Holocaust Denial, American Style 29 Nov 2007

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:iajdl3dc0u28mo2sbos4j0f0u6eva0vs02@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>what is the relevance of posting the source of a post?
>
> What does some offshore Mick have to do with any expertiseon US
> affairs of state?

I assume you racist "mick" comment refers to Irish?
You have no idea if I am Irish or not or whether I am even a US citizen. But
as usual you attack the person rather than deal with the issue. Do you
always tend to try to shoot the messengert when you can't actually deal with
the message?

But in spite of the fact that you cant produce evidence for WMD and links
showing Saddam was in League with Al Qaeda Ill demonstrate how silly that
question is.

Since you seem to think that not being in the US means one should have no
valid opinion ion US policy-
Do you think men have no right to opinions on abortion or childbirth because
they cant actually give birth or get pregnant?
Do you also think that Americans who don't live in Iraq should have no
opinion on the foreign state of Iraq?

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:svidl3pld2mar6c0797l5vv55ibt02sq5m@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>The CIA report IS based on everything they know AFTER the invasion!
>
> Ah...so hindsight allows revision, great....


I see you snipped the but about "and everything BEFORE the invasion as
well"

We are not arguing about "they THOUGHT they were right at the time" as if
that ids an excuse! THEY CLAIMED THEY KNEW! The DIDNT KNOW !

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:i3jdl39200a3pd6k9aa2pbffs181f7tmqe@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>> The enemy of my enemy...etc...
>>
>>That logic might apply to Georges Bush Jr and Snr. and Regan. Maybe even
>>to
>>Clinton. But not to Saddam
>
> Oh do tell....
>
> He had no axe to grind with the US????

What a silly comment! of course he was not a friend of the US nor they of
him. He was even an enemy of the Us. And Islamists were also enemy of the
US.

That does not mean it is logical to conclude (as you DID) that they must
BOTH be friends.


>
>
> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200410\NAT20041011a.html
> CNSNews.com) - When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4,
> entitled, "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror
> Ties," we decided against publishing all 42 pages of the Iraqi
> intelligence documents in our possession and on which the article was
> based.

You have a newspaper article from 2004 which you tout as evidence? It had an
unverified Arabic doccument (which Ill bet you cant even read) which was NOT
referred to by ANY US intelligence source as far as I know? It is very weak
and unsubstianted evidence. Furthermore

How come NO US intelligence organisations ever mentioned this doccument
which you claim was in their posession?

[snip]

>
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={EACB624F-680F-4296-9D12-49C458BF38C1}

Frontpage mag is a biased source with a stated aim of opposing the political
left and opposing those against the "war on Terror"
http://cspc.org/about2.html

[snip]

Please try to find a balanced source based on fact and not a biased one
based on opinion.

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:j1jdl3tn8i73ua3aur7v271qgv2nk0gs43@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>ANY known evidence is raised supplied and
>>analysed.
>
> Like say:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2712903.stm
>
> A court in the German city of Mannheim has convicted two businessmen
> of supplying weapons-making equipment to Iraq in violation of UN
> sanctions.
> Engineer Bernd Schompeter was sentenced to five years and three months
> for dealing in drills that can be used for boring tubes for long-range
> cannons, capable of launching nuclear, chemical or biological
> warheads.
>
> A second defendant, Willi Heinz Ribbeck, was given a two-year
> suspended sentence for failing to alert his superiors to the sale of
> the drills to Mr Schompeter by his Burgsmueller machine company.
>
> Both defendants, who are in their 50s, have confessed to the main
> charge of supplying the equipment.
you left out htis bit:

It is not known whether Iraq has actually built any of the long-range guns
yet, but if it has they could be used against troops taking part in a US-led
invasion.

[end quote]



It IS KNOWN now. No such "supergun" was ever constructed!

You will note as well that this was published when people were whipping up a
media frenzy suggesting Iraq had WMD.

31 January, 2003,



By the way I do not deny people exported things to Iraq:

Here is just the US list on biological stuff!

According to the Department of Defense's own Report to Congress on the
Conduct of the Persian Gulf War, released in April 1992: "By the time of the
invasion of Kuwait, Iraq had developed biological weapons. It's advanced and
aggressive biological warfare program was the most advanced in the Arab
world... The program probably began late in the 1970's and concentrated on
the development of two agents, botulinum toxin and anthrax bacteria... Large
scale production of these agents began in 1989 at four facilities in
Baghdad. Delivery means for biological agents ranged from simple aerial
bombs and artillery rockets to surface-to-surface missiles."
[end excerpt from
The Riegle Report
U.S. Chemical and Biological Warfare-Related Dual Use Exports to Iraq and
their Possible Impact on the Health Consequences of the Gulf War
A Report of Chairman Donald W. Riegle, Jr. and Ranking Member Alfonse M.
D'Amato of the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs with Respect
to Export Administration
United States Senate, 103d Congress, 2d Session
May 25, 1994 ]



WHAT YOU SOLD HIM: (this is only the Bio part of WMD. rockets etc. are dealt
with elsewhere.)
The following is a detailed listing of biological materials, provided by the
American Type Culture Collection, which were exported to agencies of the
government of Iraq pursuant to the issueance of an export licensed by the
U.S. Commerce Department:
Date : February 8, 1985
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Agency
Materials Shipped:

Ustilago nuda (Jensen) Rostrup

Date : February 22, 1985
Sent To : Ministry of Higher Education
Materials Shipped:

Histoplasma capsulatum var. farciminosum (ATCC 32136)
Class III pathogen

Date : July 11, 1985
Sent To : Middle and Near East Regional A
Material Shipped:

Histoplasma capsulatum var. farciminosum (ATCC 32136)
Class III pathogen

Date : May 2, 1986
Sent To : Ministry of Higher Education
Materials Shipped:

1. Bacillus Anthracis Cohn (ATCC 10)
Batch # 08-20-82 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

2. Bacillus Subtilis (Ehrenberg) Cohn (ATCC 82)
Batch # 06-20-84 (2 each)

3. Clostridium botulinum Type A (ATCC 3502)
Batch # 07-07-81 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

4. Clostridium perfringens (Weillon and Zuber) Hauduroy, et al (ATCC
3624)
Batch # 10-85SV (2 each)

5. Bacillus subtilis (ATCC 6051)
Batch # 12-06-84 (2 each)

6. Francisella tularensis var. tularensis Olsufiev (ATCC 6223)
Batch # 05-14-79 (2 each)
Avirulent, suitable for preparations of diagnotic antigens

7. Clostridium tetani (ATCC 9441)
Batch # 03-84 (3 each)
Highly toxigenic

8. Clostridium botulinum Type E (ATCC 9564)
Batch # 03-02-79 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

9. Clostridium tetani (ATCC 10779)
Batch # 04-24-84S (3 each)

10. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 12916)
Batch #08-14-80 (2 each)
Agglutinating type 2

11. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 13124)
Batch #07-84SV (3 each)
Type A, alpha-toxigenic, produces lecithinase C.J. Appl.

