Muslims and Middle Eastern Debate

[Binkie]

Heh... alright, I think you misunderstood something about the report or didn't read it. It was written after the invasion when their analyists had access to these suspected vans and trucks. This is not the report Powell went to the U.N. with. Also, you may want to go back and look at some of the dates on the articles you posted. Some were prior to other articles I posted that were written after, dispelling them directly.

Like I said, there were certain things about one of the sources that turned up to be very questionable. Powell apologized. And again, read those articles (the fact you posted a copy of the report as your second link, then claimed you couldn't find that report anywhere just goes to show you failed to do so before). Half of them don't mention mobile labs and the ones that do cite "bad information" in the broadest of terms, which translates to partial information.

I didn't alter your link, I said this is what I was searching for (hence the line "Course, I knew what I was searching for [in my own search], thusly I was able to find the CIA report pretty much right off the bat:").

Since you failed to read this in my previous post though, and I'm having to repeat myself, I'll make sure it grabs your attention the second time around:

Go look at your search page. The report I had to "dig for" is the 4th link down. Also happens to be the second link you posted to with your articles. Click on it and you'll see.

You complain about the searches not bringing up your articles, but this is the way I see it: I search for specifics, I get specifics. You search for broad headlines with a failure to mention specifics and that's what you get.

[CptSternn]

BW is a term only used in government reports, which is why when you add it, the reuslts only show the report and links to the report. All the news articles discrediting the report are listed when you search for info on the weapons labs.

Trying to narrow your search to leave out the sites that directly conflict with the stats you posted is weak at best. Like web site companies who say 'hey, your site is in the top 2 listings on google, we got it there for you' then have a half dozen terms in the search box no average person is going to type in. Average Joe Soap types in mobile weapons labs, NOT BW preceeding them. YOur attempts to do so and then copy a google link to it and think no one will notice is just pityful.

Most every news article out there along with Colin Powell himself and the presidents own commission say the EXACT OPPOSITE? Are you arguing the presidents council did not say, and I quote, DEAD WRONG? Does that sound subjective to you?

[Binkie]

S'right, Wee Willy. Only people who read offical reports done by experienced analysts would know such abreviations, hence why I said, "I knew what I was looking for." I was looking for specifics in reports, you were looking for broad terms and vague headlines that you could raise skepticism through.

Fact of the matter is, the report came up within the first four hits on both of our searches. Your articles citing reports that were "DEAD WRONG" are refering to pre-war intellegence. This report is post-war intellegence, gathered with the first-hand evaluation of these vehicles. Your claim earlier was refered to aptly in that report as a "cover story."

[CptSternn]

Your articles citing reports that were "DEAD WRONG" are refering to pre-war intellegence. This report is post-war intellegence, gathered with the first-hand evaluation of these vehicles.

So lets be clear on what your saying, his commision found that pre-war intel was dead wrong but the current intel is spot on, and the current intel says they found wmd's? Find me any article about anything that says they found any type of wmd's. Are you seriously arguing they found that the wmd data was wrong, but then later found wmd's? How could that be? If they found any, then the pre-war intellegence wouldn't be DEAD WRONG. Trying to aruge they found some later and confirmed them but yet came out and said they found none and were dead wrong is a direct contridition of yourself, and direct contridiction of the facts.

If they had found one wmd lab, or any wmd evidence, they would have had that on every new site across the globe, but as it stands, the president himself had apologised to some extent (actually he just shifted the blame to the CIA). Hell, the commision was looking into how they did not find ANY WMD's, so how could they be right?

Slán

[Binkie]

I didn't realize that CIA report said we found WMDs. Oh yeah, that's because I actually read it.

But if you want reports of Coalition forces finding chemical weapons, here you are: Wah-la!

Oh wait, you don't actually read into the specific reports that tend to destroy your arguements. How about an interview from DoD followed by a news article from the AP? That enough or you need me to google it for you?

Again, go look up and read the report submitted to the president that cited "Dead Wrong" information and look up exactly what was dead wrong. Actually read the report, yourself, so you know what you're arguing.

[CptSternn]

Your seriously arguing that the us FOUND WMDs? Biological weapons are WMD's and bush himself said there were none, so how can you argue against bush, his own commision, and dozens of news articles stating the same facts?

I put these to you...


