuclear weapons. The names of companies that may have purposely or unwittingly sold Baghdad materials that were later used in weapons production were also deleted, diplomats and U.N. officials said.

  i notice your quote above which say 'MIGHT assist'. whats bloody 'might' about it? in other words it doesn't. the real issue i would sugest is the protecting the info on goverments and companies that supported saddams regime. you cant prove what you are saying and you keeping banging on about this crap. not only that, you expect everyone to take as gospel everything any politician or governmental agency/worker, when they dont back up what they say.

  clause 10 speaks of providing information on iraqs programs to unmovic and the iaea......are there specifically non-permanent members in unmovic or the iaea that were not provided this information? if so, please provide links to back this up....im unaware of it.

  very strange sarcasm indeed.

  it was meant as a nonsense statement, to show how ridiculous your claim about clause 10 was.

  you stated

  funny how you think i was making a 'claim' and a 'statement'. did i make a statement or ask a question on that point???? a good example of how you twist what others say.

  oh and by the way, UNMOVIC reports to the security council, not just the permanent members, and it's the security council that makes the final decision by vote. so when you say when you say that the other permanent member were behind the pages removed, thats good observation. howerver the US lead that removal, that themselves did it, and so are the focus for it. i hope thats cleared up for you.

  no, i realize now that it was in fact george w. bush and dick cheney that hijacked those planes, and parachuted out before impact.....but thats a story for another thread.

  probably more likely than bin laden organising it from a CIA funded cave complex in afghanistan .
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  managed to find one newspaper report of the 8,000 pages dubla

  not good news though as it doesnt support your argument, oh dear, what a shame, never mind. not hard evidence, but i cant see you providing hard evidence either, but here it is.

  translation from a german newspaper website

  http://www.taz.de/pt/2002/12/18/a0049.nf/text

  The USA censor Iraq report

  Germany and the other not-constant members of the UN security council receive
  version of the weapon dossier only settled. Data concerning foreign suppliers are missing

  GENEVA taz Substantial parts of the Iraqi arms report are withheld from the ten not-constant members of the UN security council, to whom starting from January also Germany will belong. From the version of the report intended for it all information about the supplies and the support of foreign enterprises, research labs and governments for the Iraqi arms programs was painted since center of the 70's-years. On this censorship the five constant councillors the USA, Russia, China, France and Great Britain informed themselves. According to data of dpa reduces the report of 12.000 to 3.000 sides.

  After information taz from UN diplomats from two of these five countries this censorship was agreed upon primarily on urge of the USA. Among the five constant members of the security council the USA - so the Iraqi arms report - with distance were involved in the strongest in the armament of the regime by Saddam Hussein with means of mass destruction.

  The report supplies for the first time a complete overview of it, which the 24 US companies in particular mentioned supplied when to whom with on in the Iraq. And it makes clear, how strongly the administrations of the presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush senior supported the armament of Iraq in the time of 1980 up to the gulf conflict of 1990/91. Substantial construction units for the Iraqi nuclear weapon and the rocket program were supplied with permission of the government to Washington. The poison Anthrax for the armament of Iraq with biological weapons originates from US laboratories. There Iraqi military and armament expert were trained in the USA and received know-how for their domestic arms programs.

  According to estimate of the US Ruestungskontrollexpertin Susan WRIGHT of the University of Michigan a publication of these information would be extremely embarrassing "for the USA". It would remind "humans in the USA of a very dark chapter, which wants to make the Bush administration gladly forgotten". It continues to remain unclear first whether the USA painted not already certain information, before they made copies for the other four constant members. "ANDREAS CLOSE
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  dubla

  sorry i must have been living on another planet.

  i've searched for docs pertaining to anyone of the 8,000 pages that the US took out, and funnily enough i cant find any. i check the news often and have never seen anything on them.

  what i have read is claims by 'colon' powell that they were a 'catalogue of recycled information and flagrant omissions'. well, if thats what you refer to then i can say that i can sleep easier tonight. powell says this, so it must be true. "dont bother to back up what you say colin, 'cos we believe you." if all you have is quotes from politicians, then dont bother dubla. if you have hard evidence, then i'll put my hands up and say i was uninformed.

  why arent you crying about the fact that china didnt want that info in the hands of every government?

  'cos it doesnt bloody surprise me thats why! all the permanent members of the security council have had their fingers in the iraq pie. the US were the ones who removed it so that's the focus. dont cloud the issue, hey dubla.

  oh, and just a little point about being uninformed. check your own quote out

  clause 10 speaks of providing information on iraqs programs to unmovic and the iaea......are there specifically non-permanent members in unmovic or the iaea that were not provided this information? if so, please provide links to back this up....im unaware of it.

  non-permanent members in UNMOVIC? what the hell are you talking about? here's a little lesson on what UNMOVIC is

  http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/

  here's what IAEA is

  http://www.iaea.or.at/

  this just another typical example of you arguing about something that you know nothing about, just like the official timeline of 9/11.
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  i thought, i though, i thought....

  serious consquences means war, does it? oh yes very specific!

  "how to" manuals

  what does this BS mean? i take you were privy to that info then?

  unmovic has to report to the security council, including the non-permanent members who the take a vote on what action is to be taken. if you're going remove 8,000 pages of documentation, so non members dont get the full picture, then how can the come to a fair view of the declaration?

  it was agreed by the permanent members (not just the u.s.) that taking out the "how to" manuals on nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons was in everyones best interest. do you disagree with that decision, and if so, why?

  if what you say was right, then how kind of the US to everyone this favour. whats the big deal about it? just ignore the pages for goodness sake. if it had been anyone else who had removed pages from a document like this you would have made a big deal of it.

  just do yourself a favour dubla. stand back, take a look at the big picture, and say "yes, it's a piece of $hit"
• 
  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. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  dubla

  resolution 1441, which was unanimously voted for in the u.n., specifically called for war if iraq didnt comply

  could you "specifically" back that up?

  clause 10 of the UN resolution 1441 said:

  10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their mandates, including on Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited items, and by recommending sites to be inspected, persons to be interviewed, conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected, the results of which shall be reported to the Council by UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

  now didn't the US breach clause 10 by removing 8,000 pages of the Iraqi declaration before it was handed over to the non-permanent members of the UN security council?

  I'LL BE BACK!
• 
  20

  He died on a cross

  by ClassAvenger in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  do any of you ex-jehovah witnesses still believe that jesus died on a stake, or a cross?

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  oh i see, this is about jesus on the cross. i thought it may have been about Tamuz.
• 
  6

  Still cant have a cig in peace....

  by Pleasuredome in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  i went out friday night to a local night club.

  5 jws.

  typical i thought.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Pleasuredome

  hi Az

  they're not really rebellious, just the run of the mill young JWs.

  just cant go anywhere can i?