Sadam Hussein

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Why TS it does appear you are trying to desperately deny the viciousness of the Hussien regime by attacking me. A true immoral liberal you are my friend. Whats next will I find pictures of my house or a family member on the internet?

I have never claimed that Saddam is anything other than a dog and murderer; why is it you that feel that you must make false statements about what I've posted?

You have zero credibility, and apparently not much of a life.

 

[tieguy]

Why TS I must congratulate you for finally stepping up and admitting Hussien was actually a dog and murderer. Keep up the good work and your credibility may someday climb up to mine.

 

[tieguy]

Why are the facts "slowly leaking out"? Who's hiding them?

Great question to ask Jones. Why is this video finally seeing daylight after 3 years. Who has been sitting on it all this time? Or is it an intelligence issue where we had to shift through so much that it took this long for discovery.

 

[wily_old_vet]

Heard a good explanation for the the tapes today. It was posited that if the truth were to come out about wmd's that a lot of people on the left would be greatly disgraced. They will fight tooth and nail not to have that happen.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Heard a good explanation for the the tapes today. It was posited that if the truth were to come out about wmd's that a lot of people on the left would be greatly disgraced. They will fight tooth and nail not to have that happen.

Would Rush Limbaugh be your source for this, perchance?

 

[tieguy]

Would Rush Limbaugh be your source for this, perchance?

TSK TSK there goes your credibility rating again TS. I would have expected you would have been outraged at the implications of a possible cover up of these tapes. Instead we have another effort to discredit this line of thought. You'll never climb up to my credibility rating at this pace TS.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

TSK TSK there goes your credibility rating again TS. I would have expected you would have been outraged at the implications of a possible cover up of these tapes. Instead we have another effort to discredit this line of thought. You'll never climb up to my credibility rating at this pace TS.

Tie,

What is it with you? I asked wily a simple question, why do you feel the need to answer for him? Do you know where wily got his 'good explanation' from?

You aren't really a management person at UPS are you? What is your official capacity at UPS? Do you even work there?

 

[Jones]

Heard a good explanation for the the tapes today. It was posited that if the truth were to come out about wmd's that a lot of people on the left would be greatly disgraced. They will fight tooth and nail not to have that happen.

I am curious where you heard this as well. Is the idea that some "liberal" somehow came into sole posession of this evidence, and has been hiding it the whole time? That seems a little hard to believe. If this evidence is at all credible, why isn't the White House talking about it? Very simply, because they know it's not credible. The Iraqi general who made these claims has a lot to gain by peddling them....He has just written a book called "Saddam's Secrets", and he's essentially on a promotion tour. He has been unable to corroborate any of what he says, you basically can choose to believe him or not. Go buy his book if you like, he seems to need the money.

I prefer to trust the findings in the Duelfer Report, which, among other key findings included the following:
While a small number of old, abandoned chemical munitions have been discovered, ISG judges that Iraq unilaterally destroyed its undeclared chemical weapons stockpile in 1991. There are no credible indications that Baghdad resumed production of chemical munitions thereafter, a policy ISG attributes to Baghdads desire to see sanctions lifted, or rendered ineffectual, or its fear of force against it should WMD be discovered.

Further:
In practical terms, with the destruction of the Al Hakam facility, Iraq abandoned its ambition to obtain
advanced BW weapons quickly. ISG found no direct evidence that Iraq, after 1996, had plans for a new BW
program or was conducting BW-specific work for military purposes.

Just for clarification, BW= Biological weapons, ISG= Iraq Survey Group.

Charles Duelfer was the man that the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs. He spent 12 months in Iraq tracking down every lead before making his report to congress, and quite frankly I think he's a lot more credible than some former Iraqi general who's shilling for a book deal on Hannity and Colmbs.

Here's an excerpt from the Washinton Post's coverage of his testimony, and keep in mind that this is Bush's man:

Duelfer's report, delivered yesterday to two congressional committees, represents the government's most definitive accounting of Hussein's weapons programs, the assumed strength of which the Bush administration presented as a central reason for the war. While previous reports have drawn similar conclusions, Duelfer's assessment went beyond them in depth, detail and level of certainty.
"We were almost all wrong" on Iraq, Duelfer told a Senate panel yesterday.


This information is all out there, guys, it's a matter of public record. Read the Duelfer Report, read the 9-11 Commision Report.


And Tie, stop with the "liberal" stuff, everybody who disagrees with the policies of the current adminstration or who cares about finding the truth is not a "liberal". Labeling people is a convenient way of dismissing someone without having to adress what they are saying.

 

[tieguy]

Tie,

What is it with you? I asked wily a simple question, why do you feel the need to answer for him? Do you know where wily got his 'good explanation' from?

You aren't really a management person at UPS are you? What is your official capacity at UPS? Do you even work there?

I'm sorry TS I didn't realize it was a private conversation. For some reason I thought you could send private messages for private conversations thus allowing all message board postings to invite public participation and commnentry.

I am what I am at UPS you have not demonstrated a need to know though I might be willing to participate if you were to share first. Otherwise just consider me whatever your little fantasies require.

 

[tieguy]

Jones all of what you have posted has been previously presented. Thus the question why these tapes are now surfacing after the issue of WMD's and Hussiens threat to the US had supposedly been dismissed as you highlighted.

Thus I think a critical question we have to ask is where was this information being presented now hidden and is there more we don't know about. I'm sure those on the left do not want anymore of this type of information surfacing. I give credit to those in the press who had the courage to leave the liberal pack and present this news though quite late in the game.