12. Bacillus Anthracis (ATCC 14185)
Batch #01-14-80 (3 each)
G.G. Wright (Fort Detrick)
V770-NP1-R. Bovine Anthrax
Class III pathogen

13. Bacillus Anthracis (ATCC 14578)
Batch #01-06-78 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

14. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 14581)
Batch #04-18-85 (2 each)

15. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 14945)
Batch #06-21-81 (2 each)

16. Clostridium botulinum Type E (ATCC 17855)
Batch # 06-21-71
Class III pathogen

17. Bacillus megaterium (ATCC 19213)
Batch #3-84 (2 each)

18. Clostridium botulinum Type A (ATCC 19397)
Batch # 08-18-81 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

19. Brucella abortus Biotype 3 (ATCC 23450)
Batch # 08-02-84 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

20. Brucella abortus Biotype 9 (ATCC 23455)
Batch # 02-05-68 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

21. Brucella melitensis Biotype 1 (ATCC 23456)
Batch # 03-08-78 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

22. Brucella melitensis Biotype 3 (ATCC 23458)
Batch # 01-29-68 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

23. Clostribium botulinum Type A (ATCC 25763)
Batch # 8-83 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

24. Clostridium botulinum Type F (ATCC 35415)
Batch # 02-02-84 (2 each)
Class III pathogen

Date : August 31, 1987
Sent To : State Company for Drug Industries
Materials Shipped:

1. Saccharomyces cerevesiae (ATCC 2601)
Batch # 08-28-08 (1 each)

2. Salmonella choleraesuis subsp. choleraesuis Serotype typhi (ATCC
6539)
Batch # 06-86S (1 each)

3. Bacillus subtillus (ATCC 6633)
Batch # 10-85 (2 each)

4. Klebsiella pneumoniae subsp. pneumoniae (ATCC 10031)
Batch # 08-13-80 (1 each)

5. Escherichia coli (ATCC 10536)
Batch # 04-09-80 (1 each)

6. Bacillus cereus (11778)
Batch #05-85SV (2 each)

7. Staphylococcus epidermidis (ATCC 12228)
Batch # 11-86s (1 each)

8. Bacillus pumilus (ATCC 14884)
Batch # 09-08-80 (2 each)

Date : July 11, 1988
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped

1. Escherichia coli (ATCC 11303)
Batch # 04-875
Phase host

2. Cauliflower Mosaic Caulimovirus (ATCC 45031)
Batch # 06-14-85
Plant Virus

3. Plasmid in Agrobacterium Tumefaciens (ATCC 37349)
(Ti plasmid for co-cultivation with plant integration vectors in
E. Coli)
Batch # 05-28-85

Date : April 26, 1988
Sent To: : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Hulambda4x-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57236) Phage vector
Suggest host: E coli

2. Hulambda14-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57240) Phage vector
Suggested host: E coli

3. Hulambda15, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57242) Phage vector
Suggested host: E. coli

Date : August 31, 1987
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Escherichia coli (ATCC 23846)
Batch # 07-29-83 (1 each)

2. Escherichia coli (ATCC 33694)
Batch # 05-87 (1 each)

Date : September 29, 1988
Sent To : Ministry of Trade
Materials Shipped:

1. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 240)
Batch # 05-14-63 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

2. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 938)
Batch # 1963 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

3. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 3629)
Batch # 10-23-85 (3 each)

4. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 8009)
Batch # 03-30-84 (3 each)

5. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 8705)
Batch # 06-27-62 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

6. Brucella abortus (ATCC 9014)
Batch # 05-11-66 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

7. Clostridium perfringens (ATCC 10388)
Batch # 06-01-73 (3 each)

8. Bacillus anthracis (ATCC 11966)
Batch #05-05-70 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

9. Clostridium botulinum Type A
Batch # 07-86 (3 each)
Class III pathogen

10. Bacillus cereus (ATCC 33018)
Batch # 04-83 (3 each)

11. Bacillus ceres (ATCC 33019)
Batch # 03-88 (3 each)

Date : January 31, 1989
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. PHPT31, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase (HPRT)
Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57057)

2. Plambda500, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
pseudogene (HPRT) Chromosome(s): 5 p14-p13 (ATCC 57212)

Date : January 17, 1989
Sent To : Iraq Atomic Energy Commission
Materials Shipped:

1. Hulambda4x-8, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosomes(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57237) Phage vector;
Suggested host: E. coli

2. Hulambda14, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57540), Cloned from human
lymphoblast, Phase vector
Suggested host: E. coli

3. Hulambda15, clone: human hypoxanthine phosphoribosyltransferase
(HPRT) Chromosome(s): X q26.1 (ATCC 57241) Phage vector;
Suggested host: E. coli


Additionally, the Centers for Disease Control has compiled a listing of
biological materials shipped to Iraq prior to the Gulf War. The listing
covers the period from October 1, 1984 (when the CDC began keeping records)
through October 13, 1993. The following materials with biological warfare
significance were shipped to Iraq during this period.
Date : November 28, 1989
Sent To : University of Basrah, College of
Science, Department of Biology
Materials Shipped:

1. Enterococcus faecalis

2. Enterococcus faecium

3. Enterococcus avium

4. Enterococcus raffinosus

5. Enteroccus gallinarium

6. Enterococcus durans

7. Enteroccus hirae

8. Streptococcus bovis
(etiologic)

Date : April 21, 1986
Sent To : Officers City Al-Muthanna,
Quartret 710, Street 13, Close 69, House 28/I,
Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 1 vial botulinum toxoid
(non-infectious)

Date : March 10, 1986
Sent To : Officers City Al-Muthanna,
Quartret 710, Street 13, Close 69 House 28/I,
Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 1 vial botulinum toxoid #A2
(non-infectious)

Date : June 25, 1985
Sent To : University of Baghdad, College of
Medicine, Department of Microbiology
Materials Shipped:

1. 3 years cultures
(etiologic)
Candida sp.

