Discussion:
No WMD in Iraq
(too old to reply)
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 17:38:09 UTC
Permalink
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.

Bush never could have persuaded the American people and Congress of the
need for war if it had been known that what would be found were a few
busted shells. When Bush clamored for war, he painted a picture of
bunkers full to the ceilings with thousands of shiny artillery shells
that could be rapidly deployed and used. Bush said Iraq had WMD
factories churning out thousands of liters of chemical and biological
agents. It was all a lie. There were no such bunkers, no such
factories - and Bush knew it.

This sophomoric gag - that a few busted shells with no more than trace
amounts of chemicals - "meet the definition" of WMD is something that
can only occur in a meaningless forum like Usenet, where any
pseudonymous political extremist hack blowhard can say whatever he
likes. There's a reason Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld aren't playing
this gag: they know it's bullshit.

"Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of
mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. ...
We removed a declared enemy of America who had the
capability of producing weapons of mass murder." -
George Bush, July 12, 2004.

"It turns out that we have not found weapons of mass
destruction. Why the intelligence proved wrong I'm not in
a position to say, but the world is a lot better off with
Saddam Hussein in jail." -
Donald H. Rumsfeld, Oct. 4, 2004.

The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
BTR1701
2018-03-20 17:52:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.

Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.

As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.

If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 18:50:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice. The threat to the
United States was portrayed to be existential, and that threat was what
justified an invasion. It was all a lie.
Post by BTR1701
US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq,
Those were all built and deployed after the American's illegal invasion.
BTR1701
2018-03-20 19:02:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there, I'd say they *were* deployed at a moment's notice.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 19:04:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there
More bullshit. We encountered the Iraqi army as soon as we got over
there. The IEDs were devised by *rebels*, you fucking liar - they
weren't part of the alleged "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush lied
and said Saddam had.

You're getting nowhere.
BTR1701
2018-03-20 19:14:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there
More bullshit. We encountered the Iraqi army as soon as we got over
there. The IEDs were devised by *rebels*, you fucking liar - they
weren't part of the alleged "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush lied
and said Saddam had.
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD, then yes, Hussein had massive
stockpiles of WMDs. He had an army. He had bombs.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 19:23:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there
More bullshit. We encountered the Iraqi army as soon as we got over
there. The IEDs were devised by *rebels*, you fucking liar - they
weren't part of the alleged "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush lied
and said Saddam had.
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion. He was
talking about supposed "WMD" manufactured by the Iraqi regime and held
in "massive stockpiles" that posed an existential threat to the USA.

There were no such WMD and no such threat. Stop lying about it.
BTR1701
2018-03-20 23:05:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion.
I'm not (only) talking about them, either. We've legally defined "WMD" to
include bombs. Hussein had an army. Hussein had bombs. Therefore, Hussein
had WMDs.

A + B = C
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 23:22:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion.
I'm not (only) talking about them, either.
We're not talking about them or ordinary military explosives at all.
That's not what Bush said Saddam had that justified an invasion.
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 23:31:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say. Everyone else laughs at you.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
trotsky
2018-03-21 00:45:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say. Everyone else laughs at you.
Agreed.

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
BTR1701
2018-03-21 05:26:45 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No, so the US Code says.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 05:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 14:38:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion. All I did was correct the erroneous
claim that Hussein had no WMDs.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 16:24:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.

There were no WMD found in Iraq.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 18:18:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were. Lots of 'em.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 18:20:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are. There were no WMD found in Iraq.
I don't care.
You don't get to change the terms. You get to fuck off.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 18:25:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were. Lots of 'em.
You don't get to change the terms. You get to fuck off.
And you get to just rage impotently as I decline to follow your orders.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 18:30:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
You don't get to change the terms. You get to fuck off.
And you get to just rage impotently as I
I didn't give you any orders, bitch. I'm instructing you.

You don't get to fuck around with the terms, got it?

No WMD were found in Iraq.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 18:38:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
You don't get to change the terms. You get to fuck off.
And you get to just rage impotently as I
I didn't give you any orders, bitch. I'm instructing you.
However you characterize your spew, I'm declining to obey out of the sheer
entertainment value I get from watching you pointlessly thump your chest
and play keyboard tough guy.
You don't get to fuck around with the terms, got it?
I'll do whatever I like. Consider your terms well and truly fucked around
with.
No WMD were found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 18:40:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No,
Bush didn't predicate the illegal invasion on a handful of IEDs that
didn't even exist.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
You don't get to change the terms. You get to fuck off.
And you get to just rage impotently as I
I didn't give you any orders, bitch. I'm instructing you.
However, I suck cocks.
Yep.
You don't get to fuck around with the terms, got it?
I'll suck cocks whenever I like.
Fine.
No WMD were found in Iraq.
I suck cocks.
You do, and you also know no WMD were found in Iraq.
trotsky
2018-03-21 10:08:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
We've legally defined
So you say.
No, so the US Code says.
Cite?
FPP
2018-03-21 02:21:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion.
I'm not (only) talking about them, either. We've legally defined "WMD" to
include bombs. Hussein had an army. Hussein had bombs. Therefore, Hussein
had WMDs.
A + B = C
It's called the transitive property... and it doesn't apply because
there are no correlations between a nation and an individual, and a
single bomb and hundreds of bombs, chemical as well as nuclear.