Iraqi mobile labs nothing to do with germ warfare, report finds

Peter Beaumont, Antony Barnett and Gaby Hinsliff
Sunday June 15, 2003
The Observer

An official British investigation into two trailers found in northern Iraq has concluded they are not mobile germ warfare labs, as was claimed by Tony Blair and President George Bush, but were for the production of hydrogen to fill artillery balloons, as the Iraqis have continued to insist.
The conclusion by biological weapons experts working for the British Government is an embarrassment for the Prime Minister, who has claimed that the discovery of the labs proved that Iraq retained weapons of mass destruction and justified the case for going to war against Saddam Hussein.

Instead, a British scientist and biological weapons expert, who has examined the trailers in Iraq, told The Observer last week: 'They are not mobile germ warfare laboratories. You could not use them for making biological weapons. They do not even look like them. They are exactly what the Iraqis said they were - facilities for the production of hydrogen gas to fill balloons.'

The conclusion of the investigation ordered by the British Government - and revealed by The Observer last week - is hugely embarrassing for Blair, who had used the discovery of the alleged mobile labs as part of his efforts to silence criticism over the failure of Britain and the US to find any weapons of mass destruction since the invasion of Iraq...

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/inter...977853,00.html


AFTER THE WAR: ARMS; Iraqi Trailers Said To Make Hydrogen, Not Biological Arms

By DOUGLAS JEHL (NYT) 1103 words
Late Edition - Final , Section A , Page 1 , Column 6

Government officials say Defense Intelligence Agency experts believe that most likely use for two mysterious trailers found in Iraq was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons used in artillery practice, not biological weapons; agency and Central Intelligence Agency officials say agencies still stand by their May 28 report that trailers were for making biological arms; it was not previously known that majority of Defense Intelligence Agency's engineering teams had come to disagree with that report; officials say teams had not completed work at time report was drafted and that their views were not taken into account at that time (M)

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/abstrac...A10894DB404482


State Department Disputes CIA View of Trailers as Labs
by Douglas Jehl

WASHINGTON, June 25 — The State Department's intelligence division is disputing the Central Intelligence Agency's conclusion that mysterious trailers found in Iraq were for making biological weapons, United States government officials said today.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0626-05.htm



Iraqi Trailers Said to Make Hydrogen, Not Biological Arms
by Douglas Jehl

WASHINGTON, Aug. 8 — Engineering experts from the Defense Intelligence Agency have come to believe that the most likely use for two mysterious trailers found in Iraq was to produce hydrogen for weather balloons rather than to make biological weapons, government officials say.

The classified findings by a majority of the engineering experts differ from the view put forward in a white paper made public on May 28 by the C.I.A. and the Defense Intelligence Agency, which said that the trailers were for making biological weapons.

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines03/0809-05.htm


Also google for these terms...

http://www.google.com/search?q=Defen...rt=10&sa=N

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...bush+wmd+wrong


Out of all those articles, the first is the best from the Observer, because they tracked the trucks and trailers to the company that made them, a british company, and the company even states there is no possible way for them to make weapons, no dual use. Are you going to argue with your own government, the british government, and the actual manufacturer of the trailers? Also, how do you discount all those articles (I posted only the first few - click my google link for more) that say that the report you posted has been long discredited by the CIA itself? Interally they canned the report and called it crap, yet you are still here defending it and the lads who wrote it have discredited it!

How do you explain that away?

Slán

[Binkie]

Dodged that first report, didn't ya? Let's tackle that first, since you can't find conflicting reports or articles on the internet on it:

"Beginning in May 2004, ISG recovered a series of chemical weapons from Coalition military units and other sources. A total of 53 munitions have been recovered, all of which appear to have been part of pre-1991 Gulf war stocks based on their physical condition and residual components.

The most interesting discovery has been a 152mm binary Sarin artillery projectile—containing a 40 percent concentration of Sarin—which insurgents attempted to use as an Improvised Explosive Device (IED). The existence of this binary weapon not only raises questions about the number of viable chemical weapons remaining in Iraq and raises the possibility that a larger number of binary, long-lasting chemical weapons still exist."

So what's that about no Chemical Weapons having been found? ISG is the same organization that tried to argue with the CIA in your other articles, so I guess now that there's complete unison, we can all agree that Chemical Weapons (53, to be exact) were found in Iraq after the war, justifying the claim that they were present and Saddam had indeed not destroyed all of his weapons as U.N. inspectors had previously claimed and thought.

Onto the articles you've posted: Am I going to argue with my government? No, have you read the CIA report? Discredited by the CIA, itself, you say? Do you understand that the DIA and CIA are two entirely different organizations? Should we google it? If it was discredited by the CIA, itself, it would have been removed from the site. Alas, it remains.