Date : May 21, 1985
Sent To : Basrah, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. Lyophilized arbovirus seed
(etiologic)

2. West Nile Fever Virus

Date : April 26, 1985
Sent To : Minister of Health, Ministry of
Health, Baghdad, Iraq
Materials Shipped:

1. 8 vials antigen and antisera (r. rickettsii and r. typhi) to
diagnose rickettsial infections (non-infectious> >
End biological WMD evidence







>
>

 

[Don Homuth]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:18:59 GMT, jim bronson <then@came.nbc> wrote:

>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:28:51 -0800, Don Homuth
><dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:
>
>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:07:10 GMT, Sir Sam <nite@cru.sade> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>
>>>>Read the actual report by the CIA.
>>>
>>>Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool.
>
>>No WMDs.
>
>LIAR!
>
>http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/
>
>The Tuwaitha site was heavily bombed during the

 

[Don Homuth]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> wrote:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>newscjdl3h0t9gsjogt9c3r2nrkad2ap4as36@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a
>>>JOKE!
>>
>> So that fuselage must be a "joke" too, eh?
>
>
>I don't deny there was a facility at Salman Pak.
>If you want to train terrorists you train them to hijack planes and NOT how
>to get into grounded planes! for that you only need the INSIDE of a plane.
>You use planes on the ground to train COUNTER TERRORISTS!

We have fuselages of old airplanes in training camps in CONUS as well.

>The Salman Pak claims had been soundly debunked....

But the early discussions of the "apparent" Terrist Training Camp
there still are to be found on the Web, and are still being used as
"evidence" even after the debunking.

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>news:fuidl3hlmucbjgbj8ddhtegjrut0laq56o@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:17:49 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>I gave you a source from the OFFICIAL classified report to congress.
>>
>> Whop a dee ****.
>>
>> Think "Congress" ever solved JFK's assassination?
>
>You are changing the context.

Congressional reports are rarely if EVER the definitive answer to
ANYTHING!

>Lee Harvey Oswald was not in the fourth largest Army in the World.

Who cares?!?

He was a pawn.

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>news:iajdl3dc0u28mo2sbos4j0f0u6eva0vs02@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>what is the relevance of posting the source of a post?
>>
>> What does some offshore Mick have to do with any expertiseon US
>> affairs of state?
>
>I assume you racist "mick" comment refers to Irish?

Irish is a "race"?????

>You have no idea if I am Irish or not or whether I am even a US citizen.



So clear the mystery up __________________________.

>But in spite of the fact that you cant produce evidence for WMD

BULLSHIT!


http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/

The Tuwaitha site was heavily bombed during the

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>newscjdl3h0t9gsjogt9c3r2nrkad2ap4as36@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a
>>>JOKE!
>>
>> So that fuselage must be a "joke" too, eh?
>
>
>I don't deny there was a facility at Salman Pak.

And elsewhere too!


http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/012/024eyieu.asp

Beginning in 1994, the Fedayeen Saddam opened its own paramilitary
training camps for volunteers, graduating more than 7,200 "good men
racing full with courage and enthusiasm" in the first year. Beginning
in 1998, these camps began hosting "Arab volunteers from Egypt,
Palestine, Jordan, 'the Gulf,' and Syria." It is not clear from
available evidence where all of these non-Iraqi volunteers who were
"sacrificing for the cause" went to ply their newfound skills. Before
the summer of 2002, most volunteers went home upon the completion of
training. But these camps
were humming with frenzied activity in the months immediately prior to
the war. As late as January 2003, the volunteers participated in a
special training event called the "Heroes Attack." This training event
was designed in part to prepare regional Fedayeen Saddam commands to
"obstruct the enemy from achieving his goal and to support keeping
peace and stability in the province."

Some of this training came under the auspices of the Iraqi
Intelligence Service's "Division 27," which, according to the study,
"supplied the Fedayeen Saddam with silencers, equipment for
booby-trapping vehicles, [and] special training on the use of certain
explosive timers. The only apparent use for all of this Division 27
equipment was to conduct commando or terrorist operations."

The publication of the Joint Forces Command study, called the "Iraqi
Perspectives Project," coincides with the release by the Office of the
Director of National Intelligence of several hundred documents
captured in postwar Iraq. There are many more to come. Some of the
documents used to complete the study have been made public as part of
the ODNI effort; others have not.

It is early, but the emerging picture suggests that the U.S.
intelligence community underestimated Saddam Hussein's interest in
terrorism.

http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=604615

March 22, 2005

Iraqi commandos backed by U.S. ground and air fire uncovered an
apparent insurgent training camp today that hosted fighters from as
far away as the Philippines, senior officials tell ABC News.

The discovery was made after the members of Iraq's 1st Police Commando
Battalion -- who are part of the fighting forces of Iraq's interim
government -- were attacked while on a noontime patrol north of
Baghdad, near Samarra.

As they approached a group of buildings, they were attacked by
sustained heavy fire from RPG, small arms, and mortars.

Seven Iraqi commandos were killed and six were wounded. There were an
estimated 70 to 100 attackers and they were in dug-in positions.

A U.S. military officer with the unit called in air support. Attack
helicopters from Task Force Liberty's Aviation Brigade responded but
sustained major structural damage and were forced to turn back. More
helicopters came in and fired on insurgents.

Soldiers from the 1st Brigade Combat Team also responded in support.
The U.S. military said an "undetermined number" of the attackers were
killed," and no Task Force Liberty soldiers were reported killed or
wounded.

The fight lasted about 90 minutes. Once the insurgents broke contact,
they fled by either boats back toward nearby Lake Tharthar or into
local areas by vehicle or on foot.

At the scene, the commandos found documents indicating that there were
Syrians, Algerians, other Arabs and at least one Filipino among the
insurgents. The "training camp" found nearby is being "exploited,"
officials said.

On Monday and today, 20 insurgents were detained in three separate
operations in Mosul, the military said in separate statements.

>If you want to train terrorists you train them to hijack planes and NOT how
>to get into grounded planes! for that you only need the INSIDE of a plane.
>You use planes on the ground to train COUNTER TERRORISTS!

BULLSHIT!

Training can eb done on the ground OR in the air.

>The Salman Pak claims had been soundly debunked. I only gave you the CIA FBI
>NSA and other securoty sources view on it.

You QUOTED nothing!

Provide factual rebuttal or **** OFF!

http://cdonohoe.townhall.com/

April 7, 2003, 12:48AM

Marines find site of terror training

U.S. forces earlier had captured Syrians, Egyptians and Sudanese who
said they had trained in the Salman Pak camp southeast of Baghdad.
Brig.-Gen. Vincent Brooks said Marines raided the empty complex using
information obtained from captured foreign fighters. It "reinforces
the likelihood of links between this regime and external terrorist
organizations,"


Richard O. Spertzel member of the Iraq Survey Group

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>news:svidl3pld2mar6c0797l5vv55ibt02sq5m@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>The CIA report IS based on everything they know AFTER the invasion!
>>
>> Ah...so hindsight allows revision, great....
>
>
>I see you snipped the

How may blacked out segments are there in that Senate report pdf?

Have you read it?

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>news:i3jdl39200a3pd6k9aa2pbffs181f7tmqe@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>> The enemy of my enemy...etc...
>>>
>>>That logic might apply to Georges Bush Jr and Snr. and Regan. Maybe even
>>>to
>>>Clinton. But not to Saddam
>>
>> Oh do tell....
>>
>> He had no axe to grind with the US????
>
>What a silly comment! of course he was not a friend of the US nor they of
>him. He was even an enemy of the Us. And Islamists were also enemy of the
>US.
>
>That does not mean it is logical to conclude (as you DID) that they must
>BOTH be friends.

