OT WMD found in Iraq

OK....dims....

Bush did NOT lie....

What else do have?

Bush is NOT a liar...

In article <kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com>,
Scott in Florida <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> OK....dims....
>
> Bush did NOT lie....
>
> What else do have?
>
> Bush is NOT a liar...[/color]

Yes, 500 chemical munitions found. I have made this prediction in the
past. I believe there is even more to be found. There is a lot of sq
miles to check and saddam was a master at hiding things. He even hid
himself for quite a time, but we found him anyway. We will also find
the great prize, ozomma has-been laden, he will be a good catch. I bet
we find him in the next several months along with his big buddy, the
doctor, I forget his name.

Why does the left keep asking about WMD? There was never any doubt.
Oh, but I forgot, it's all about politics isn't it.
--

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> OK....dims....
>
> Bush did NOT lie....
>
> What else do have?
>
> Bush is NOT a liar...
>[/color]

Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true. That is a lie
regardless of what happens after.
Also it turns out that these are pre-91 weapons that even the defense
department says are degraded and unusable,
and not the WMDs that the White House was referring to when making their
claims of WMDs.

Sorry, the Republicans are getting desperate. Must be getting close to
election time.

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:13:45 GMT, "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true[/color]

That statement is totally untrue....and unsubstantiated.

You lefties just lost your big argument and your 'leaders' are making
damned fools of themselves in the House and Senate.

You should have owned this argument and now you look like the boobs
you truly are....

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:13:45 GMT, "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote:
[color=blue]
>Also it turns out that these are pre-91 weapons that even the defense
>department says are degraded and unusable,[/color]

Saddam said he had NO WMDs left.

Saddam lied.

Saddam will die....

.....along with the Dims that love him so much....

Long live the Dims...they provide entertainment...

In article <p4sj929nnf2of88sh320d4cmt5eojj5bpr@4ax.com>,
Scott in Florida <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:13:45 GMT, "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
> >Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true[/color]
>
> That statement is totally untrue....and unsubstantiated.
>
> You lefties just lost your big argument and your 'leaders' are making
> damned fools of themselves in the House and Senate.
>
> You should have owned this argument and now you look like the boobs
> you truly are....[/color]

these old left wing extremists keep making excuses. They are a laugh
and a half.
--

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:p4sj929nnf2of88sh320d4cmt5eojj5bpr@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:13:45 GMT, "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true[/color]
>
> That statement is totally untrue....and unsubstantiated.
>
> You lefties just lost your big argument and your 'leaders' are making
> damned fools of themselves in the House and Senate.
>
> You should have owned this argument and now you look like the boobs
> you truly are....
>[/color]

Sorry to rain on your parade, but it's absolutely true. Even the White House
is smart enough not to touch this, that's why they didn't come out with it.

"ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote in message news:d9mmg.4888$DI2.87@trnddc05...[color=blue]
>
> "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
> news:kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com...[color=green]
>> OK....dims....
>>
>> Bush did NOT lie....
>>
>> What else do have?
>>
>> Bush is NOT a liar...
>>[/color]
>
> Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true. That is a lie
> regardless of what happens after.[/color]

But, the intelligence is not a lie if it turns out to be true, even if it
takes 4 years to prove.



[color=blue]
> Also it turns out that these are pre-91 weapons that even the defense
> department says are degraded and unusable,
> and not the WMDs that the White House was referring to when making their
> claims of WMDs.
>[/color]

There are very few things worse than an unstable WMD.

"Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:RLKdnYKNOKnxjQfZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@ez2.net...[color=blue]
>
> "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote in message news:d9mmg.4888$DI2.87@trnddc05...[color=green]
>>
>> "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
>> news:kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com...[color=darkred]
>>> OK....dims....
>>>
>>> Bush did NOT lie....
>>>
>>> What else do have?
>>>
>>> Bush is NOT a liar...
>>>[/color]
>>
>> Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true. That is a lie
>> regardless of what happens after.[/color]
>
> But, the intelligence is not a lie if it turns out to be true, even if it
> takes 4 years to prove.
>
>[/color]

Except these old pre-91 weapons had nothing to do with the intelligence
that Bush used. Even so, if I made up a lie about you, say I said you were
unfaithful to your wife, even though I had no evidence, and years later it
turned out you really did cheat on your wife, would that make me any less of
a liar?
[color=blue]
>
>[color=green]
>> Also it turns out that these are pre-91 weapons that even the defense
>> department says are degraded and unusable,
>> and not the WMDs that the White House was referring to when making their
>> claims of WMDs.
>>[/color]
>
> There are very few things worse than an unstable WMD.
>[/color]

They certainly are dangerous, but cannot be used as WMDs anymore.

"ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:_Qomg.25918$DR1.5781@trnddc02...[color=blue]
>
> "Jeff Strickland" <crwlr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:RLKdnYKNOKnxjQfZnZ2dnUVZ_vydnZ2d@ez2.net...[color=green]
>>
>> "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote in message
>> news:d9mmg.4888$DI2.87@trnddc05...[color=darkred]
>>>
>>> "Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
>>> news:kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com...
>>>> OK....dims....
>>>>
>>>> Bush did NOT lie....
>>>>
>>>> What else do have?
>>>>
>>>> Bush is NOT a liar...
>>>>
>>>
>>> Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true. That is a lie
>>> regardless of what happens after.[/color]
>>
>> But, the intelligence is not a lie if it turns out to be true, even if it
>> takes 4 years to prove.
>>
>>[/color]
>
> Except these old pre-91 weapons had nothing to do with the intelligence
> that Bush used. Even so, if I made up a lie about you, say I said you were
> unfaithful to your wife, even though I had no evidence, and years later it
> turned out you really did cheat on your wife, would that make me any less
> of a liar?
>[/color]

No, you would still be the same liar, but you'd be less of a scoundrel I
suppose.

Saddam is thought to have 9000 metric tons (rounded up a bit because I
forget the exact figure, but 8793 metric tons comes to mind -- but what's
100 metric tons of WMD between friends?) of chemcial and biological weapons
dating to 1991 and before. This would include the then current production --
hard to prove -- along with the long standing stockpiles -- known to
exist -- that have apparently been found, or a portion has been found.

The UN and the USA, along with a host of other countries, all believed that
Saddam was using a powdered milk factory to produce chemical and/or
biological materials. Just because you do not believe the world's
intelligence community doesn't make it a lie.




[color=blue][color=green]
>>
>>[color=darkred]
>>> Also it turns out that these are pre-91 weapons that even the defense
>>> department says are degraded and unusable,
>>> and not the WMDs that the White House was referring to when making their
>>> claims of WMDs.
>>>[/color]
>>
>> There are very few things worse than an unstable WMD.
>>[/color]
>
> They certainly are dangerous, but cannot be used as WMDs anymore.
>[/color]


Why not. instability does not translate to "safe". Instability means that
they can't be sure how safe the stuff might be to transport, or that only
900,000 people might die instead of 1,000,000.

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:p4sj929nnf2of88sh320d4cmt5eojj5bpr@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:13:45 GMT, "ToMh" <tl@nospam.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>Bush passed off intelligence that he knew was not true[/color]
>
> That statement is totally untrue....and unsubstantiated.
>
> You lefties just lost your big argument and your 'leaders' are making
> damned fools of themselves in the House and Senate.
>
> You should have owned this argument and now you look like the boobs
> you truly are....
>[/color]

I resent that. Most boobs are better looking than the dims. . . .

Charles of Schaumburg

"Scott in Florida" <askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote in message
news:kclj92lgjh4smi5fc5tjgq5e0grnm66rv4@4ax.com...[color=blue]
> OK....dims....
>
> Bush did NOT lie....
>
> What else do have?
>
> Bush is NOT a liar...
>[/color]

DOH! We gave him nearly a year to move, hide and bury them and he still
left 500 of them to be found. Damn, is he stupid.

I predict that the sands of Syria will one day reveal the true whereabouts
of Saddam's WMDs.

Charles of Schaumburg

On Thu, 22 Jun 2006 23:20:35 GMT, Scott in Florida
<askifyouwant@mindspring.net> wrote:
[color=blue]
>On 22 Jun 2006 16:14:34 -0700, "ToMh" <tlhumm@hotmail.com> wrote:
>[color=green]
>>
>>Mike Hunter wrote:[color=darkred]
>>> You have you facts wrong AGAIN, just as did all who said their were NO WMDs.
>>> The weapons found, so far, were said to contain 'degraded muster gas,' but
>>> it certainly is was not said to be UNUSABLE by DOD. If you think 'degraded'
>>> means unusable you do not know anything about mustard gas. LOL
>>>
>>> The more astute Dims always were careful to use the term 'no WMDs have been
>>> FOUND.' They were shrewd enough never to say 'there were no WMDs' because
>>> they knew Iraq had listed many WMDs as part of the first gulf war ceasefire
>>> that have never been accounted for by Iraq, the UN inspectors or anybody
>>> else.
>>>
>>>
>>> mike hunt
>>>
>>>[/color]
>>
>>OK I'll bite, show me one fact that I have wrong and I'll prove it.[/color]
>
>You stated that there were no WMDs.....[/color]

BUSH claimed Sadam had Nukes, neocon. How quickly you "forget".

Basically, you're justifing the deaths of thousands of americans with
degraded mustard gas. (Degraded, btw, does mean useless, not
unusable. They could have used them, but since they were degraded,
they would have had no or little effect).
--
gburnore at DataBasix dot Com
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
How you look depends on where you go.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary L. Burnore | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
Official .sig, Accept no substitutes. | ÝÛ³ºÝ³Þ³ºÝ³³Ýۺݳ޳ºÝ³Ý³Þ³ºÝ³ÝÝÛ³
| ÝÛ 0 1 7 2 3 / Ý³Þ 3 7 4 9 3 0 Û³
Black Helicopter Repair Services, Ltd.| Official Proof of Purchase
===========================================================================

Scott in Florida wrote:[color=blue]
> OK....dims....
>
> Bush did NOT lie....
>
> What else do have?
>
> Bush is NOT a liar...
>[/color]
Hey Scott your still sprouting this shit from your ass? your one
brainwashed individual.

cd wrote:[color=blue]
> Scott in Florida wrote:[color=green]
> > OK....dims....
> >
> > Bush did NOT lie....
> >[/color][/color]

On Oct. 7, 2002 President Bush said,

"Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering
against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the
final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a
mushroom cloud."

If you read the text, he spend a LOT of the speech on the nuclear
threat. All the while knowing it was not true.
[url]http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/10/20021007-8.html[/url]

He lied.

Do you think Americans would have agreed with sending our troops to
Iraq to prevent them from using the pathetic stockpile just uncovered?
That stockpile poses no threat to the USA. Those WMDs only pose a
threat to our troops because we're on Iraqi turf.