The claim that Bush and Cheney made was that Iraq had aluminum tubes
that could only be for nuclear weapons. (They weren't.) They claimed
they had yellow-cake uranium, for nukes. (They didn't.)

They claimed they had stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons -
not single pressure cooker bombs, or IED's.
--
"How will History judge America if it elects a madman because his
opponent used work email at home?" -Nicholas Thompson/Washington Post
Gronk
2018-03-21 05:06:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion.
I'm not (only) talking about them, either. We've legally defined "WMD" to
include bombs. Hussein had an army. Hussein had bombs. Therefore, Hussein
had WMDs.
A + B = C
Let's change TWO words

We've legally defined "WMD" to include bombs. Switzerland has an army.
Switzerland has bombs. Therefore, Switzerland has WMDs.

A + B = C
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-21 18:33:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gronk
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD,
The point is that you're lying about Iraqi WMD. Bush wasn't talking
about IEDs put together by rebels 18 months after the invasion.
I'm not (only) talking about them, either. We've legally defined "WMD" to
include bombs. Hussein had an army. Hussein had bombs. Therefore, Hussein
had WMDs.
A + B = C
Let's change TWO words
We've legally defined "WMD" to include bombs. Switzerland has an army.
Switzerland has bombs. Therefore, Switzerland has WMDs.
A + B = C
We "TRUMP" dropped MOAB on the caves in Afghanistan, big as a bus and
pushed out the back of a C-130.... it took out a large radius of caves
and terrorists.

It was a conventional weapon but a WMD because of the size of the kill
zone (something like a mile) and the fact it could kill thousands in one
single use.

We probably should have targeted 3 to 5 terrorist hot zones and dropped
them all at the same second in time.
--
That's Karma
Gronk
2018-03-21 04:40:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there
More bullshit. We encountered the Iraqi army as soon as we got over
there. The IEDs were devised by *rebels*, you fucking liar - they
weren't part of the alleged "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush lied
and said Saddam had.
The point is that if a simple bomb is a WMD, then yes, Hussein had massive
stockpiles of WMDs. He had an army. He had bombs.
WOW! STOP THE PRESSES!

Switzerland has bombs. AND an army.

When do we invade?
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 19:13:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there, I'd say they *were* deployed at a moment's notice.
All infantry anti-tank rockets have an IED at the front end.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-20 19:56:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there, I'd say they *were* deployed at a moment's notice.
All infantry anti-tank rockets have an IED at the front end.
The word improvised, would exclude a manufactured and packaged device
designed for specific used against a tank.

IED is an Improvised Explosive Device isn't it. You know like building
a bomb in your garage... buying a shiny "UL listed" bomb designed and
tested for a specific function would NOT be an IED.
--
That's Karma
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 20:40:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by #BeamMeUpScotty
IED is an Improvised Explosive Device isn't it. You know like building
a bomb in your garage... buying a shiny "UL listed" bomb designed and
tested for a specific function would NOT be an IED.
They're shaped charge antitank shells or rocket warheads with an alternative
detonator. They're manufactured with a contact detonator on the front.

When detonated the there's an undirected explosion which is nasty enough if it's
close, and it also spits out a penetrator which can go right throuugh unarmorred
targets like human beings.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Gronk
2018-03-21 04:39:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there, I'd say they *were* deployed at a moment's notice.
And that's we we invaded?

HAHAHAHAHAHA


https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/10/08/bush-cites-urgent-iraqi-threat/27b16c89-3a0d-40d1-a27e-38865b42468f/

Seeking to rally support for a congressional resolution that would
authorize him to order unilateral U.S. military action against Iraq,
Bush said, "While there are many dangers in the world, the threat
from Iraq stands alone -- because it gathers the most serious
dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical
weapons to kill thousands of people."

"Facing clear evidence of peril," Bush said, "we cannot wait for the
final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a
mushroom cloud."
BTR1701
2018-03-21 05:02:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gronk
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a
weapon of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at
the Boston Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit. The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.
Well, considering we encountered IEDs and VBIEDs as soon as we got over
there, I'd say they *were* deployed at a moment's notice.
And that's we we invaded?
What we where?
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 19:12:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq,
Those were all built and deployed after the American's illegal invasion.
IED is just an obscure way to refer to a low velocity antitank round. By the way
that same technique, shaped charges, is used by domestic industry to drill holes
through metal sheets.