Did I say "friends"????

NO!

>> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200410\NAT20041011a.html
>> CNSNews.com) - When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4,
>> entitled, "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror
>> Ties," we decided against publishing all 42 pages of the Iraqi
>> intelligence documents in our possession and on which the article was
>> based.
>
>You have a newspaper article from 2004 which you tout as evidence? It had an
>unverified Arabic doccument (which Ill bet you cant even read) which was NOT
>referred to by ANY US intelligence source as far as I know? It is very weak
>and unsubstianted evidence. Furthermore
>
>How come NO US intelligence organisations ever mentioned this doccument
>which you claim was in their posession?
>
>[snip]

Could it be there is a bit of a cover up?

>>
>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={EACB624F-680F-4296-9D12-49C458BF38C1}
>
>Frontpage mag is a biased source

**** YOU TO HELL TOO!


http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=604615

March 22, 2005

Iraqi commandos backed by U.S. ground and air fire uncovered an
apparent insurgent training camp today that hosted fighters from as
far away as the Philippines, senior officials tell ABC News.

The discovery was made after the members of Iraq's 1st Police Commando
Battalion -- who are part of the fighting forces of Iraq's interim
government -- were attacked while on a noontime patrol north of
Baghdad, near Samarra.

As they approached a group of buildings, they were attacked by
sustained heavy fire from RPG, small arms, and mortars.

Seven Iraqi commandos were killed and six were wounded. There were an
estimated 70 to 100 attackers and they were in dug-in positions.

A U.S. military officer with the unit called in air support. Attack
helicopters from Task Force Liberty's Aviation Brigade responded but
sustained major structural damage and were forced to turn back. More
helicopters came in and fired on insurgents.

Soldiers from the 1st Brigade Combat Team also responded in support.
The U.S. military said an "undetermined number" of the attackers were
killed," and no Task Force Liberty soldiers were reported killed or
wounded.

The fight lasted about 90 minutes. Once the insurgents broke contact,
they fled by either boats back toward nearby Lake Tharthar or into
local areas by vehicle or on foot.

At the scene, the commandos found documents indicating that there were
Syrians, Algerians, other Arabs and at least one Filipino among the
insurgents. The "training camp" found nearby is being "exploited,"
officials said.

On Monday and today, 20 insurgents were detained in three separate
operations in Mosul, the military said in separate statements.


Docex Project- millions of captured documents that had sat deep within
a warehouse. These documents have shed light on links between Saddam
and Al Qaeda. They were originally headquartered in Doha, Qatar.
Released by John Negroponte for volunteers to translate.

Page 3 Translation from captured Iraqi document ISGZ-2004-031613.pdf

In The Name of God the Most Merciful The Most Compassionate

Directory of General Security

Directory of Security Ninevah Province

No: 10106

Directory of General Security/ Director Section 1

Subject: Information

Date: 24/8/2002

The confident (1253) declared the following:

1.On 21/8/2002 an American delegation who is visiting the Northern
Region has paid a visit to the headquarters of the Iraqi communist
party in Shaklawa. The representative of the communist party made
presentation accusing the Iraqi government of hiding members of Al
Qaeda organization in the region of Salman Pak in addition to members
of the Turkish Workers party and the Iranian Moujahidee Khlak and that
they are trained to use chemical weapons and that Iraq will use them
in case there is military strike directed against it.
End of translation.

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
<Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:

>
>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>news:j1jdl3tn8i73ua3aur7v271qgv2nk0gs43@4ax.com...
>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>
>>>ANY known evidence is raised supplied and
>>>analysed.
>>
>> Like say:
>>
>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2712903.stm
>>
>> A court in the German city of Mannheim has convicted two businessmen
>> of supplying weapons-making equipment to Iraq in violation of UN
>> sanctions.
>> Engineer Bernd Schompeter was sentenced to five years and three months
>> for dealing in drills that can be used for boring tubes for long-range
>> cannons, capable of launching nuclear, chemical or biological
>> warheads.
>>
>> A second defendant, Willi Heinz Ribbeck, was given a two-year
>> suspended sentence for failing to alert his superiors to the sale of
>> the drills to Mr Schompeter by his Burgsmueller machine company.
>>
>> Both defendants, who are in their 50s, have confessed to the main
>> charge of supplying the equipment.
>you left out htis bit:
>
>It is not known whether Iraq has actually built any of the long-range guns

SO?????

>It IS KNOWN now. No such "supergun" was ever constructed!

Gee, that makes the ILLEGAL componentry and INTENT to build it OK
then, right???

I mean no gun, no foul...right????


>You will note as well that this was published when people were whipping up a
>media frenzy suggesting Iraq had WMD.
>
>31 January, 2003,

So ****ING WHAT?!?!?

They're not serving time now for sending Sod-em bon bons, are they,
you asshole!

>Here is just the US list on biological stuff!

Don't care - SNIP.

You want to point it ALL at the US, **** you, ya stupid Mick ******* -
straight to HELL with you.

At least We clean up our messes.


http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm

Weapons of Mass Destruction HAVE been found in Iraq:

1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents

17 chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times
more deadly than sarin gas)

Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal
over populated areas

Roadside bombs loaded with mustard and "conventional" sarin gas,
assembled in binary chemical projectiles for maximum potency


http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={A91FEE10-D98F-4EAA-8CA5-73DCD65234D2}

The UN

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:44:26 -0800, Don Homuth
<dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:

>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:18:59 GMT, jim bronson <then@came.nbc> wrote:
>
>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:28:51 -0800, Don Homuth
>><dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:
>>
>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:07:10 GMT, Sir Sam <nite@cru.sade> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>>><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>>
>>>
>>>>>Read the actual report by the CIA.
>>>>
>>>>Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool.
>>
>>>No WMDs.
>>
>>LIAR!
>>
>>http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/
>>
>>The Tuwaitha site was heavily bombed during the

 

[jim bronson]

On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:48:47 -0800, Don Homuth
<dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:

>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> wrote:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>newscjdl3h0t9gsjogt9c3r2nrkad2ap4as36@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>The "Salman Pak was training Al Qaeda terrorists" claim is a
>>>>JOKE!
>>>
>>> So that fuselage must be a "joke" too, eh?
>>
>>
>>I don't deny there was a facility at Salman Pak.
>>If you want to train terrorists you train them to hijack planes and NOT how
>>to get into grounded planes! for that you only need the INSIDE of a plane.
>>You use planes on the ground to train COUNTER TERRORISTS!
>
>We have fuselages of old airplanes in training camps in CONUS as well.

You are a ****ING TRAITOR!

>>The Salman Pak claims had been soundly debunked....
>
>But the early discussions

The facts:

http://cdonohoe.townhall.com/

April 7, 2003, 12:48AM

Marines find site of terror training

U.S. forces earlier had captured Syrians, Egyptians and Sudanese who
said they had trained in the Salman Pak camp southeast of Baghdad.
Brig.-Gen. Vincent Brooks said Marines raided the empty complex using
information obtained from captured foreign fighters. It "reinforces
the likelihood of links between this regime and external terrorist
organizations,"


Richard O. Spertzel member of the Iraq Survey Group

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:9e0el39tj6tpbgcdlnk64uhcqi1pifhfmh@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>news:fuidl3hlmucbjgbj8ddhtegjrut0laq56o@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:17:49 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>I gave you a source from the OFFICIAL classified report to congress.
>>>
>>> Whop a dee ****.
>>>
>>> Think "Congress" ever solved JFK's assassination?
>>
>>You are changing the context.
>
> Congressional reports are rarely if EVER the definitive answer to
> ANYTHING!

I didn't claim it was the definitive answer. I offered it as ONE PIECE of
evidence for my part of the debate1 A piece which takeds in evidence
gathered from tens of millions og doccuments, from photographs and videos
and sound recordings and which have been analysed by the CIA FBI NSA and a
plethora of other US professional and official security bodies and which
have been mutually agreed between them to be valid information. It is not
selected "stovepiped" infromation of the sort dealth with by the OSP. If you
have ANY evidence which disagrees with teh analysis of the US securioty
agencies feel free to admit it. Of the scant submissions which proport to be
"evidence" submitted by my detractors here, the official security agencies
of the US does not even mention them save int he case of a claim that Salman
Pak was a "terrorist training camp". In THAT case I can find no trace of the
names of the officials mentioned in your so called "evidence". I can however
see the conclusions reached by the official securioty agencies and the
evidence on which those conslusion is based. That conclusion is NO EVIDENCE
OF ANY TERRORIST TRAINING CAMP at Salman Pak.


There are a plethors of other media, book and other sources to which I can
also refer but for the moment suppose you take on each and every point
raised by me based on official security agency evidence?

>
>>Lee Harvey Oswald was not in the fourth largest Army in the World.
>
> Who cares?!?

Apparently YOU DO! Since you first raised the JFK assassination! It isnt a
case of a conspiracy theory of a lone gunman whom a few people saw carrying
what might have been "curtain rods". It is a case of one of the largest
armies in the World! It is a case of claim upon claim BEFORE the event that
this Army had loads and loads of WMD reasy to launch. It is a claim of links
between Iraq and Islamists like Al Qaeda and their cooperation in World
Terror. Claims they had chemical bio and even Nukes!

>
> He was a pawn.

I won't be diverted off the issue into a classic conspiracy theory. where is
your evidence of WMD in iraq before the occupation or links to Islamists in
a world terrorist campaign? If and when you can't produce thge evidence then
tell me WHY DID THE US INVADE IRAQ?

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:8g0el31j0k4371hae87m6kka5beot05vbp@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>news:iajdl3dc0u28mo2sbos4j0f0u6eva0vs02@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 10:03:14 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>what is the relevance of posting the source of a post?
>>>
>>> What does some offshore Mick have to do with any expertiseon US
>>> affairs of state?
>>
>>I assume you racist "mick" comment refers to Irish?
>
> Irish is a "race"?????


Calling someone a "Mick" is racist!

In case you are not aware the concept of "race" is disputable and social
scientists argue about it.

Even if "race" does not exiat one may still have racism! Your comment was
racist!

>
>>You have no idea if I am Irish or not or whether I am even a US citizen.
>
>
>
> So clear the mystery up __________________________.

It has nothing to do with the issue of unsupported claims of WMD or in Iraq
or co planning of terror campaigns with Al Qaeda!



>
>>But in spite of the fact that you cant produce evidence for WMD
>
> BULLSHIT!
>
>
> http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/

LOL! A blog now! And you criticise official intelligence agency sources as
not being definitive! LOL!

The "Yellow Cake" story had been well and truly debunked. It rivals the
"Salman Pak" and "Saving Private Jessica Lynch" stories!
for some background read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIA_leak_scandal_timeline
As you can see I don't think the spooks have the "definitive answer" either

[snip - most of this article deals with BEFORE 1991]

then we came to the CLAIM
> place. A total of 1.8 tons of enriched uranium have been discovered
> and removed from Iraq since the war started in 2003.


This claim is clearly WRONG! but follow the SOURCE and wher does it come
form? - FRONTPAGE MAG. to be fair frontpage mag refers to a piece in the
Washington post.
U.S. Removed Radioactive Materials From Iraq Facility

By Walter Pincus
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, July 7, 2004; Page A16

Now in THAT source you find that it was NOT ENRICHED URANIUM

and you will find: Less sensitive radiological materials -- used for
medical, agricultural or industrial purposes -- were left in Iraq, according
to a Department of Energy statement.
and...
Tuwaitha was once the center of Saddam Hussein's nuclear weapons effort, but
its equipment was dismantled at the direction of U.N. inspectors in the
early 1990s as part of the agreement following Iraq's surrender in the 1991
Persian Gulf War. The U.N. inspectors removed highly enriched uranium that
could be used for weapons and shipped it for storage in Russia. The
low-enriched uranium was placed under seal in storage at Tuwaitha but under
the control of the IAEA.
and...

In April 2003, just days after the statue of Hussein in Baghdad was pulled
down, a U.S. Marine engineering company took a close look at Tuwaitha, which
is 30 miles south of Baghdad. There they found guards had abandoned their
posts and looters were roaming the giant facility. At one storage building,
which later was found to hold radioactive samples used in research, the
radiation levels were too high to enter safely, although the entrance door
stood wide open.
A month later, the Pentagon rejected suggestions that U.N. inspectors be
allowed to reenter Iraq but agreed the IAEA experts could return to secure
the uranium that had been under its seal for years.

[end quote]

NOT ENRICHED! NON WEAPONS GRADE! UNDER SEAL! KNOWN ABOUT! ENRICHMENT
MACHINERY DISMANTLED!

LOL! Funny how the spin doctors morph this into a weapons system. LOL!

>
>
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={A91FEE10-D98F-4EAA-8CA5-73DCD65234D2}

Opps! Frontpage mag. Which is a self proclaimed biased source!

>
> The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency
> (IAEA), was very upset last week that the US had shipped about 1.8
> tons of low-enriched uranium and other radioactive material out of
> Iraq for disposition in the US.

Aha! Now THEY go the "half spin" route. Instead of a downright lie (and the
blogger above may not have been lying he may have honestly -but
mistakely -believed it was enriched) sayong "enriched" Uranium when clearly
it WAS NOT they introduec the "low-enriched" moniker! LOL! for "low" read
"NOT"

> One would think that the IAEA would
> have appreciated our work in assisting them in the implementation of
> the provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in this
> particularly volatile region of the world. But one would be wrong.

One would appreciate if Frontpage mag used the following phrases:

NOT ENRICHED! NON WEAPONS GRADE! UNDER SEAL! KNOWN ABOUT! ENRICHMENT
MACHINERY DISMANTLED!

>
>
>> and links
>>showing Saddam was in League with Al Qaeda Ill demonstrate how silly that
>>question is.
>
> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200410\SPE20041004a.html
>
[snip]

I dealt with this in an earlier post in this thread.

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:bc1el3521eg6or6plqq7duutn4fvktbmic@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>news:svidl3pld2mar6c0797l5vv55ibt02sq5m@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>The CIA report IS based on everything they know AFTER the invasion!
>>>
>>> Ah...so hindsight allows revision, great....
>>
>>
>>I see you snipped the

Snipped it again didnt you?
[unsnipped]
"and everything BEFORE the invasion as
well"

We are not arguing about "they THOUGHT they were right at the time" as if
that is an excuse! THEY CLAIMED THEY KNEW! They DIDNT KNOW !


>
> How may blacked out segments are there in that Senate report pdf?

Several? Why do you ask? LOL! Are you going to claim that YOUR evidence is
in the blacked out bits? LOL! I suppose you will also claim that it is with
the Unicorns and WMD. But that would be a circular argument wouldnt it?
Using unseen "evidence" of WMD as evidence for unseen WMD!

>
> Have you read it?

Please stick with the issue. You have been presented with official evidence.
Whether I know more than you or not is not the issue! Based on the evidence
before you tell me where your so called evidence of WMD which the US Leaders
claimed they KNEW about?

already known about sealed NON weapons grade Uranium is NOT WMD!

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:qd1el35cs7t38thr7u861veaga35t7m7sr@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>news:i3jdl39200a3pd6k9aa2pbffs181f7tmqe@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>> The enemy of my enemy...etc...
>>>>
>>>>That logic might apply to Georges Bush Jr and Snr. and Regan. Maybe even
>>>>to
>>>>Clinton. But not to Saddam
>>>
>>> Oh do tell....
>>>
>>> He had no axe to grind with the US????
>>
>>What a silly comment! of course he was not a friend of the US nor they of
>>him. He was even an enemy of the Us. And Islamists were also enemy of the
>>US.
>>
>>That does not mean it is logical to conclude (as you DID) that they must
>>BOTH be friends.
>
> Did I say "friends"????
>
> NO!

Okay then

You stated:

The enemy of my enemy...etc...
[end quote]


What did you mean by the "etc." above?

If you didn't mean "IS MY FRIEND" what did you mean?



>
>>> http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewNation.asp?Page=\Nation\archive\200410\NAT20041011a.html
>>> CNSNews.com) - When CNSNews.com published an article Monday, Oct. 4,
>>> entitled, "Exclusive: Saddam Possessed WMD, Had Extensive Terror
>>> Ties," we decided against publishing all 42 pages of the Iraqi
>>> intelligence documents in our possession and on which the article was
>>> based.
>>
>>You have a newspaper article from 2004 which you tout as evidence? It had
>>an
>>unverified Arabic doccument (which Ill bet you cant even read) which was
>>NOT
>>referred to by ANY US intelligence source as far as I know? It is very
>>weak
>>and unsubstianted evidence. Furthermore
>>
>>How come NO US intelligence organisations ever mentioned this doccument
>>which you claim was in their posession?
>>
>>[snip]
>
> Could it be there is a bit of a cover up?

It could well be that! and there could be gaint lizards running the Us
government to or Bush might be in league with Unicorns! The thinf is that if
I clamed such things it would be for me to prove them! In the absence of
evidence we assume the claim is not valid. No evidence of WMD means NO WMD!
No evidence of cover up means NO cover up! Im not claiming there is NO WMD
in IRAQ and ther is NO COVER UP. But I dont have to prove the negative. the
person making the claim has the burden of proof!

But I will comment on this conspiracy theory. Ironically it reminds me of
the burden of evidence of a "miracle" in the Catholic church. They way they
see it as far ads I know is that an alternative explanation mucst be sought.
A miracle is deemed to have happened when the alternative explanation is
even more unlikely then the miracle happening in the first place! Now
looking at your "cover up" theory it appears to me that finding WMD in Iraq
would indeed qualify as a "miracle"

In other words the "found but covered up" thgeory is even more unlikely than
finding these WMD in the first place! But as the conspiracists theorists say
when they cant prove a conspiracy "that only mean there is an even deeper
conspiracy covering it up".
Please try to see reason and argue based on evidence and not on what you
want to believe based on spin!

>
>>>
>>> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={EACB624F-680F-4296-9D12-49C458BF38C1}
>>
>>Frontpage mag is a biased source
>
> **** YOU TO HELL TOO!

When you are losing the debate do you always resort to attacking the person
instead of dealing with the issue?
That does not change the admitted bias of the source.

>
>
> http://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=604615
>
> March 22, 2005
>
> Iraqi commandos backed by U.S. ground and air fire uncovered an
> apparent insurgent training camp today that hosted fighters from as
> far away as the Philippines, senior officials tell ABC News.

Okay . Better! this does not seem biased. note the word "apparent" ? Nor is
"insurgent" defined! Against who or what?

[snip]

>
> At the scene, the commandos found documents indicating that there were
> Syrians, Algerians, other Arabs and at least one Filipino among the
> insurgents. The "training camp" found nearby is being "exploited,"
> officials said.

LOL! "training camp" in quotation marks! foreigners in Iraq! Now that is not
surprising is it? most "insurgents" however are iraqi! But let us suppose
you wanted to set up a worldwide covert terror group and train them for an
attack say in the Phillipnes. You think it is somehow a smart idea to site
theis trainint camp in an active war zone in desert patrolled by US troops?
or would you not go to Jungle terrain in some remote part of the world away
from US troops? The "training camp" theory does not syttand up. And I havent
even gone into counter evidence.


>
> On Monday and today, 20 insurgents were detained in three separate
> operations in Mosul, the military said in separate statements.

Yeah. so what? How does that prove "world terrorist links"?

SO????? Where is the story here? People are shot at and captured everyday



> Docex Project- millions of captured documents that had sat deep within
> a warehouse. These documents have shed light on links between Saddam
> and Al Qaeda. They were originally headquartered in Doha, Qatar.
> Released by John Negroponte for volunteers to translate.

You won't get access to them for some time!

Here look at this form one of you own biased sources:
https://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/290fenpf.asp
SECRET INTELLIGENCE work is one of the most important tools a government can
use to reduce--in Rumsfeldian parlance--"unknown unknowns." Intelligence is
a national security decision-making tool, not a ball to be taken out and
kicked about when cheap political points need to be scored. Yet now that the
Department of Defense Inspector General's Office has released its report on
the intelligence-related activities of the Pentagon's Office of Special
Plans, that is exactly what is going on.
Leaks of secret intelligence documents are curious affairs. The general
public rarely gets to see the full text of intelligence assessments because,
as prolific as they can be, leakers gain no benefit from revealing the full
picture. Doing so would reveal, as the recent key judgments of the national
intelligence estimate on Iraq showed, that there is often a ray of light
amongst all the doom and gloom.
[end excerpt]

Originally posted at The Weekly Standard of 12/19/2005 (Volume 011, Issue
14).
FOR THE SECOND TIME IN recent weeks the Department of Defense has denied a
request from The Weekly Standard to release unclassified documents recovered
in postwar Iraq. These documents apparently reveal, in some detail,
activities of Saddam Hussein's regime in the years before the war.
....
Much of today's debate about the threat posed three years ago by Saddam
Hussein's Iraq is based on past assessments by U.S. intelligence agencies
that we now know had no real sources on the ground in Iraq. The Bush
administration seems remarkably uninterested in discovering, now that we
have reams of material from Saddam's regime, what the actual terror-related
and WMD-related activities of that regime were
....
Beginning in February 2005, I started asking the Pentagon's public affairs
office for more information on the document exploitation (DOCEX) project
headquartered in Doha, Qatar. Later in the spring, I provided to the
Pentagon a list of more than 40 unclassified Iraqi regime documents and
requested that they be released. Pentagon public affairs officials denied
this request and indicated that a Freedom of Information Act request would
likely be the only way to secure the documents, even though they were not
classified. I filed a FOIA request on June 19. The FOIA request was passed
from the Pentagon to the Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) to the Army's
Intelligence and Security Command. I received an "administrative denial" of
my request on September 20.

....

Were biological and chemical agents destroyed by the Iraqi regime? When?
How? How many? Does the correspondence between the Iraqi Embassy in Manila
and the Iraqi Ministry of Foreign Affairs shed any new light on the $25
million ransom that Muammar Qaddafi paid Abu Sayyaf in the summer of 2000,
ostensibly to secure the release of 25 Westerners held hostage by the
Filipino al Qaeda affiliate? Who traveled to Pakistan? What was his
involvement with bin Laden? Did he have anything to do with the Iraqi
government?

One would think the U.S. government would want answers to questions like
these. But the DIA has been angling since last spring to close the DOCEX
program in Doha. According to two Pentagon sources with direct knowledge of
the issue, the future of that DOCEX program has been the subject of intense
debate in recent weeks. Analysts with knowledge of the project say that the
work is not close to being completed and warn that the closure of the DOCEX
project there could mean the premature end to an important effort.

[end excerpts]



So much for DOCEX

[snip]

Funny how we cant find these docs verified in OFFICIAL security sources?
Where did ABC news get them?

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:7u1el3ddm88fm7n9cfr6dg52sfum1l8sdt@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 11:44:26 -0800, Don Homuth
> <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:
>
>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:18:59 GMT, jim bronson <then@came.nbc> wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:28:51 -0800, Don Homuth
>>><dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 04:07:10 GMT, Sir Sam <nite@cru.sade> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 01:30:20 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>>>><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>Read the actual report by the CIA.
>>>>>
>>>>>Read what they found AFTER the invasion - fool.
>>>
>>>>No WMDs.
>>>
>>>LIAR!
>>>
>>>http://butlerblog.com/2005/08/30/how-many-nuclear-weapons-can-you-make-from-500-tons-of-yellow-cake/
>>>
>>>The Tuwaitha site was heavily bombed during the '91 allied campaign,
>>>yet, when the allies showed up in 2003, they found that this site had
>>>continued to be used to stockpile material as part of an appearent
>>>nuclear weapons program.
>>
>>From a Bloggiste, yet!
>
>
> NO FACTUAL REBUTTAL!

I already posted. You blogger was using a biased source which used the
WashingtonPost. The original post shows that

Discovered in 1991 by the UN!
Not containing enriched weapons grade Uranium but non enriched uranium!
SEALED by the UN in 1991!

Known about over a decade before invasion! the US then shelled and bombed
the place and refused the UN entry!
>
[snip]
[snip]
>>
>>As above, Low-enriched uranium is not useful for nuclear weapons,
>
> ASSHOLE it shows what they were trying to DO!

What they admitted they were trying to do in 1995! But in 1991 the UN ciezed
and sealed this! They camne back in 2003 weeks before the US invasion and
nothing had changed! That does not mean twelve years later after continuous
inspection that Iraq had nukes or even the means of making them!

>
>>>>No facilities to make or store CWs or BWs.
>>>
>>>Destroyed and sanitized.
>>>
>>>http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm
>>>
>>>Weapons of Mass Destruction HAVE been found in Iraq:
>>>
>>>1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium
>>
>>Low-enriched, and not suitable for WMD use.

NON enriched! read the original source! THe washington post. The biased
source changed NON to LOW.


>>
>>>1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents
>>
>>Turned out to be bug spray, and nothing else.
>
> PROVE IT!

It is for the claimant to prove it! Dont try to shift the burden!

>
>>>17 chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times
>>>more deadly than sarin gas)
>>
>>That Used to contain cyclosarin,
>
> MORE RATIONALIZING!

Where and when were these discovered?


>
>>>Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal
>>>over populated areas
>>
>>Nonsense.
>
> FACT!
>
> NO REBUTTAL OFFERED!

No actual facts offered. where and when were these discovered?


>
>>>Roadside bombs loaded with mustard and "conventional" sarin gas,
>>>assembled in binary chemical projectiles for maximum potency
>>
>>Nope -- didn't happen.
>
> PROVE IT!
>
> CITE!

Shiftin the burden again! Where and when werre these discovered? what are
the tests for the "filled munitions" and where are they now located?