Let's look at your first article and make comment on your claim that the company even said there is no dual use for the trailers. Find me that statement. I know you can't find it cause it wasn't in the article and you don't read reports. Half of the equipment inside that truck, including the formentor, were replaced from the original parts. Formentor that was on one of the trucks dated back to 2002. So even if the company made any kind of statements, it'd be bullshit cause little to none of the original equipment exists on there. In addition, there were more than just two trucks found, so even if you want to believe only this conclusion, it still doesn't discredit all the evidence.

As for the DIA's disagreement, that's all it stands as. It doesn't discredit anything, otherwise the CIA would retract it's own report if it did. CIA disagrees with the DIA. DIA disagrees with the CIA.

Also: your google searches are funny. Type in "CIA mobile weapons" and you'll get the exact opposite of what you're looking for.

[CptSternn]

All the references you continue to make are from one single solitary source, one single link - to a report that has been found to be faulty, which I pointed out in multiple articles above. If the only source you have is the faulty CIA report, then you really don't have an argument do you?

Slán

[Binkie]

I encourage you to at least click on those links at some point. If nothing else, it'll help you save face when you decide to attack the credibility of both (as one?). First one is a CIA assessment/report. The second is an ISG report. Those two organizations are entirely different.

On a secondary note, the articles you've posted thus far describe other assessments. No report, CIA or DIA, can "prove" the other wrong. First off, these are educated opinions on evaluating the capabilities of these vehicles. Second, the trucks were looted before anyone even got to them, which makes it hard to understand exactly what they capable of, especially considering alot of the equipment had been since long replaced from the day they were manufactured and sold. This is why the CIA report is still up and backed. Actually read some of these other assessments. The phrase, "it's believed" gets used alot.

But back to that second report, want to know something even more funny? That's the same ISG report that reporters use to put up the headlines that say, "No WMD Stockpiles Found In Iraq." Yet buried on page 97 of the report it says very blatantly that 53 chemical weapons were found in Iraq (they just weren't 'stockpiled'). Let me remind you that the ISG is an independent survey group that was made up of many international experts from other nations. So I wish you good luck finding an article that dispells that assessment, as the international press swears by the Duelfer Report.

Happy Hunting.

[CptSternn]

So your not only still arguing that the discredited report is still not discredited, but your now also arguing that:

1. It repeatedly uses the term 'it is belived', but aren't we now past that, since that report was on what they knew then vs. the newer articles i posted that say how things are now.

2. You also point out the report says NO WMDS WERE FOUND. The reason they didn't list the handful they did find because they predated the first Iraq war PLUS they were so badly rusted they could never be used. Also note that they were found in a buried bunker that was likely buried by advancing us forces during the first gulf war.

I mean, you can no longer argue old CIA reports even if they weren't discredited because now they know the facts, which directly contridict most everything they said in their reports.

Also, 53 artillery shells will fit in the boot of yer car. Even if they were usable thats just enough for maybe 3 rounds (about 10 minutes) of ammo.

Slán

[Binkie]

Why don't you send an email to the CIA and tell them that report has been discredited by a DIA disagreement and they need to take it down, Sternn? I'd love to see the response you get. Have you read these other reports? I mean the reports, not the articles the media writes on them.

Again, you fail to understand that the report you're "arguing" was written after the war when we had access to first-hand intellegence (i.e. the trucks, themselves) and some of your "newer articles" are based on disagreements the DIA had that arose from the same analysis?

I pointed out that no WMD Stockpiles were found. Keyword if you had read my post accurately. These were weapons he needed to delcare or get rid of, but instead of doing either, he hid them from U.N. Weapons Inspectors. Oops, that sounds like justification.

Where'd you hear that they were buried by US forces? Go find some articles or something to back up your claims. And while you're at it, check out who headed up the ISG, David Kay. He thought it was most likely that Saddam had more weapons and that they were transported into Syria before the US-invasion. It's all there in the report that so many of your articles cite.

And where are these "facts" that you speak of? Show me the report that lays it out without jumping into speculation, due to the fact that the evidence was looted.

I really urge you to read reports. They'll do you good cause then you can cite specific information rather than having to make it up. The report said 53 munitions. Several were war heads filled with cyclosarin gas. If you can fit all those in my car, then I'll endorse you for the nobel peace prize for the shrink ray you built.

[edible_eye]

http://www.zabrze.net.pl/~s5_haker/m...f/bigbombs.swf

[edible_eye]

[edible_eye]

savages.