The liberal label does fit and is used to describe those who have the liberal point of view. Politics have proven to be very polarizing. There are very few exceptions that I have seen. TS is a classic example. He will try to attack me in every way to keep from having to deal with the issue that there may have been a Hussien plot to terrorize the US or the planned usage of WMD's by Hussien.

I'm not sure where you are with these issues. Feel free to break from the pack and be an exception if you're so inclined. I would find it refreshing.

 

[wily_old_vet]

TS-Yes, as a matter of fact I did hear it on Rush Limbaugh but that in no way diminishes the truth of that statement.

Jones-Happy that you believe someone as evil as Hussein would unilaterally destroy his wmd's in 1991. Personally I don't. I also don't happen to believe that if he did so that he would pretend to still have them and thus cause the invasion of his country.

But I guess in the opinions of you two I am just some dumb dittohead. So be it.

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Re: Sadam(sic) Hussein

Jones all of what you have posted has been previously presented. Thus the question why these tapes are now surfacing after the issue of WMD's and Hussiens threat to the US had supposedly been dismissed as you highlighted.

Thus I think a critical question we have to ask is where was this information being presented now hidden and is there more we don't know about. I'm sure those on the left do not want anymore of this type of information surfacing. I give credit to those in the press who had the courage to leave the liberal pack and present this news though quite late in the game.

.

Maybe to promote the conference he has this weekend? The guy has no credibility and is trying to make a buck. Do your research.

 

[tieguy]

Re: Sadam(sic) Hussein

Maybe to promote the conference he has this weekend? The guy has no credibility and is trying to make a buck. Do your research.

Ah TS if only you would work as hard at trying to discredit the liberal side as you do the right. Your credibility could possibly climb upwards closer to mine.

 

[Mr. Brown]

Don't know why you all are getting heated over the issue of WMD, I'm sure he had many plans to do harm to the USA and other countries. Sadam Hussein is a evil man and needs to get punished for all he has done!

 

[Tyrone Slothrop]

TS-Yes, as a matter of fact I did hear it on Rush Limbaugh but that in no way diminishes the truth of that statement.

Jones-Happy that you believe someone as evil as Hussein would unilaterally destroy his wmd's in 1991. Personally I don't. I also don't happen to believe that if he did so that he would pretend to still have them and thus cause the invasion of his country.

But I guess in the opinions of you two I am just some dumb dittohead. So be it.

Wily, I was just asking, your buddy tie is the one who said a Rush Limbaugh comment would 'discredit this line of thought'. Thanks for revealing your source, though. I guess you can always call an opinion 'truth'.

Funny thing, you and tie throw around the term 'liberal' as if it means traitor. Truth is, I am conservative; problem is, the current regime running our country is anything but 'conservative'. The Barry Goldwaters of yesterday are the Howard Deans of today (ok--that might be a stretch, but not that much of one).

I don't believe I've ever called you dumb, but I would tell you the same thing I would tell anyone; do your own research and make up your own mind. I'm not sure what a dittohead is, but I would guess it's someone who just repeats what they are told without due diligence.

Thanks again for being forthcoming, have a nice weekend.

 

[tieguy]

Wily, I was just asking, your buddy tie is the one who said a Rush Limbaugh comment would 'discredit this line of thought'. Thanks for revealing your source, though. I guess you can always call an opinion 'truth'.

Ahhh now you're trying to get cute with the facts. It was a clear effort on your part to discredit the source by throwing Limbaugh into the conversation.

Funny thing, you and tie throw around the term 'liberal' as if it means traitor. Truth is, I am conservative; problem is, the current regime running our country is anything but 'conservative'. The Barry Goldwaters of yesterday are the Howard Deans of today (ok--that might be a stretch, but not that much of one).

You a conservative. Thats Rich

I don't believe I've ever called you dumb, but I would tell you the same thing I would tell anyone; do your own research and make up your own mind.

And as long as he does his research and he agrees with your point of view then he is ok. If he comes up with a different answer then he didn't do his own research?

 

[wily_old_vet]

TS-I agree with you about this administration and some of the things they do. Border control and spending are the two biggest blunders on their part in my mind. That said I believe that if either Al Gore or John Kerry had been elected we would be in far worse shape. I live just outside of Washington D.C. so the major paper I get my information from is the Washington Post which is hardly a conservative paper. Please explain to me how one of their main political REPORTERS (not a opinion writer) can go onto a news show dressed in a hunting vest right after the accidental shooting by Cheney and try to make people believe that he is objective. I agree with you that many on the left did not want to see the man die but those on the far left IMO are sorry that he didn't. There were just too many news people asking questions about what Cheney could be charged with if he did die. I find it interesting that you call yourself a conservative because I have not seen you take one position on here that faintly resembles conservative thought. Please correct me if I am wrong. As far as calling opinion "truth" I will agree with you to a degree. Do I believe it's the truth that there are those on the left who will do whatever they can to discredit any information regarding wmd's? Yes. Can it be proved? Only if they were extremely sloppy in their attempts to do so. So does that mean that my opinion is untrue? No. Hope you have a nice weekend as well.

 

[moreluck]

Today, someone was questioning Cheney's selection of a pink tie when he did the interview with Britt Hume. The man is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't. What possible secret coded message could he be sending OR what could he possibly be trying to keep from the American people by wearing a pink tie?????

 

[tieguy]

Perhaps the liberals think they own the rights to pink ties...

 

[tieguy]

Perhaps they were upset that a conservative was more fashion aware then they were