So when can domestic metal working businesses as using weapons of mass
destruction.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
a425couple
2018-03-21 16:53:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist.  Bush knew they didn't.  He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs.
Bullshit.  The case the Bush regime attempted to fob off on us was that
there were bunkers packed to the ceilings with brand-new shiny WMD that
could be deployed and used at a moment's notice.  The threat to the
United States was portrayed to be existential, and that threat was what
justified an invasion.  It was all a lie.
Post by BTR1701
US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq,
Those were all built and deployed after the American's illegal invasion.
Another reason to understand that Hillary Clinton
has horrible judgement and should never be POTUS.
She joined a majority of the Democrats and voted
for that invasion.
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 19:00:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?

The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.

Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 19:07:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-20 19:50:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past.  The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA.  The claim
was a lie.
Iraq used them against Iran in a war. We know that!

Whether he was hiding more was just an educated guess. To bad Saddam
decided to obstruct the hunt for them rather than assist in the hunt.

Bad choices often have bad outcomes.
--
That's Karma
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 20:47:10 UTC
Permalink
Post by #BeamMeUpScotty
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past.  The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA.  The claim
was a lie.
Iraq used them against Iran in a war. We know that!
Which was over ten years earlier. Chemical weapons degrade over time. Iraq
destroyed nearlt all of its chemical weapons as required. The few they missed
were no worse than industrial toxic waste.

The UN was on the verge of proving Iraq had complied with cease fire. That would
let Iraq sell its oil to China unhinderred. Bush the Dumber chased the UN out
and started an aggressive war without cause.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Gronk
2018-03-21 05:05:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by #BeamMeUpScotty
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Iraq used them against Iran in a war. We know that!
And what CENTURY was that in???
Post by #BeamMeUpScotty
Whether he was hiding more was just an educated guess. To bad Saddam
We've had years, and found zip.
Post by #BeamMeUpScotty
decided to obstruct the hunt for them rather than assist in the hunt.
Bad choices often have bad outcomes.
He cooperated rather well. Bush just wanted a war.
Siri Cruise
2018-03-20 20:42:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against Iraq
while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people when it
bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive ordnance
as weapons of mass destruction.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
BTR1701
2018-03-21 05:01:11 UTC
Permalink
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet that's what people are sitting in prison for. The use of normal
explosives is "using a weapon of mass destruction" under US law.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 05:51:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 14:40:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion. All I did was correct your erroneous
claim that Hussein had no WMDs.
moviePig
2018-03-21 15:08:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion. All I did was correct your erroneous
claim that Hussein had no WMDs.
Words' meaning changes with context. E.g., a 'flood' in your basement
is different from a 'flood' in 1889 Johnstown. So, which 'WMDs' do
*you* suspect (i.e., are rock-solid certain) that Bush/Cheney meant?
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 16:24:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are. You don't get to change the topic.

There were no WMD found in Iraq.
max headroom
2018-03-21 17:54:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law--
then Iraq was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered
roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass
destruction against Iraq while they were within their own
borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its
own people when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against
bedrock when building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used
"WMD" [sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said
Saddam possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and
that his mere possession of those posed an "existential threat"
to the USA. The claim was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military
explosive ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are....
Why?
... You don't get to change the topic.
The topic is "No WMD in Iraq", in case you forgot.
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
USDoD says there were.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 18:18:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care. You have fun with that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
You don't get to change the topic.
I can literally talk about anything I like and there's absolutely nothing
you can do about it, you impotent little man. The most you can do is ignore
me and you haven't even chosen to do that.
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were. Lots of 'em.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 18:22:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet
That's not what Bush and Cheney and Powell based the invasion on.
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care.
Yes, you do, you lying cocksucker. That's why you're desperately trying
to "prove" that WMD were found in Iraq.

You're wrong.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
You don't get to change the topic.
I can literally talk about anything I like and
You can literally fuck off.
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
No, there weren't. None were found. Your phony definition of WMD is
bullshit.
BTR1701
2018-03-21 18:31:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care.
Yes, you do, you lying cocksucker.
Nope.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
You don't get to change the topic.
I can literally talk about anything I like and
You can literally fuck off.
And you can literally try and make me if you think you can.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
No, there weren't.
Yes, there were.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Your phony definition of WMD is bullshit.
I wasn't aware I was writing the US Code now.

I'm drunk with power!
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 18:39:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
I wasn't addressing the invasion.
We are.
I don't care.
Yes, you do, you lying cocksucker.
I suck cocks.
Yes, you do.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
You don't get to change the topic.
I can literally talk about anything I like and
You can literally fuck off.
And I literally suck cocks.
Yes, yu do.
Post by Rudy Canoza
Post by BTR1701
Post by Rudy Canoza
There were no WMD found in Iraq.
Yes, there were.
No, there weren't.
Yes, I literally suck cocks.
Indeed, you do!
Post by Rudy Canoza
Your phony definition of WMD is bullshit.
I wasn't aware I was sucking cocks.
Yes, you're fully aware of it.