[edible_eye]

[edible_eye]

[AlKilyu]

Originally Posted by edible_eye

savages.

LOL Brilliant!


Post-war Japan had honor. Too bad others don't.

[MrMaelstrom]

Are Iraq or Afghanistan in post-war periods?
How come? Because Bush said official offensive operations were over?
the taking of Fallujah was a lot later than that and it was a major offensive military operation.

Anyway:


>> Saudi Love Island <<
Burka babes at Burj Al Arab

While the unlucky Muslims at Guantanamo are
subjected to the inhuman torture of Christina
Aguilera on repeat play, their leaders back
in the Middle East are doing their bit to
preserve the purity of Islam.

Prince Faisal Al Saud of Saudi Arabia regularly
hires out the Al Falak ballroom of the Burj Al
Arab in Dubai, the world's most expensive hotel.
He always flies in a dozen or so of the best
call girls from Lebanon and Syria. The girls
parade around in knee-length boots and mini
skirts... but in order to comply with the
Koran also wear a hijab or veil.

So that's alright then...


-----------------------------------------------------
Chris Martin celebrated Coldplay's number one
album success on Sunday at the Landsdown pub, west
London, where he bought everyone a drink.
-----------------------------------------------------


>> Taking the mickey <<
Mickey Rourke: no genius

zymunt writes:
"When Sin City star Mickey Rourke was filming
A Prayer For The Dying, he was taken on a tour
of Belfast. The was first time he'd ever been
to Ireland, despite allegations of him giving
money to Sinn Fienn and the IRA. While
walking near the Shankhill Road, Mickey
(seemingly oblivious to the red, white and blue
kerbstones) whipped off his shirt to show off
his IRA Tattoo. His horrified escorts pointed
out that this really wasn't a good idea.
Mickey replied "What? These people is Irish...
they'll LOVE it"

[MrMaelstrom]

Terrorist attack today in London.


Group claims responsibility online with following statement:


" In the name of God, the merciful, the compassionate, may peace be upon the cheerful one and undaunted fighter, Prophet Muhammad, God's peace be upon him.

Nation of Islam and Arab nation: Rejoice for it is time to take revenge against the British Zionist Crusader government in retaliation for the massacres Britain is committing in Iraq and Afghanistan. The heroic mujahideen have carried out a blessed raid in London. Britain is now burning with fear, terror and panic in its northern, southern, eastern, and western quarters.

We have repeatedly warned the British Government and people. We have fulfilled our promise and carried out our blessed military raid in Britain after our mujahideen exerted strenuous efforts over a long period of time to ensure the success of the raid.

We continue to warn the governments of Denmark and Italy and all the Crusader governments that they will be punished in the same way if they do not withdraw their troops from Iraq and Afghanistan. He who warns is excused.

God says: "You who believe: If ye will aid (the cause of) Allah, He will aid you, and plant your feet firmly."



Could we not turn this instantly into another "it's all America's fault" for a minute and talk about this?


Thanks.

[edible_eye]

cowards.

every single one of them - the muslims, that is.

muslims.

it's a pity, really that the followers of allah have to resort to assassinating people in trains and buses in order to fulfill their allegiance to whatever that god is supposed to stand for. but that's the way it is for those fanatical fuckheads.

i can only hope this will inspire the leaders of our armed forces to remove their kid gloves and mete out a vicious rebuttal. something has to convince them their tactic is flawed, that fighting a "politically correct" war is asinine. i'm tired of the constant attempts at hard-talk with no follow up. enough. i hope, i hope, i hope we shut our mouths now, pull the ground troops and send in massive waves of annihilation.

this campaign to - win the hearts and minds - of that shit-stain nation by "winning" them their freedom is an embarassment. i wish they'd end it. just end it.

[WolfMoon]

Actually it's only the extremists that do such things. I know a few Muslims who think those people are out of their fucking minds.

[MrMaelstrom]

Over 30 people dead and hundreds of injured so far.

3 attacks were perpetrated in the London Underground (subway) and on a double-decker bus.

Death toll is still rising...

[edible_eye]

i agree, wolfmoon. that's why i included the word - fanatical. i realize that until you get to that line, my post could be taken to mean every single muslim out there, but that wasn't my intent.

[WolfMoon]

I know, luv. But someone who hasn't interacted with you before might think something completely different.

I wasn't trying to point anything out, just letting others out there know that it's not the whole group, my completely edible companion.

[MrMaelstrom]

Thanks for clearing that up, E-man. :wink: