Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:jr8kl3t07fp5ea8dknuvod00m4uihb64tv@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>Where are they? > > Fucking MORON! > > http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=12525 > > It's become a Liberal "article of faith" that Iraq had no weapons of > mass destruction BZZZT! WRONG! Why do you continually recommit this logical fallacy! Look up "proving a negative" will you? I didn't claim "NO WMD" YOU are the one claiming WMD in Iraq when the invasion happened and that Saddam was linked to al Quaeda and suchlike Islamists who want Islamic states and are planning terrorism on an international scale! You have produced NO EVIDENCE to support these hypotheses! Please don't try to shift the burden onto me as if I should prove the negative >and no intention to build them, despite all the > evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed and used them many times. He certainly posessed them! On soc.culture.iraq I published a list of what the the US SOLD HIM in the eighties! The Us then stood by and Rumsfeld even shook Saddam's hand when he used them against IRAN! But most of them were decomissioned by 1991! By "most" read 90 per cent. But 1995 almost all were gone and the inspectors stayed till 1998! They then came back in 2003 and guess what still NO EVIDENCE OF WMD in Iraq! These were not pictures form space but actual people on the ground in Iraq and the US couldn't tell then ANY places to go where they found WMD! Days before the US invaded! What evidence he used them many times? I am aware of two or three times! Twicew against Iran and once against the Kurds. The Kurdish one is even disputed in the suggestion that it was Iranian WMD used to provoke them against Saddam but I don't believe that. It is plausable however. But if by "many times" you nean "THREE times" well then I agree. >When > the CIA didn't immediately uncover huge stockpiles of illegal weapons, There were hundreds of inspectors not just a few CIA and BEFORE the invasion the US Authorities assured us they know wher the WMD were! > critics of Iraqi liberation were able to push the false meme that The theory of memetics is soundly rebutted elsewhere. > Saddam never had WMDs in the first place, or secretly disposed of them > long ago, or that he was "contained" by UN sanctions. Saddm HAD WMD in the eighties! We KNOW that because the US (and others) SOLD that capability to him and he USED them! Saddam did NOT secretly dispose of them. ALL the launchers rocket moulds etc. were disposed of BY THE UN! There remains materials (not actual WMD but the machinery and materials which could make WMD) 95 percent of which were disposed of BY THE UN! Of the other 5 per cent most would render itself unusuable after the intervening time. Of the rest,yes, the Iraquis in charge of the WMD programme claimed to have disposed of it. they provided the locations it was stored (again NOT WMD but what would be unusable but used to be materials capable of making PART of a WMD) and destroyed. UN inspectors found NO stores of WMD materials by 1998! >With the US > invasion of Iraq telegraphed for well over a year in advance, it > boggles the mind that Liberals still refuse to even consider the > possibility that Saddam moved or hid whatever WMD materials he had to > prevent them from being discovered. This is a rubbish claim! The reason is that they don't have to prove how there are "NO WMD"! The original claim was that there were loads and loads of WMD and that they were pointing at the West and the US knew where they were and would show them to the rest of the world! They didn't! CHANGING the claim to an explaination of why they think they were WRONG does not mean they are suddenly right! The claim is STILL WRONG! > > The idea that every inch of Iraq has been examined and pronounced > clean is ludicrous. correct. One can not porove a negative! It is a fallacy! One can not prove NO WMD in Iraq! But it is on the claimant who claim thar ARE WMD to provide evidence! I will remind you one can not prove the involvment of Space aliens, unicorns, pixies, the tooth fairy or Sauron either! But if YOU CLAIM Unicorns are involved it is not for me to go all over Iraq looking for buiried unicorns is it? >Reports are still coming in of storage sites that > were completely ignored by the Iraq Survey Group, Which reports? WHICH storage sites? Care to cite these reports? > which concentrated > heavily on previously known WMD storage sites. Simple common sense > would tell anyone that a place marked on every inspector's map "WMD > Storage Facility" might not be the best place to hide your WMDs. Simple common sence might tell anyone that if you claim there is a report you should be able to produce it! > Instead, something like buried and locked concrete bunkers not marked > on any map might be a more likely location. Lo and behold, several > such sites were reported to the ISG... and totally ignored. When and where were these reposted. LOL you mean to say you have a map of "invisible sites". Does the Emperor store his invisible clothes there? > > David Gaubatz, a former member of the Air Force's Office of Special > Investigations, was assigned to intelligence research. He was shown > four sealed underground concrete bunkers in southern Iraq with the > tunnels leading to them deliberately flooded. His sources told him > that the facilities had contained stockpiles of biological and > chemical weapons. When was he told this? By whom? Where is the site? Has it been examined for trace materials? Where is that technical report? And do you claim the UN were aware of this site and never inspected it? >He filed reports with photographs, grid coordinates, > and testimony from multiple sources. Great! Where are these reports? I would love to see them? >But the ISG never unsealed the > bunkers. Oh! so they were (and apparently still ARE) SEALED! Great we can still go there and check for WMD! Where are these bunkers? >"We agents begged and begged for weeks and months to get ISG > to respond to the sites with the proper equipment," Gaubatz told the > NY Sun. Yet the ISG felt comfortable filing a final report, in effect > closing the case. Where are these bunkers? and pics, docs, anything on them? Caome on? You claim to have whole reports. > > Several sources have previously indicated that Saddam sent some WMDs > and equipment related to chemical and biological weapons production to > Syria and Lebanon in the months preceding the US invasion. Maybe he did maybe he didnt! But the CLAIM WAS WMD in Iraq! thats apparently WHY the US invaded! And they claimed in the area of Tikrit and Bagdadh which is on the opposide side of the country to Syria! >In May > 2003, DEBKAfile reported that "the relocation of Iraq's WMD systems > took place between January 10 and March 10 and was completed just 10 > days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq." LOL! You invaded to find WMD and a week before while you were blanket bombing the eitire country. secret convoys crossed a thousand kilometres of desert skirting the Kurdish controlled border and right through the "no fly zone" constantly patrolled by US aricraft and not a single convoy was hit! Saddam should have used thes troops against the US and they would never have beaten such an invisible foe capable of moving faster than the US and completly undetected and unhurt! In fact the plausability of this happening is ever more extraordinary and bizzare than Saddam havinf the WMD in the first place. This is classic "conspiracy theory" reasoning. If the WMD conspiracy theory does not fit then that is because there is an even bigger conspiracy covering it up! LOL! > CIA > satellite imagery showed "convoys of Iraqi trucks that poured into > Syria in February and March 2003." Sure why do they need satellites. they were flying planes over the whole area all the time! Look here are LOADS of maps of WMD facilities. http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/ You can see that some are well over a thousand kilometeres from the Syrian border! And Bagdadh and Tikrit are across rivers and deserts from Syria! It just does not stand up to scrutiny! But the real issue is that the US CLAIMED WMD and they KNEW where they were! > > David Kay, original head of the Iraq Survey group, reported that "we > know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a > lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some > components of Saddam's WMD program." Among the things left behind, Kay > reported finding a "clandestine network of laboratories and > safehouses," and "a prison laboratory complex... that Iraqi officials > working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to > declare to the UN." The ISG's investigation revealed "new research on > BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever > (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin." Charles Duelfer, > who replaced David Kay as head of the ISG, wrote in his final report > that, "ISG received information about movement of material out of > Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved... these reports > were sufficiently credible to merit further investigation." Senator > Pat Roberts, (R-KS), chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, > even acknowledged that "there is some concern that shipments of WMD > went to Syria." Yes. But SUSPICION of SOME MATERIALS which might be used to make WMD going to Syria is ENTIRELY DIFFERENT to the claims of loads of actual WMD in Iraq ready for launchand that the US knew where these were in the Tikjrit and Bagdadh region surroundin the city. So you accept whay Kay says? The SAME David Kay who stated: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/06/23/politics/main1747450.shtml But intelligence officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the subject's sensitive nature, said the weapons were produced before the 1991 Gulf War and there is no evidence to date of chemical munitions manufactured since then. They said an assessment of the weapons concluded they are so degraded that they couldn't now be used as designed. .... 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. And any of Iraq's 1980s-era mustard would produce burns, but it is unlikely to be lethal, Kay said. Asked about the potential danger to U.S. troops, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld said: "They are weapons of mass destruction. They are harmful to human beings. And they have been found." .... Intelligence officials said the munitions were found in ones, twos and maybe slightly larger collections over the past couple of years. One official conceded that these pre-Gulf War weapons did not pose a threat to the U.S. military before the 2003 invasion of Iraq. They were not maintained or part of any organized program run by Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. [end excerpts] You accept what Kay says do you? > > John Shaw, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for International > Technology Security, has charged that Saddam's WMD stockpiles were > moved by Russian special forces into Syria and Lebanon. According to > Shaw, former Russian intelligence head Yevgeny Primakov supervised the > removal operations. GRU military intelligence and Russian "spetsnaz" > (special forces) troops moved Saddam's WMDs to Syria by truck > beginning in December 2002. Strange that they didnt accept this story in December 2002 then and continued in their "lots of WMD " till May 2003 isnt it? [snip - deal with rest later] Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:58:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > On soc.culture.iraq I published a list of what >the the US SOLD HIM in the eighties! Why don't you fuck off, you useless America-hating Mick. The choice was Sod-em or commies on the oil. And we were far from the top end of the list on those who armed or made money off his regime. http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm Facts on Who Benefits From Keeping Saddam Hussein In Power by Carrie Satterlee WebMemo #217 France France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] French total trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest, totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2] In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly 60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with Baghdad in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3] France's largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to contain as much as 25 percent of the country's oil reserves. The two fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.[4] In 2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that average these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return near $650 billion. France's Alcatel company, a major telecom firm, is negotiating a $76 million contract to rehabilitate Iraq's telephone system.[5] In 2001 French carmaker Renault SA sold $75 million worth of farming equipment to Iraq.[6] More objections have been lodged against French export contracts with Iraq than any other exporting country under the oil-for-food program, according to a report published by the London Times. In addition French companies have signed contracts with Iraq worth more than $150 million that are suspected of being linked to its military operations.[7] Some of the goods offered by French companies to Iraq, detailed by UN documents, include refrigerated trucks that can be used as storage facilities and mobile laboratories for biological weapons. Iraq owes France an estimated $6 billion in foreign debt accrued from arms sales in the 1970s and '80s.[8] From 1981 to 2001, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI), France was responsible for over 13 percent of Iraq's arms imports.[9] Germany Direct trade between Germany and Iraq amounts to about $350 million annually, and another $1 billion is reportedly sold through third parties.[10] It has recently been reported that Saddam Hussein has ordered Iraqi domestic businesses to show preference to German companies as a reward for Germany's "firm positive stand in rejecting the launching of a military attack against Iraq." It was also reported that over 101 German companies were present at the Baghdad Annual exposition.[11] During the 35th Annual Baghdad International Fair in November 2002, a German company signed a contract for $80 million for 5,000 cars and spare parts.[12] In 2002, DaimlerChrysler was awarded over $13 million in contracts for German trucks and spare parts.[13] Germany is owed billions by Iraq in foreign debt generated during the 1980's.[14] German officials are investigating a German corporation accused of illegally channeling weapons to Iraq via Jordan. The equipment in question is used for boring the barrels of large cannons and is allegedly intended for Saddam Hussein's Al Fao Supercannon project.[15] An article in the German daily Tageszeitung reported that of the more than 80 German companies that have done business with Baghdad since around 1975 and have continued to do so up until 2001, many have supplied whole systems or components for weapons of mass destruction. Russia Russia controls roughly 5.8 percent of Iraq's annual imports.[16] Under the U.N. oil-for-food program, Russia's total trade with Iraq was somewhere between $530 million and $1 billion for the six months ending in December of 2001.[17] According to the Russian Ambassador to Iraq, Vladimir Titorenko, new contracts worth another $200 million under the U.N. oil-for-food program are to be signed over the next three months.[18] Russia's LUKoil negotiated a $4 billion, 23-year contract in 1997 to rehabilitate the 15 billion-barrel West Qurna field in southern Iraq. Work on the oil field was expected to commence upon cancellation of U.N. sanctions on Iraq. The deal is currently on hold.[19] In October 2001, Salvneft, a Russian Quote
Guest Merlin Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 On Dec 4, 5:46 am, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbea...@nospam.forme> wrote: > BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any > other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! > the US occupation facilitated rather than mitigated against Islamists! You love to try that meaningless bit of information in almost all of your posts. You're wrong. One has nothing to do with the other. What an idiot you are for not seeing so. Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:270jl39o5afhr7gmhrde8p66u873hp593e@4ax.com... > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:48:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Hertz Donut" <somewhere@outthere.net> wrote in message >>news:EbqdnRnPmcH6MsXanZ2dnUVZ_smnnZ2d@hawaiiantel.net... >>> >>> "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> wrote in message >>> news:MW16j.2$fl3.0@amsnews12... >>>> >>>> "Western Road Co." <hydr@ulics.biz> wrote in message >>>> news:vg2hl3158mtip5mmoerkienih3v42s0l25@4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 20:30:05 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>>> >>>>>>NO LINKS between Al Quaeda and Salman Pak! >>>>> >>>>> AQ is NOT the only terror sponsor! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Oh I do aplogise. No evidence of Saddam working in international terror >>>> with any Islamic fundamentalist group. >>>> I take it you accept he whsnt working with AQ then? By the way what is >>>> a >>>> "terrorist" according to you? >>> >>> Liberals do no believe in terrorists...they think they do not exist (or >>> at >>> least that's the way they act). >>> >> >>Sorry but were you actually answering a question there? What is a >>"terrorist" according to you? >> > Why don't you fuck the HEll off you lying piece of shit! Stated just exactly like a true Islamic fundamentalist! Why are you evading the question? Are you afraid of telling prople what you honestly thin a terrorist is according to you? Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >> >>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>actually >>meet or pay commit further violence? > > > There is something so inherently intellectually dishonest about you > that it defies comprtehension. > > Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families > will profit. How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned terrorist and supporting other terrorist actions? Betya you wont! Were Americans ALL clearly contributing to Noraid so that the IRA would bomb civilians? I don't think so! So how is it so "clear" as you claim? > > I wish someone would blow your worthless ass up clearly when you lose the argument you resort to attacking the person. How un Christian you are! You realise that rather than adopt the mainstream Christian point of view you exactly replicated the fundamentalist mindset in this remark? Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message news:p8val3tvi7e72hc4st3lfen6lbiuo9hgss@4ax.com... > On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:46:58 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any >>other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! > LIAR! > > http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm > > Salman Pak / Al Salman > Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret > terrorist training facility at Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and > non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, > planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations. [snip] http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/gunning/interviews/ November 2005: More than two years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, there has been no verification of the general's account of the activities at Salman Pak. In fact, U.S. officials have now concluded that Salman Pak was most likely used to train Iraqi counter-terrorism units in anti-hijacking techniques. It should also be noted that the general and other defectors interviewed for this report were brought to FRONTLINE's attention by the Iraqi National Congress (INC), a dissident organization that was working to overthrow Saddam Hussein. .... More than two years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, there has been no verification of Khodada's account of the activities at Salman Pak. In fact, U.S. officials have now concluded that Salman Pak was most likely used to train Iraqi counter-terrorism units in anti-hijacking techniques. It should also be noted that he and other defectors interviewed for this report were brought to FRONTLINE's attention by the Iraqi National Congress (INC), a dissident organization that was working to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Since the original broadcast, Khodada has not publicly addressed questions that have been raised about his account of activities at Salman Pak .... More than two years after the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, no evidence has surfaced showing that