You're also fully aware: no WMD found in Iraq.
trotsky
2018-03-21 10:07:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
In article
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock when
building foundations.
The issue is not whether or not domestic terrorists have used "WMD"
[sic] in the past. The issue is that the Bush regime said Saddam
possessed "massive stockpiles" of intact usable WMD and that his mere
possession of those posed an "existential threat" to the USA. The claim
was a lie.
Yes, it's ridiculous interpretation to call normal military explosive
ordnance as weapons of mass destruction.
And yet that's what people are sitting in prison for.
Cite?


The use of normal
Post by BTR1701
explosives is "using a weapon of mass destruction" under US law.
Cite?
Wile E. Coyote
2018-03-21 06:17:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock
when building foundations.
Shut the fuck up you illiterate whore.
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.

Siri Cruise <***@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 06:34:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock
when building foundations.
I'm illiterate whore.
At best.
trotsky
2018-03-21 10:19:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wile E. Coyote
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock
when building foundations.
Shut the fuck up you illiterate whore.
Hey, at least he/she didn't call himself "Wiley E. Coyote". That was
pretty fucking stupid.
Wile E. Coyote
2018-03-21 16:04:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by trotsky
Post by Wile E. Coyote
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by BTR1701
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq
was riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs
by the
Then the US broke its own laws using weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq while they were within their own borders doing nothing to the US?
The US has used these weapons of mass destruction against its own people
when it bombed MOVE.
Construction workers use weapons of mass destruction against bedrock
when building foundations.
Shut the fuck up you illiterate whore.
Hey, at least he/she didn't call himself "Wiley E. Coyote". That was
pretty fucking stupid.
Trotsky, the mass murdering communist. Who was such a scumbag his fellow
commies had him killed.

The handle you choose tells you a lot about a person. What should we infer
from your choice?

Still got that ax in your skull?
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.

Siri Cruise <***@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
Siri Cruise
2018-03-21 17:05:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Wile E. Coyote
Trotsky, the mass murdering communist. Who was such a scumbag his fellow
commies had him killed.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised you're a fan of Uncle Joe Stalin.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Wile E. Coyote
2018-03-21 18:25:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Wile E. Coyote
Trotsky, the mass murdering communist. Who was such a scumbag his fellow
commies had him killed.
I guess I shouldn't be surprised you're a fan of Uncle Joe Stalin.
The stupid is strong in you today.
--
It's time for the students to step up their game and kill people like
Coulter.

Siri Cruise <***@yahoo.com> April 25, 2017
FPP
2018-03-20 22:56:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Nice lie. They teach that in the Fake Military, do they?
--
"How will History judge America if it elects a madman because his
opponent used work email at home?" -Nicholas Thompson/Washington Post
BTR1701
2018-03-21 04:59:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Nice lie. They teach that in the Fake Military, do they?
I've never been in any kind of military, moron. Never claimed I have.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 05:50:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Nice lie. They teach that in the Fake Military, do they?
I've never been in any kind of military,
Obviously.
trotsky
2018-03-21 10:07:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Nice lie. They teach that in the Fake Military, do they?
I've never been
Another post telling us what you didn't do.
Gronk
2018-03-21 04:38:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Wow, you're really claiming that's cause for invading????

HAHAHHAAHHHAHA


https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2002/10/08/bush-cites-urgent-iraqi-threat/27b16c89-3a0d-40d1-a27e-38865b42468f/


Seeking to rally support for a congressional resolution that would
authorize him to order unilateral U.S. military action against Iraq,
Bush said, "While there are many dangers in the world, the threat
from Iraq stands alone -- because it gathers the most serious
dangers of our age in one place. Iraq's weapons of mass destruction
are controlled by a murderous tyrant who has already used chemical weapons
to kill thousands of people."

"Facing clear evidence of peril," Bush said, "we cannot wait for the final
proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud."


Hey! Switzerland has grenades - when do we invade?

HAHAHHAHHA
BTR1701
2018-03-21 04:58:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gronk
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Wow, you're really claiming that's cause for invading????
The people in this thread seem to have a problem with logic.

I never addressed the invasion. I merely took issue with (and corrected)
the erroneous statement that Hussein had no WMDs.

Whether that justifies an invasion is a separate and independent
question.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 05:49:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Gronk
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Wow, you're really claiming that's cause for invading????
The people in this thread seem to have a problem with logic.
You are incapable of basic logic.
trotsky
2018-03-21 10:06:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by BTR1701
Post by Gronk
Post by BTR1701
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
The government charged the surviving Tsarnaev brother with "use of a weapon
of mass destruction" for setting that pressure cooker bomb at the Boston
Marathon.
Likewise, the Unabomber was charged with "use of a weapon of mass
destruction" for his crimes.
As was Terry Nichols Tim McVeigh for the Oklahoma City bombing.
If those crimes qualify as WMDs-- and they do under US law-- then Iraq was
riddled with WMDs. US troops encountered roadside IEDs and VBIEDs by the
thousands in Iraq, so any claim that there were no WMDs found there is
nonsense.
Wow, you're really claiming that's cause for invading????
The people in this thread seem to have a problem with logic.
I never addressed the invasion.
Correct, Jar Jar. You spend more time telling us what you didn't do
than you discussing the topic. The technical term for this is called
being a dickhead.
Shadow
2018-03-20 19:15:17 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
Bush never could have persuaded the American people and Congress of the
need for war if it had been known that what would be found were a few
busted shells. When Bush clamored for war, he painted a picture of
bunkers full to the ceilings with thousands of shiny artillery shells
that could be rapidly deployed and used. Bush said Iraq had WMD
factories churning out thousands of liters of chemical and biological
agents. It was all a lie. There were no such bunkers, no such
factories - and Bush knew it.
This sophomoric gag - that a few busted shells with no more than trace
amounts of chemicals - "meet the definition" of WMD is something that
can only occur in a meaningless forum like Usenet, where any
pseudonymous political extremist hack blowhard can say whatever he
likes. There's a reason Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld aren't playing
this gag: they know it's bullshit.
"Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of
mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. ...
We removed a declared enemy of America who had the
capability of producing weapons of mass murder." -
George Bush, July 12, 2004.
"It turns out that we have not found weapons of mass
destruction. Why the intelligence proved wrong I'm not in
a position to say, but the world is a lot better off with
Saddam Hussein in jail." -
Donald H. Rumsfeld, Oct. 4, 2004.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
Rather appropriate nick."The late". Gratz.
The rest of the world knew they didn't exist 16 years ago ....
Only a few hysterical snowflakes (AKA republicans) believed
they did ....
[]'s
--
Don't be evil - Google 2004
We have a new policy - Google 2012
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 19:24:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
Bush never could have persuaded the American people and Congress of the
need for war if it had been known that what would be found were a few
busted shells. When Bush clamored for war, he painted a picture of
bunkers full to the ceilings with thousands of shiny artillery shells
that could be rapidly deployed and used. Bush said Iraq had WMD
factories churning out thousands of liters of chemical and biological
agents. It was all a lie. There were no such bunkers, no such
factories - and Bush knew it.
This sophomoric gag - that a few busted shells with no more than trace
amounts of chemicals - "meet the definition" of WMD is something that
can only occur in a meaningless forum like Usenet, where any
pseudonymous political extremist hack blowhard can say whatever he
likes. There's a reason Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld aren't playing
this gag: they know it's bullshit.
"Although we have not found stockpiles of weapons of
mass destruction, we were right to go into Iraq. ...
We removed a declared enemy of America who had the
capability of producing weapons of mass murder." -
George Bush, July 12, 2004.
"It turns out that we have not found weapons of mass
destruction. Why the intelligence proved wrong I'm not in
a position to say, but the world is a lot better off with
Saddam Hussein in jail." -
Donald H. Rumsfeld, Oct. 4, 2004.
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
Rather appropriate nick."The late". Gratz.
The rest of the world knew they didn't exist 16 years ago ....
Only a few hysterical snowflakes (AKA republicans) believed
they did ....
And that's *still* descriptive of those who insist there were "WMD" in Iraq.
max headroom
2018-03-20 19:42:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist
engaging in cynical lying.
Ya mean like Rudy Canoza?

http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918

https://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/george-wbush-weapons-of-mass-destruction-iraq-war/2015/05/24/id/646530/
Gronk
2018-03-21 05:04:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by max headroom
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist
engaging in cynical lying.
Ya mean like Rudy Canoza?
http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918
snicker - only five hundred? HAHAHHA

https://www.sbs.com.au/news/iraq-chemical-weapons-haul

A Pentagon official who confirmed the findings said that all the weapons
were pre-1991 vintage munitions "in such a degraded state they couldn't be
used for what they are designed for."



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/weapons-found-in-iraq-old-unusable/
June 23, 2006

They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the
Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team in
Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.

He said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent
agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no longer
be dangerous.

"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen
sink at this point," Kay said.
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-21 18:35:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Gronk
Post by max headroom
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist
engaging in cynical lying.
Ya mean like Rudy Canoza?
http://archive.defense.gov/news/newsarticle.aspx?id=15918
snicker - only five hundred? HAHAHHA
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/iraq-chemical-weapons-haul
A Pentagon official who confirmed the findings said that all the weapons
were pre-1991 vintage munitions "in such a degraded state they couldn't
be used for what they are designed for."
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/weapons-found-in-iraq-old-unusable/
June 23, 2006
They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the
Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team
in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.
He said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent
agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no
longer be dangerous.
Then they could ship it back to the United States and sell it at
Toy's-R-Us.
--
That's Karma
Ubiquitous
2018-03-20 19:56:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
TROLL-O-METER
5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
Post by the late Mark Wieber
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
"Good evening. Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike
military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces.
Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons
programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and
indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the
world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the
world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons."
-- Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

"I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous recommendation of
my national security team, to use force in Iraq [...] Six weeks ago, Saddam
Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations
weapons inspectors called UNSCOM [...] The inspectors undertook this mission
first seven and a half years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed
to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire [...] The
international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other
countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles. With
Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but
repeatedly [...] Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a
decade-long war [...] And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against
his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international
community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left
unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
-- Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

And you posted this off-topic article here because?
--
"I support George Bush's war in Iraq" -- Bill Clinton, 2003
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 20:10:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
TROLL-O-METER
You lose.
%
2018-03-20 20:12:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
TROLL-O-METER
You lose.
yes there is so up your bum
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-20 20:20:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by %
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
                             TROLL-O-METER
You lose.
yes there is so
No, there were not the "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush, Cheney and
Powell all lied and said there were.
Gospel TT
2018-03-20 20:56:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals
Post by Ubiquitous
Post by the late Mark Wieber
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
TROLL-O-METER
5* 6* *7
4* *8
3* *9
2* *10
1* | *stuporous
0* -*- *catatonic
* |\ *comatose
* \ *clinical death
* \ *biological death
* _\/ *demonic apparition
* * *damned for all eternity
Post by the late Mark Wieber
The "massive stockpiles" of WMD that Bush claimed to exist in Iraq did
not exist. Bush knew they didn't. He was lying.
"Good evening. Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike
military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces.
Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons
programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.
Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and
indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and
around the
Post by Ubiquitous
world. Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the
world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons."
-- Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998
"I want to explain why I have decided, with the unanimous
recommendation of
Post by Ubiquitous
my national security team, to use force in Iraq [...] Six weeks ago, Saddam
Hussein announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations
weapons inspectors called UNSCOM [...] The inspectors undertook this mission
first seven and a half years ago at the end of the Gulf War when Iraq agreed
to declare and destroy its arsenal as a condition of the ceasefire [...] The
international community had good reason to set this requirement. Other
countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic
missiles. With
Post by Ubiquitous
Saddam, there is one big difference: He has used them. Not once, but
repeatedly [...] Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a
decade-long war [...] And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against
his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq. The international
community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left
unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
-- Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998
And you posted this off-topic article here because?
--
"I support George Bush's war in Iraq" -- Bill Clinton, 2003
So what's your point? That Clinton was lying too?????
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 00:51:34 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 00:53:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were
not found in Iraq.

Settled.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 01:13:48 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 ?The 500 munitions discovered throughout
Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center
report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's
commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons
Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass
destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services
Committee.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918
or
http://search.defense.gov/search?affiliate=DEFENSE_gov&query=Army+Col.+John+Chu&x=2&y=8

Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/us/iraq-chemical-weapons/

U.S. Covered Up Evidence of Long-Abandoned Chemical Weapons Program in
Iraq
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html

And for you idiots-- like Rudy-- who claim that if they're not
"massive stockpiles of shiny new chemical weapons like Bush said!"
that means they aren't dangerous WMD's, here's alittle something for
you:

But nearly a decade of wartime experience showed that old Iraqi
chemical munitions often remained dangerous when repurposed for local
attacks in makeshift bombs, as insurgents did starting by 2004.
Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United
States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including
that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been
wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used
chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the
pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in
which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared
to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and
filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western
companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1
Gronk
2018-03-21 05:10:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html

All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs. (The U.S. supported
Iraq during its '80s war with Iran, and was complicit in helping Saddam
Hussein use chemical agents against Iranian forces.)


What's that? 1991?


https://www.sbs.com.au/news/iraq-chemical-weapons-haul

A Pentagon official who confirmed the findings said that all the weapons
were pre-1991 vintage munitions "in such a degraded state they couldn't
be used for what they are designed for."



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/weapons-found-in-iraq-old-unusable/
June 23, 2006

They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the
Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team
in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.

He said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent
agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no
longer be dangerous.

"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen
sink at this point," Kay said.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 12:36:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Siri Cruise
2018-03-21 12:53:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Yes, there were in 1990.

What you state is they were still there in 2001.
--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
I'm saving up to buy the Donald a blue stone This post / \
from Metebelis 3. All praise the Great Don! insults Islam. Mohammed
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 13:03:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Yes, there were in 1990.
What you state is they were still there in 2001.
That's correct. Good girl.

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 ?The 500 munitions discovered throughout
Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center
report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's
commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons
Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass
destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services
Committee.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918
or
http://search.defense.gov/search?affiliate=DEFENSE_gov&query=Army+Col.+John+Chu&x=2&y=8

Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/us/iraq-chemical-weapons/

U.S. Covered Up Evidence of Long-Abandoned Chemical Weapons Program in
Iraq
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html

And for you idiots-- like Rudy-- who claim that if they're not
"massive stockpiles of shiny new chemical weapons like Bush said!"
that means they aren't dangerous WMD's, here's alittle something for
you:

But nearly a decade of wartime experience showed that old Iraqi
chemical munitions often remained dangerous when repurposed for local
attacks in makeshift bombs, as insurgents did starting by 2004.
Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United
States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including
that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been
wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used
chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the
pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in
which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared
to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and
filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western
companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 16:23:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Yes, there were in 1990.
What you state is they were still there in 2001.
That's correct.
It's incorrect. There weren't any. They were all destroyed.
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-21 16:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Yes, there were in 1990.
What you state is they were still there in 2001.
That's correct.
It's incorrect.  There weren't any.  They were all destroyed.
Do you have proof they were "ALL" destroyed.
--
That's Karma
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 18:55:47 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:23:24 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Siri Cruise
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
Yes, there were in 1990.
What you state is they were still there in 2001.
That's correct. Good girl.
Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 ?The 500 munitions discovered throughout
Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center
report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's
commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons
Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass
destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services
Committee.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918
or
http://search.defense.gov/search?affiliate=DEFENSE_gov&query=Army+Col.+John+Chu&x=2&y=8
Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/us/iraq-chemical-weapons/
U.S. Covered Up Evidence of Long-Abandoned Chemical Weapons Program in
Iraq
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
And for you idiots-- like Rudy-- who claim that if they're not
"massive stockpiles of shiny new chemical weapons like Bush said!"
that means they aren't dangerous WMD's, here's alittle something for
But nearly a decade of wartime experience showed that old Iraqi
chemical munitions often remained dangerous when repurposed for local
attacks in makeshift bombs, as insurgents did starting by 2004.
Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United
States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including
that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been
wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used
chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the
pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in
which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared
to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and
filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western
companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1
It's incorrect. There weren't any. They were all destroyed.
Well let's see, Rudolph!

The New York Times, defense.gov, CNN, Slate says "Yes."

The pint-sized parking lot brawler Rudy says "No."

[chuckle]

You lose. Again.
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 16:22:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's,
There were no intact usable WMD found. A couple of busted shells with
traces of chemicals are not WMD.
#BeamMeUpScotty
2018-03-21 16:32:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's,
There were no intact usable WMD found.  A couple of busted shells with
traces of chemicals are not WMD.
Tell that to the people killed by a couple of shells...
--
That's Karma
max headroom
2018-03-21 17:52:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's
free and there's no consequence for a pseudonymous political
hack extremist engaging in cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Gronk
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had
been manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States
first invaded Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's,
There were no intact usable WMD found. A couple of busted shells with
traces of chemicals are not WMD.
USDoD says they are.

Hold your breath, Rudy, and stomp your little feet.

BTW, this is 2018. Why did you even bring this up?
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 18:56:50 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:22:43 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were WMD's, JUST as I stated.
There were no intact usable WMD found. A couple of busted shells with
traces of chemicals are not WMD.
There were WMD found.

I know you're a drug-abusing illiterate fuck that can't read, so that
is obviously your problem here, Rudy.
Rudy Canoza
2018-03-21 19:01:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:22:43 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
found in Iraq.
Settled.
That's what I said,.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
All of the weapons found, which contained sarin or mustard gas, had been
manufactured before 1991, the year that the United States first invaded
Iraq. Some were even made from United States designs.
Thanks for admitting there were *NO* WMD's, JUST as I stated.
There were no intact usable WMD found. A couple of busted shells with
traces of chemicals are not WMD.
There were *NO* WMD found.
Correct.

Gospel TT
2018-03-21 12:21:31 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck
around in
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were
not found in Iraq.
Settled.
Klaus is a rumdum lol.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 12:36:45 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:21:31 -0400, Gospel TT
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck
around in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging
in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
cynical lying.
WMD's were
found in Iraq.
Settled.
Klaus is
correct again.
Gospel TT
2018-03-21 15:58:28 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 05:36:45 -0700, Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:21:31 -0400, Gospel TT
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck
around in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist
engaging
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
cynical lying.
WMD's were
found in Iraq.
Settled.
Klaus is a rumdum that stink's.
correct again.
I no lol.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 18:57:38 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 11:58:28 -0400, Gospel TT
Post by Gospel TT
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 08:21:31 -0400, Gospel TT
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 17:53:58 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck
around in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of
chemicals
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and
there's no
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging
in
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
Post by the late Mark Wieber
cynical lying.
WMD's were
found in Iraq.
Settled.
Klaus is
correct again.
I no lol.
Are you attempting to write, "I know" ??????
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 02:39:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were
not found in Iraq.