>
>>>>No indication of an operational connection between ObL and Iraq at any
>>>>level.
>>>
>>>LIAR!
>>>
>>>http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewSpecialReports.asp?Page=\SpecialReports\archive\200410\SPE20041004a.html
>>>
>>>(CNSNews.com) - Iraqi intelligence documents, confiscated by U.S.
>>>forces and obtained by CNSNews.com, show numerous efforts by Saddam
>>>Hussein's regime to work with some of the world's most notorious
>>>terror organizations, including al Qaeda, to target Americans.
>>
>>Nope -- didn't happen. The alleged "documents" were Never confirmed
>
>
> PROVE IT!
>
> CITE!

shifting the burden again! One can not prove a negative1

Please look up "logical fallacy" "proving a negative" aND "SHIFTING THE
BURDEN"

 

[Mavisbeacon]

"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
news:7i1el392cn4tb13set65jms48bahvdm1a4@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 19:42:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>
>>
>>"jim bronson" <then@came.nbc> wrote in message
>>news:j1jdl3tn8i73ua3aur7v271qgv2nk0gs43@4ax.com...
>>> On Wed, 05 Dec 2007 09:40:03 GMT, "Mavisbeacon"
>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled:
>>>
>>>>ANY known evidence is raised supplied and
>>>>analysed.
>>>
>>> Like say:
>>>
>>> http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2712903.stm
>>>
>>> A court in the German city of Mannheim has convicted two businessmen
>>> of supplying weapons-making equipment to Iraq in violation of UN
>>> sanctions.
>>> Engineer Bernd Schompeter was sentenced to five years and three months
>>> for dealing in drills that can be used for boring tubes for long-range
>>> cannons, capable of launching nuclear, chemical or biological
>>> warheads.
>>>
>>> A second defendant, Willi Heinz Ribbeck, was given a two-year
>>> suspended sentence for failing to alert his superiors to the sale of
>>> the drills to Mr Schompeter by his Burgsmueller machine company.
>>>
>>> Both defendants, who are in their 50s, have confessed to the main
>>> charge of supplying the equipment.
>>you left out htis bit:
>>
>>It is not known whether Iraq has actually built any of the long-range guns
>
> SO?????
>
>>It IS KNOWN now. No such "supergun" was ever constructed!
>
> Gee, that makes the ILLEGAL componentry and INTENT to build it OK
> then, right???
>
> I mean no gun, no foul...right????

No that is an ENTIRELY SEPERATE issue! The issue of whether selling WMD
materials to Iraq was wrong is in my case clear. Nobody should have been
selling such stuff to Iraq. I opposed saddam back in the eighties when the
US WERE SELLING himn WMD materials!

The issue we are dealing with here is a DIFFERENT one namely:
Where is there evidence for all the WMD ready to launch which the US claimed
as a basis for invading Iraq? where are the proven links to al Qaeda and
world terror organisations?

>
>
>>You will note as well that this was published when people were whipping up
>>a
>>media frenzy suggesting Iraq had WMD.
>>
>>31 January, 2003,
>
> So ****ING WHAT?!?!?

Please look at that last question from me and you may have a clue to and
answer to this one.

>
> They're not serving time now for sending Sod-em bon bons, are they,
> you asshole!

Actually at least one of them leakers and spinners WAS ! But Bush just
pardoned him didn't he?

>
>>Here is just the US list on biological stuff!
>
> Don't care - SNIP.

Then why did you bring it up? YOU brought up people supplying WMD materials
to Iraq. But you now don't seem to care about the issue! Is that because the
US was complicit in this regard?

>
> You want to point it ALL at the US, **** you, ya stupid Mick ******* -
> straight to HELL with you.

You do not seem to be reading what I actually wrote! I pointed to Germany
France China Britian and others. But in FACT it is true that the US lead the
world in Arms dealing. You can't dismiss that fact no matter how much you
don't like it! And attacking the person showing you the facts won't make
them untrue.
Also, assuming the moral authority to sendf people to Hell makes you no
better than an Islamist in that regard! How much you have in common!

>
> At least We clean up our messes.

Invading a non Islamist country and turning it into a civil war involvoing
Islamists while US forces ignored some like the "Mhadi Army" is cleaning up
a mess is it? Maybe your idea of "cleaning up" is confused with the general
publics idea of "creating". In fact all the colonial countries I mentioned
created messes with their militaries which they didnt clean up. The Us have
used their military over a hundred times (outside of WWI WWII and KOREA) in
the past century or so . mainly for economic and trade reasons and not to
keep peace. The British and French are only trotting after them on that
count. You should make yourself more aware of the facts.

>
>
> http://www.internet-grocer.net/weapons.htm
>
> Weapons of Mass Destruction HAVE been found in Iraq:
>
> 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium

WRONG! Not enriched . found and SEALED in 1991! And even if it WAS enriched
(and it WASNT!) it is still a percursor and not a weapon!

>
> 1,500 gallons of chemical weapons agents

Where? When?

>
> 17 chemical warheads containing cyclosarin (a nerve agent five times
> more deadly than sarin gas)

Where? when? Before 1995?

>
> Over 1,000 radioactive materials in powdered form meant for dispersal
> over populated areas


Where? When?

>
> Roadside bombs loaded with mustard and "conventional" sarin gas,
> assembled in binary chemical projectiles for maximum potency

Where? when?

I dispute all the above were found after the current occupation! Mind you
ti is still minute compared the the claims of the US administration BEFORE
the occupation.


>
>
> http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID={A91FEE10-D98F-4EAA-8CA5-73DCD65234D2}

Bioased source

>
> The UN's nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency
> (IAEA), was very upset last week that the US had shipped about 1.8
> tons of low-enriched uranium and other radioactive material out of


For "low" read "non"


> Iraq for disposition in the US. One would think that the IAEA would
> have appreciated our work in assisting them in the implementation of
> the provisions of the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) in this

found in 1991! Not enriched. Sealed by the UN in1991!



>
> http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,200499,00.html

Fox is also baised see www.outfoxed.org

but let us deal with it anyway
>
> WASHINGTON - The United States has found 500 chemical weapons in Iraq
> since 2003, and more weapons of mass destruction are likely to be
> uncovered, two Republican lawmakers said Wednesday.
>
> "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, chemical weapons,"
> Sen. Rick Santorum, R-Pa., said in a quickly called press conference
> late Wednesday afternoon.


Great! Where are they?


>
> Reading from a declassified portion of a report by the National Ground
> Intelligence Center, a Defense Department intelligence unit, Santorum
> said: "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500
> weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.
> Despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War
> chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical
> munitions are assessed to still exist."

This is WEAK! It has been dealt with before by me in soc.culture.iraq
Where is the evidence of SARIN? SArin denatures. you couldnt detect it! But
even if they were SARIN used shells isn't evidence of Sarin WMD ready for
launch as claimed!

>
> "The purity of the agents inside the munitions depends on many
> factors, including the manufacturing process, potential additives and
> environmental storage conditions. While agents degrade over time,
> chemical warfare agents remain hazardous and potentially lethal,"
> Santorum read from the document.

But where is the evidence they recovered ANY reagents?

>
> "This says weapons have been discovered, more weapons exist and they
> state that Iraq was not a WMD-free zone, that there are continuing
> threats from the materials that are or may still be in Iraq," said
> Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich., chairman of the House Intelligence
> Committee.

It does NOT say any such thing! That is OPINION! Where is the evidence of
the tests conducted? where are the "filled munitions" claimed above?