Saddam Hussein had had the capability to deploy nuclear weapons. After Saddam's fall, Hamza was appointed by the Coalition Provisional Authority to be senior adviser to Iraq's Ministry of Science and Technology. In this role, he had partial control of Iraq's nuclear and military industries. In March 2004, Hamza's contract was not renewed. To date, he has not addressed questions about the failure to find weapons of mass destruction .... IT WAS THE WMD facility in 1990! http://www.fas.org/nuke/guide/iraq/facility/salman_pak.htm It is a geographical region also containing a camp http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salman_Pak_facility Douglas MacCollam wrote in the July/August 2004 issue of the Columbia Journalism Review that "There still remain claims and counterclaims about what was going on at Salman Pak. But the consensus view now is that the camp was what Iraq told UN weapons inspectors it was - a counterterrorism training camp for army commandos." The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence concluded that "Postwar findings support the April 2002 Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) assessment that there was no credible reporting on al-Qa'ida training at Salman Pak or anywhere else in Iraq. There have been no credible reports since the war that Iraq trained al-Qa'ida operatives at Salman Pak to conduct or support transnational terrorist operations."p. 108 in http://intelligence.senate.gov/phaseiiaccuracy.pdf Inconsistencies in the stories of the defectors led some U.S. officials, journalists, and investigators to conclude that the Salman Pak story was inaccurate. One senior U.S. official said that they had found "nothing to substantiate" the claim that al-Qaeda trained at Salman Pak.[10][11] The credibility of the defectors has been questioned due to their association with the Iraqi National Congress, an organization that has been accused of deliberately supplying false information to the US government in order to build support for an invasion of Iraq.[12] "The INC's agenda was to get us into a war", said Helen Kennedy of the New York Daily News.[13] The DIA told the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence in 2006 that after Operation Desert Storm, "fabricators and unestablished sources who reported hearsay or thirdhand information created a large volume of human intelligence reporting. This type of reporting surged after September 2001 and continued well after the capture of Salman Pak." Yet the DIA's postwar exploitation of the facility found "no information from Salman Pak that links al-Qa'ida with the former regime." (p. 84) Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:c09kl3hsc3t1k3ebnbhofdkf8hhv1ilkge@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:13 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>It des not answer the following questions: > > I don't FUCKING CARE!!!! Well that seems obvious. But whether you care or not ut still does not answer the questions! Caring about it or not will not change the facts! In fact it does not matter what I believe either. what we are arguing about here is objectively established facts! You haven't established any of your so called "evidence". > > Got it asshole? > > The SOB either played good global liar's poker and got > caught...or...the goods are in Syria. This is a false dichotomy. In fact it might well be that there were NO WMD in Iraq for a at least 5 years before the US occupation! I also suggest you also look up the "fallacy of the excluded middle". In fact some might be in Syria some might exist and be hidden in Iraq. But all this is beside the point. The point is THE CLAIMS that 1. There were WMD in Iraq just before the US invasion! 2. There were links between Saddam and islamic terror to the extent that Saddam trained funded or helped plan international terror 3. At least some of WMD referred to before the invasion have been discovered. None of these points are substianted facts! claiming "we cant find them because..." is a DIFFERENT claim to "we know wher they are and will show you" > > For the sake of the world I actually hope YOU are right! Well this is only the "spread fear" tactic which got you the Patriot Act and locked up about 700 people for six years so far without due legal process. You are appealing to ignorance! Look that up under "fallacy" too! > > But I'm not stupid enough to service that level of naivete for a > living. Fool me once shome on you fool me twice shame on me! Or as some people say "the fooled guy won't get fooled again" Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 8, 2007 Posted December 8, 2007 "Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message news:0cell3prcdrq7stsachs8uth79pllut2q3@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:58:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> On soc.culture.iraq I published a list of what >>the the US SOLD HIM in the eighties! > > Why don't you fuck off, you useless America-hating Mick. Well in spite of you racist comments which are bereft of Christmas cheer (NB: I actually answer questions and dont evade them?) maybe because I chose to point out that the likes of you have NO SUPPORT for empty claims? Maybe for a lot of other reasons? But the magic of usenet is that while you may ignore me if you wish (and that is your perogative) You can't make me go anywhere and I cant make you go anywhere! If you can't support you claims about WMD in Iraq then don't think that a personal attack on me will make your unsupported claims true. > > The choice was Sod-em or commies on the oil. This is a rather niave analysis. The case of Iran proves it! The Iranians threw the US out of Iran. But they didnt replace it with commies. In fact they introduces Islamism! In the meantime, in case you haven't noticed the Soviet Union collapsed! So you analysis if far from apt! > > And we were far from the top end of the list on those who armed or > made money off his regime. That is beside the point! I doubty you can prove the US was not top on a list of WMD suppliers. But in any case it isn't a scale of "badness". either one does the right thing or not. If Germany andf France and Britian ALSO supplied Islamists (like the US DID with for example the MuJIHADeen) then they were also wrong. I do not believe two wrongs makes a right. The US is certainly on the Top of who is making money off Iraq! But anyone who promotes war for economic interests is wrong. > > http://www.heritage.org/Research/Iraq/wm217.cfm > > Facts on Who Benefits From Keeping Saddam Hussein In Power > by Carrie Satterlee > WebMemo #217 Before you go any further please note the political contest of this memo. It was in early 2003 before the invasion. France had told the Us that if they requested the Security Council for another Resolution to invade Iraq that France would veto it! The Us then withdrew their resolution and started hostile publicity against France. LOL! People even poured wine down the drains and started callinfg French Fries "freedom Fries" . Clever campaign. > France > France controls over 22.5 percent of Iraq's imports.[1] This may have been true in 2003 before the US invaded. I dont dispute it. But who controlled the other 77.5 per cent then ? >French total > trade with Iraq under the oil-for-food program is the third largest, > totaling $3.1 billion since 1996, according to the United Nations.[2] Who were No 1 and 2? Mind you the Us had just had a war with Saddam but ill bet they were still buying oil! > In 2001 France became Iraq's largest European trading partner. Roughly > 60 French companies did an estimated $1.5 billion in trade with > Baghdad in 2001 under the U.N. oil-for-food program.[3] Yeah. So? > France's largest oil company, Total Fina Elf, has negotiated extensive > oil contracts to develop the Majnoon and Nahr Umar oil fields in > southern Iraq. Both the Majnoon and Nahr Umar fields are estimated to > contain as much as 25 percent of the country's oil reserves. The two > fields purportedly contain an estimated 26 billion barrels of oil.[4] Aha! Only to be replaced by WHOM AFTER the US had invaded? > In 2002, the non-war price per barrel of oil was $25. Based on that > average these two fields have the potential to provide a gross return > near $650 billion. It is $100 now and guess who has control of it? > France's Alcatel company, a major telecom firm, is negotiating a $76 > million contract to rehabilitate Iraq's telephone system.[5] And who is doing the contract now? > In 2001 French carmaker Renault SA sold $75 million worth of farming > equipment to Iraq.[6] Who is supplying it now? [snip Germany/Russia] If you read any of my posts on this on soc.culture.iraq you would realise that I have pointed to British (I note you left them out) French German and any other post colonialist arms dealers. > The United States remains the largest importer of Iraqi oil under the > UN Oil-for-Food program. Oh so they WERE NO 1! Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message >news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... >> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >>> >>>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>>actually >>>meet or pay commit further violence? >> >> >> There is something so inherently intellectually dishonest about you >> that it defies comprtehension. >> >> Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families >> will profit. > >How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear >steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned terrorist >and supporting other terrorist actions? Are you THAT stupid??? What do you think the message is? You blow yourself up, family gets stipend - you get glory. Damn you FOOL, it's a recruiting incentive! What a fucking dishonest muzzie puke you are! Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:13:37 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message >news:0cell3prcdrq7stsachs8uth79pllut2q3@4ax.com... >> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:58:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>> On soc.culture.iraq I published a list of what >>>the the US SOLD HIM in the eighties! >> >> Why don't you fuck off, you useless America-hating Mick. > >Well in spite of you racist comments Since when did the Irish becoem a race? CITE! http://rationalrevolution.net/war/communism_in_iraq.htm What is a significant, and mostly overlooked, aspect of the Iraqi political landscape is the relatively strong revolutionary communist parties in Iraq. As one of the most highly educated countries in the Middle East Iraq has been a breeding ground for Marxists since the days of Kassem. The Ba'ath Party came to power with American approval precisely because they were an anti-Communist organization, and have taken strong action to fight Communists in Iraq over the years. The Communists of Iraq have historically presented some of the strongest opposition to the Saddam regime. I believe that one of the major, and unspoken, elements of American policy towards Iraq is, and has been, that the last thing that America wants is a natural regime change in Iraq that comes from within the Iraqi borders, because there is a significant chance that regime change could mean the formation of a Democratic Communist government in Iraq. Saddam has been wary of this as well, and it is one reason that he changed from his secular approach to government to one that supported fundamentalist Islam. Iraq has traditionally been one of the most, if not the most, secular country in the Middle East. This is one reason that Osama Bin Laden has been largely at odds with Iraq and Saddam over the years. Some of the most advanced opposition groups to Saddam Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >"Sir Sam" <nite@cru.sade> wrote in message >news:p8val3tvi7e72hc4st3lfen6lbiuo9hgss@4ax.com... >> On Tue, 04 Dec 2007 10:46:58 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>>BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any >>>other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! >> LIAR! >> >> http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/world/iraq/salman_pak.htm >> >> Salman Pak / Al Salman >> Former Iraqi military officers have described a highly secret >> terrorist training facility at Salman Pak, where both Iraqis and >> non-Iraqi Arabs receive training on hijacking planes and trains, >> planting explosives in cities, sabotage, and assassinations. > >[snip] Snip right back you scumbag liar! http://pierrelegrand.net/2006/07/06/marines-capture-suspected-iraqi-terror-training-camp.htm SALMAN PAK, Iraq Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >The point is THE CLAIMS that >1. There were WMD in Iraq just before the US invasion! You scumsucking lying pig, fucking muzzie sympathizer! http://www.theconservativevoice.com/articles/article.html?id=12525 It's become a Liberal "article of faith" that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction and no intention to build them, despite all the evidence that Saddam Hussein possessed and used them many times. When the CIA didn't immediately uncover huge stockpiles of illegal weapons, critics of Iraqi liberation were able to push the false meme that Saddam never had WMDs in the first place, or secretly disposed of them long ago, or that he was "contained" by UN sanctions. With the US invasion of Iraq telegraphed for well over a year in advance, it boggles the mind that Liberals still refuse to even consider the possibility that Saddam moved or hid whatever WMD materials he had to prevent them from being discovered. The idea that every inch of Iraq has been examined and pronounced clean is ludicrous. Reports are still coming in of storage sites that were completely ignored by the Iraq Survey Group, which concentrated heavily on previously known WMD storage sites. Simple common sense would tell anyone that a place marked on every inspector's map "WMD Storage Facility" might not be the best place to hide your WMDs. Instead, something like buried and locked concrete bunkers not marked on any map might be a more likely location. Lo and behold, several such sites were reported to the ISG... and totally ignored. David Gaubatz, a former member of the Air Force's Office of Special Investigations, was assigned to intelligence research. He was shown four sealed underground concrete bunkers in southern Iraq with the tunnels leading to them deliberately flooded. His sources told him that the facilities had contained stockpiles of biological and chemical weapons. He filed reports with photographs, grid coordinates, and testimony from multiple sources. But the ISG never unsealed the bunkers. "We agents begged and begged for weeks and months to get ISG to respond to the sites with the proper equipment," Gaubatz told the NY Sun. Yet the ISG felt comfortable filing a final report, in effect closing the case. Several sources have previously indicated that Saddam sent some WMDs and equipment related to chemical and biological weapons production to Syria and Lebanon in the months preceding the US invasion. In May 2003, DEBKAfile reported that "the relocation of Iraq's WMD systems took place between January 10 and March 10 and was completed just 10 days before the US-led offensive was launched against Iraq." CIA satellite imagery showed "convoys of Iraqi trucks that poured into Syria in February and March 2003." David Kay, original head of the Iraq Survey group, reported that "we know from some of the interrogations of former Iraqi officials that a lot of material went to Syria before the war, including some components of Saddam's WMD program." Among the things left behind, Kay reported finding a "clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses," and "a prison laboratory complex... that Iraqi officials working to prepare for UN inspections were explicitly ordered not to declare to the UN." The ISG's investigation revealed "new research on BW-applicable agents, Brucella and Congo Crimean Hemorrhagic Fever (CCHF), and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin." Charles Duelfer, who replaced David Kay as head of the ISG, wrote in his final report that, "ISG received information about movement of material out of Iraq, including the possibility that WMD was involved... these reports were sufficiently credible to merit further investigation." Senator Pat Roberts, (R-KS), chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, even acknowledged that "there is some concern that shipments of WMD went to Syria." John Shaw, former Deputy Undersecretary of Defense for International Technology Security, has charged that Saddam's WMD stockpiles were moved by Russian special forces into Syria and Lebanon. According to Shaw, former Russian intelligence head Yevgeny Primakov supervised the removal operations. GRU military intelligence and Russian "spetsnaz" (special forces) troops moved Saddam's WMDs to Syria by truck beginning in December 2002. Former Iraqi Air Force General Georges Sada has come forward to corroborate and supplement these reports. Sada stated that hundreds of tons of chemicals were smuggled into Syria as early as June 2002, under cover of humanitarian aid to flood victims. Two commercial jets, a 747 and 727, were used to move the WMDs and banned material. "They used to do two sorties a day," said Sada. "Fifty-six sorties were done between Baghdad and Damascus." Twelve hours of unclassified tapes were recently released to the public by the Intelligence Summit, a non-profit group headed by former Federal prosecutor John Loftus. The contents of the tapes make it clear that Saddam Hussein was determined to retain as much of his WMD capability as could be hidden from the UN weapons inspectors. The job of the inspectors, however, was not to discover what was hidden, but to verify what Iraq claimed to have destroyed. In 1991, Iraq was given three months to surrender or destroy everything related to weapons of mass destruction. According to the tapes, Iraq did seem to have an active nuclear program as late as the year 2000. Iraqi scientists were working on enriching uranium using the plasma separation method. On one tape, Dr. Thamir Ma'aman Mawdud reported to Saddam on "the production we achieved in the advanced stages at the end of the Nineties." Mawdud went on to say that "activity hasn't died in plasma because it is allowed in some of the tests which we use. Then, sir, according to what we have done in the Iraqi National Laboratory in building plasma activity, we have a very large industrial base... We have built a factory to produce plasma systems... the truth is the applied activity is present and found in the industrial sector, and not only in the Military Industrial Commission, but in the Atomic Energy Agency, under Dr. Amer [Rashid al-Ubaydi]." Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:15 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> Why don't you fuck the HEll off you lying piece of shit! > >Stated just exactly like a true Islamic fundamentalist! Hey muzzie, how long have you lived in Ireland? Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 08:47:47 -0800 (PST), Merlin <johndoe99@fastmail.fm> mumbled: >On Dec 4, 5:46 am, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbea...@nospam.forme> wrote: > >> BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any >> other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! >> the US occupation facilitated rather than mitigated against Islamists! > >You love to try that meaningless bit of information in almost all of >your posts. > >You're wrong. One has nothing to do with the other. > >What an idiot you are for not seeing so. You're dealing with a deluded liar - no reason in there to access. Quote
Guest Don Homuth Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 01:26:03 GMT, Rid Skewrr <calton@creek.council> wrote: >On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" ><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message >>news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>>>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>>>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >>>> >>>>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>>>actually >>>>meet or pay commit further violence? >>> >>> >>> There is something so inherently intellectually dishonest about you >>> that it defies comprtehension. >>> >>> Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families >>> will profit. >> >>How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear >>steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned terrorist >>and supporting other terrorist actions? > >Are you THAT stupid??? > >What do you think the message is? > >You blow yourself up, family gets stipend - you get glory. > >Damn you FOOL, it's a recruiting incentive! > >What a fucking dishonest muzzie puke you are! Interestingly enough, several years back a group of English academics researched that very question. It was more than clear that the suicide bombers were prepared to blow themselves up without Any recruitment or inducements from anyone. When I get some time, I'll see if I can find the study. It was not particularly surprising. Quote
Guest Rid Skewrr Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:23:11 -0800, Don Homuth <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled: >On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 01:26:03 GMT, Rid Skewrr <calton@creek.council> >wrote: > >>On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>> >>>"P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message >>>news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... >>>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>> >>>>>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>>>>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >>>>> >>>>>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>>>>actually >>>>>meet or pay commit further violence? >>>> >>>> >>>> There is something so inherently intellectually dishonest about you >>>> that it defies comprtehension. >>>> >>>> Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families >>>> will profit. >>> >>>How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear >>>steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned terrorist >>>and supporting other terrorist actions? >> >>Are you THAT stupid??? >> >>What do you think the message is? >> >>You blow yourself up, family gets stipend - you get glory. >> >>Damn you FOOL, it's a recruiting incentive! >> >>What a fucking dishonest muzzie puke you are! > >Interestingly enough, STFU you fat gasbag bird killer! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:jquil35v2cp3ip5tmmoi4o84rk64g52qpv@4ax.com... > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:48:45 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Western Road Co." <hydr@ulics.biz> wrote in message >>news:e6ahl39n13cdoardjq9p6e91a2ous8t3te@4ax.com... >>> On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 01:55:04 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>>> >>>>"Western Road Co." <hydr@ulics.biz> wrote in message >>>>news:fh1hl3l6uqapasbqifnnnqggbghnftbaq1@4ax.com... >>>>> On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 21:10:11 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>>> >>>>>>This is funny. LOL! >>>>> >>>>> YOU ARE A FUCKING PIECE OF MUZZIE_APOLOGIST SHIT! >>>> >>>>I dont have to apologise for Muslims no more than I have to apologise >>>>for >>>>Christians Jews Hindus or members of any other religion. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> http://goliath.ecnext.com/coms2/gi_0199-2343180/Photos-point-to-removal-of.html >>>>> >>>>> U.S. intelligence agencies have obtained satellite photographs of >>>>> truck convoys that were at several weapons sites in Iraq in the weeks >>>>> before U.S. military operations were launched, defense officials said >>>>> yesterday. >>>> >>>>LOL! Funny how the US didnt say that at the time isnt it? >>> >>> You think _everything_ is declassified in a situation like that? >> >>Yep! > Especially when the US say We know where the WMD are and we will show the world. then apparently they find them but keep quiet about them for years! LOL! At the same time you claim that they DIDN'T find them because the clever Iraqis sneaked them into Syria past the whole US army! so they knew they were in Iraq and also know they they were in Syria at the same time! LOL! And I thought only God could be in two places at once! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message news:3g0jl3dddo0p96grlm9phgvd85scij4g41@4ax.com... > On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 15:48:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > [snip] > The character of "Mavis Beacon" is not a real person, but rather a > fictional character created to bring a personal touch to the tutorial. LOL! You are beginning to understand something! > The original photo of Mavis Beacon was of a bankteller in Sherman > Oaks, California, the city in which Software Toolworks, the original > publisher, had its offices. Former TV talkshow host Les Crane, who was > then a partner in Software Toolworks, invented the name. Her first > name is meant to evoke the concept of a maven. Her last name > represents her role as a light to guide your way. If you look you might find the Beacon which has illimunated the way! LOL! But it really has nothing to do with you argument in this thread has it? You are trying to make a personal attack because all your invective and unsupported claims have failed! Which only makes me more intent on posting. > > Mavis Beacon was mentioned in the US version of the TV series The > Office by the character Jim while talking to Pam about how fast she > types. Actor Josh Hartnett said he used Mavis Beacon Teaches Typing to > teach himself to type in preparing to play a journalist in the movie > Resurrecting the Champ [2] > > Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message news:fsgml35j4kjgjv5r2u2m7lj5chqnt87qb0@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message >>news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>>>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>>>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >>>> >>>>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>>>actually >>>>meet or pay commit further violence? >>> [snip] >>> >>> Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families >>> will profit. >> >>How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear >>steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned terrorist >>and supporting other terrorist actions? > [snip] > > You blow yourself up, family gets stipend - you get glory. > > Damn you FOOL, it's a recruiting incentive! > > What a fucking dishonest muzzie puke you are! So then was Noraid which depended on Americans donating money and the Brirish and Irish government a recruting agency for the IRA? They all gave money , houses, allowances to the families of convicted or dead terrorists! Clearly, giving something to the wife or children of a dead terrorist is not in and of itself a "payment" not does it constitute the signing of on a terrorism "contract"! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Don Homuth" <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> wrote in message news:cqnml3p8c08743n3g0tg0v1um7c8p1glna@4ax.com... > On Sun, 09 Dec 2007 01:26:03 GMT, Rid Skewrr <calton@creek.council> > wrote: > >>On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >><Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >> >>> >>>"P-38" <light@ning.pln> wrote in message >>>news:st8kl3pl13hem883t1r9fk9rhe0qa0kt4u@4ax.com... >>>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 02:05:12 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>>> >>>>>> That's what happens when you give money to terrorists, you create an >>>>>> INVCENTIVE to further VIOLENCE! >>>>> >>>>>But how can a suicide bomber who is already dead and whom you didnt >>>>>actually >>>>>meet or pay commit further violence? >>>> >>>> >>>> There is something so inherently intellectually dishonest about you >>>> that it defies comprtehension. >>>> >>>> Clearly the incentive is for more young men to die so their families >>>> will profit. >>> >>>How is that clear in ANY way whatsoever? Care to please show me the clear >>>steps betwen giving money to the family of a dead or imprisioned >>>terrorist >>>and supporting other terrorist actions? >> >>Are you THAT stupid??? >> >>What do you think the message is? >> >>You blow yourself up, family gets stipend - you get glory. >> >>Damn you FOOL, it's a recruiting incentive! >> >>What a fucking dishonest muzzie puke you are! Who sadi anything about me being Irish or Islamic. I could be neither or both but it really has NOTHING to do with the point has it? > > Interestingly enough, several years back a group of English academics > researched that very question. It was more than clear that the > suicide bombers were prepared to blow themselves up without Any > recruitment or inducements from anyone. QED! > > When I get some time, I'll see if I can find the study. It was not > particularly surprising. Im not surprised Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message news:advml357g2qablddb2llfcodqlfa9hai8i@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:23:11 -0800, Don Homuth > <dhomuthoneatcomcast.net@> mumbled: > [snip] >> >>Interestingly enough, [dishonest unattributed snippage which pointed to an academic study that suicide bombers needed no such inducements] thanks for that. By the way are you aware that the largest number of suicide bombers and the originators of the tactic back in the eighties -the TIGERS- are not Islamic! > > > STFU you fat gasbag bird killer! This is what is meant to represent counter argument from a persistent bigot troll who will spam back the same defeated arguments . But don't worry . In spite of hundreds of spam posts I recon he will be gone from soc.culture.iraq by January! Happy Xmas. Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message news:1qgml3pbpi8n9q1i9h8d47ber37fghcaot@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 19:51:16 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >>The point is THE CLAIMS that >>1. There were WMD in Iraq just before the US invasion! > [snip - reposted something which is already replied to in this thread] No evidence of WMD in Iraq before the invasion as claimed! Of course they were there over a decade ago! Nobody denies that! Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message news:regml396idr162vq0p4m7p56ivf627nanh@4ax.com... > On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:13:37 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" > <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: > >> >>"Rid Skewrr" <calton@creek.council> wrote in message >>news:0cell3prcdrq7stsachs8uth79pllut2q3@4ax.com... >>> On Sat, 08 Dec 2007 11:58:46 GMT, "Mavisbeacon" >>> <Mavisbeacon@nospam.forme> mumbled: >>> >>>> On soc.culture.iraq I published a list of what >>>>the the US SOLD HIM in the eighties! >>> >>> Why don't you fuck off, you useless America-hating Mick. >> >>Well in spite of you racist comments > > Since when did the Irish becoem a race? > > CITE! > > http://rationalrevolution.net/war/communism_in_iraq.htm > > What is a significant, and mostly overlooked, aspect of the Iraqi > political landscape is the relatively strong revolutionary communist > parties in Iraq. This has nothing to do with the above question. But it is true. In fact I have posted elsewhere in soc.cultuire.iraq about the hiostorical Iranian and Iraqui political climate.The Baathist party in particular has Syrian Origins but developed a particular brand of Iraqi nationalism which was heavily influenced by Marxism. so what? >As one of the most highly educated countries in the > Middle East Iraq has been a breeding ground for Marxists since the > days of Kassem. This i would not necessarily disagree with. As has America and England! >The Ba'ath Party came to power with American approval > precisely because they were an anti-Communist organization, They were NATIONALIST! This suggested they opposed internationalism and hense communism! But they were socialist as well. But look at the underlying US position. It is basically "the enemy of my enemy is my friend". On that basis the US could have supported the WWII NAZIS against the communist russians! It witnessed the US support the MuJIHADeen against the Russians! The whole policy of supporting war criminals and terrorists really needs review don't you think? and have > taken strong action to fight Communists in Iraq over the years. The > Communists of Iraq have historically presented some of the strongest > opposition to the Saddam regime. Yes but it is more intricate than that! The Marxist wing of the Baathists woulf have wanted to come to the fore but Sadaam harnessed the nationalist wing. But he didnt pogrom the socialists! > > I believe that one of the major, and unspoken, elements of American > policy towards Iraq is, and has been, that the last thing that America > wants is a natural regime change in Iraq that comes from within the > Iraqi borders, because there is a significant chance that regime > change could mean the formation of a Democratic Communist government > in Iraq. This is in fact possible. [snip] Quote
Guest Merlin Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 On Dec 8, 8:42 pm, Rid Skewrr <cal...@creek.council> wrote: > On Sat, 8 Dec 2007 08:47:47 -0800 (PST), Merlin > <johndo...@fastmail.fm> mumbled: > > >On Dec 4, 5:46 am, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbea...@nospam.forme> wrote: > > >> BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any > >> other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! > >> the US occupation facilitated rather than mitigated against Islamists! > > >You love to try that meaningless bit of information in almost all of > >your posts. > > >You're wrong. One has nothing to do with the other. > > >What an idiot you are for not seeing so. > > You're dealing with a deluded liar - no reason in there to access. You're right of course. I've shown be-a-con the door. He can't debate without his little tricks. Strip the tricks away and he's just another idiot. Quote
Guest Mavisbeacon Posted December 9, 2007 Posted December 9, 2007 "Merlin" <johndoe99@fastmail.fm> wrote in message news:867a7f1d-155f-4d57-b0d7-f42359f28241@w40g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > On Dec 4, 5:46 am, "Mavisbeacon" <Mavisbea...@nospam.forme> wrote: > >> BEFORE the US occupation there was not Al Qaeda or any >> other Islamists groups of note in Iraq! >> the US occupation facilitated rather than mitigated against Islamists! > > You love to try that meaningless bit of information in almost all of > your posts. > > You're wrong. Where is you support for the claim of Islamists having substantial control in Saddam controlled Iraq? Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.