Settled.
Street
2018-03-21 04:43:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
Post by the late Mark Wieber
WMD's were
not found in Iraq.
Settled.
Bush lied and it's obvious. Why do these fuckwits even want to deny it?
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 11:09:32 UTC
Permalink
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 19:39:17 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists - can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were
found in Iraq.
Settled.
Exactly what I was saying, Rudy.
Gronk
2018-03-21 05:06:59 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/iraq-chemical-weapons-haul

A Pentagon official who confirmed the findings said that all the weapons
were pre-1991 vintage munitions "in such a degraded state they couldn't
be used for what they are designed for."



https://www.cbsnews.com/news/weapons-found-in-iraq-old-unusable/
June 23, 2006

They probably would have been intended for chemical attacks during the
Iran-Iraq War, said David Kay, who headed the U.S. weapons-hunting team
in Iraq from 2003 until early 2004.

He said experts on Iraq's chemical weapons are in "almost 100 percent
agreement" that sarin nerve agent produced from the 1980s would no
longer be dangerous.

"It is less toxic than most things that Americans have under their kitchen
sink at this point," Kay said.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 11:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 ?The 500 munitions discovered throughout
Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center
report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's
commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons
Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass
destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services
Committee.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918
or
http://search.defense.gov/search?affiliate=DEFENSE_gov&query=Army+Col.+John+Chu&x=2&y=8

Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/us/iraq-chemical-weapons/

U.S. Covered Up Evidence of Long-Abandoned Chemical Weapons Program in
Iraq
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html

And for you idiots-- like Rudy-- who claim that if they're not
"massive stockpiles of shiny new chemical weapons like Bush said!"
that means they aren't dangerous WMD's, here's alittle something for
you:

But nearly a decade of wartime experience showed that old Iraqi
chemical munitions often remained dangerous when repurposed for local
attacks in makeshift bombs, as insurgents did starting by 2004.
Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United
States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including
that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been
wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used
chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the
pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in
which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared
to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and
filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western
companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1
the late Mark Wieber
2018-03-21 16:21:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Shadow
On Tue, 20 Mar 2018 10:38:09 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by the late Mark Wieber
People - pseudonymous political hack extremists
Like you, Rudy?
Post by the late Mark Wieber
- can fuck around in
Usenet all they want and claim that a few busted and rusty and
*unusable* shells and canisters containing residual traces of chemicals
are "WMD", but they can only do that because it's free and there's no
consequence for a pseudonymous political hack extremist engaging in
cynical lying.
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria,
No.
Klaus Schadenfreude
2018-03-21 18:58:16 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 21 Mar 2018 09:21:25 -0700, the late Mark Wieber
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
Post by Klaus Schadenfreude
WMD's were found in Iraq. This is settled science.
Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
WASHINGTON, June 29, 2006 ?The 500 munitions discovered throughout
Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center
report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's
commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons
Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass
destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services
Committee.
http://www.defense.gov/News/NewsArticle.aspx?ID=15918
or
http://search.defense.gov/search?affiliate=DEFENSE_gov&query=Army+Col.+John+Chu&x=2&y=8
Report: United States kept secret its chemical weapons finds in Iraq
http://www.cnn.com/2014/10/15/us/iraq-chemical-weapons/
U.S. Covered Up Evidence of Long-Abandoned Chemical Weapons Program in
Iraq
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2014/10/15/chemical_weapons_iraq_u_s_covered_up_evidence_of_defunct_sarin_mustard_gas.html
And for you idiots-- like Rudy-- who claim that if they're not
"massive stockpiles of shiny new chemical weapons like Bush said!"
that means they aren't dangerous WMD's, here's alittle something for
But nearly a decade of wartime experience showed that old Iraqi
chemical munitions often remained dangerous when repurposed for local
attacks in makeshift bombs, as insurgents did starting by 2004.
Participants in the chemical weapons discoveries said the United
States suppressed knowledge of finds for multiple reasons, including
that the government bristled at further acknowledgment it had been
wrong. “They needed something to say that after Sept. 11 Saddam used
chemical rounds,” Mr. Lampier said. “And all of this was from the
pre-1991 era.”
Others pointed to another embarrassment. In five of six incidents in
which troops were wounded by chemical agents, the munitions appeared
to have been designed in the United States, manufactured in Europe and
filled in chemical agent production lines built in Iraq by Western
companies.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/10/14/world/middleeast/us-casualties-of-iraq-chemical-weapons.html?_r=1
No.
You *LIKE* being wrong, doncha little fella?

LOL
Loading...