Grex Agora46 Conference

Item 85: Government Lies and WMD

Entered by pvn on Sun Jul 13 07:29:54 2003:

One way (and the way the DNC et al would like it to be) to look at the
current situation in Iraq is that Bush-II and the rest of what would be
called the unholy hord if the liberals believed in a god lied about
everything about Iraq in order to seize its oil to the benefit of its
co-conspirators including the VP.  This of course assumes that the
Saudis are too stupid about what is going on to sit still and indeed
cooperate with the US stealing the oil of #2 while they are #1.

Thus there were never any WMD and it was all made up so go about your
biz there is nothing to worry about.

Alternatively.  There is no lack of evidence to suggest that Sadaam's
regime in fact had a wide variety of WMDs.  I don't know of any credible
source including the UN that suggests otherwise.  The question is what
happened to them.  Where are they?  The comforting thought is that in an
attempt to maintain his historical reputation in the "west"
(posthumously) he magnanimously ordered them all destroyed so that he
would go down in western history as a really misunderstood but
fundametally nice guy and that all of his followers would obey such
orders so as to also be seen as such sweet and really kindly people.
Like he really ever cared so much how the "west" sees him.

The other alternative is that sensing his own demise either politically
and/or physically (he didn't have to be a rocket scientist) he turned
his WMD arsenal over to one or more groups who don't exactly hold the
west in general and the US in particular in high regard.  (revenge from
the grave as it were.)  Remember, this is the same dude that when
Gulf-War I broke out (who knew there would be a II) transfered as much
of his Air Force to Iran whom he had just only the year before concluded
a long running war with in a tie.

So either Iraq never had any WMDs in the first place, or they are
floating out there in who knows how many not-so-friendly hands just
waiting to pop up when most inconvenient.

Sleep well.

14 responses total.

#1 of 14 by mary on Sun Jul 13 13:06:17 2003:

This response has been erased.



#2 of 14 by krj on Sun Jul 13 17:32:56 2003:

BDH's implication is that, from the viewpoint of the US' national security,
the war against Iraq will turn out to have been a disaster. 
 
Another implication is that the vaunted Bush national security team was 
completely outsmarted by Saddam.


#3 of 14 by sj2 on Sun Jul 13 17:53:52 2003:

The horse is dead. I repeat, the horse is dead.


#4 of 14 by slestak on Mon Jul 14 20:04:46 2003:

These wars are all transparent escalations of the master plan according to
Bush SR. The first step forward was the Bush Coup D'etat over Gore. We have
been a headless dead horse since we stood by and allowed that to happen. All
of the "players" in his "war on terrorism" have been or are still in business
with him. Prescott Bush funded and supported Hitler's campaign in Germany pre
WWII. The US seized his assets for these treasonous acts against the United
States. The Bush family has a long history of twisted, ruthless politics that
fuel acts of terrorism globally. Like father like son....bad grammar i
know...i just woke up..


#5 of 14 by russ on Mon Jul 14 22:12:41 2003:

The Saudis are too smart to confront the US directly; they have
neither the military nor diplomatic clout do to so.  Instead they
are (despite their cash-flow problems) spending huge sums to build
mosques and train Wahhabi imams to go all over the world, teaching
people everywhere to hate the USA and Americans on general principles.

That's asymmetric warfare for ya.

I think we should fix this by taxing petroleum to reduce demand (and
thus the fundamentalists' income) and promoting economic development
by e.g. buying clothes sewed up by Paki and African seamstresses.  It
would give money to people below the oil-controlling elites in places
like Nigeria and give people reason to want us around.  (It would also
give notice to Beijing that their export industries don't come with
guarantees.)


#6 of 14 by slestak on Tue Jul 15 04:54:07 2003:

I think you're right on target in regards to Saudi Arabia. The US has tiptoed
around the Saudis due to the huge ammount of US ruling class interests in the
Saudis. The most tell tale to me is the Bin
Laden/Bush/Harken/Harriman/Carlisle Group connections to terrorists and war
mongers accross the globe. It is sad to me that so many have jumped to support
a governing body with these types of connections. Buying goods and services
from the real people in these places is an excellent idea as well. Grass roots
orgs push this type of behavior quite a bit out here on the west coast. I'm
sure there are many throughout the US also promote healthy buying habits.
Another issue for me comes to mind: Personal convenience. One of my sole
reasons for engaging in text based communication of this sort is to force
myself out of the lazy norm. I think convenience has become very
inconvenient.Combustion engines are completely obsolete and have been for
decades.Locomotives use batteries and diesel generators for massive
torque.Hybrids have made an appearance on the US market as of late and there
are even tax breaks up to $2,000.00 per year for investing in them.US Flywheel
is making headway wih flywheel batteries.Solar and solid fuel cells are moving
forward as well.All of these brilliant inspirations scare the hell out of Oil
Men and the third world tyrants they own.They are more interested in extremely
educated and innovative slaves.Pyramid building could be alive and well again
soon.Imagine the absolute fear of those who governing folks who have turned
over their ilusion of control to computer systems.They struggle with email
while passing laws governing systems and people they will never
understand.(Myself included to a large degree.)Some of these folks are more
concerned with the evils of spam and "electronic terrorists" than with the
volumes of unrecyclable junk mail filling our mail boxen.Complete with
untraced athrax spores from the Ames strain letters.
http://www.fas.org/bwc/news/anthraxreport.htm is an interesting and
involved read. Wow bad spelling big tyrade....apollo


#7 of 14 by pvn on Tue Jul 15 06:35:01 2003:

re#2: Time will tell in the long run won't it.  In the near short term
the specific case of Iraq is a case where clearly there was a train
wreck building up, and we intervened to prevent the obvious.  Incidently
liberating a nation which is always a cool thing to do.  The multitude
of US intelligence agencies weren't outsmarted - one has only to look to
Rumsfeld's comments from april where he clearly stated the most
disturbing thing to him would be if the allies didn't easily find WMD
which indicates that not only had they gamed that scenario but had ACA's
in mind.  To give the devil his due it was Clinton that first officially
mandated "regime change" - the removal of the Hussein regime in Iraq -
something that Bush-I didn't do for other reasons (Iran was in a much
better position then to exploit such and it was probably the correct
decision at the time as well).

Re#5: Something like what the US christian and mormon churches have and
continue to do for a long time?  I find it interesting that a
libertarian would call for the increased funding of any government in
the form of any tax increase as a solution to anything.  (How about
letting the free market of ideas play itself out?)  More money for
education didn't work (obviously in your case).  Gas taxes are already
high enough tank-you very much.  The price of a gallon of gasoline in
Iraq rose to in the equivalent of 50 to 60 cents a gallon as a result of
the war and boy were they pissed.  (Know what percentage of a gallon is
taxes already and isn't that enough for pete sake?)

re#6:  Gasoline engines are hardly obsolete.  Anthrax spores in physical
mail may become like cocaine traces on money - detectible but
meaningless.  And as for the rest of yer post...I'm surprised that you
haven't noticed that you can connect Kevin Bacon in with it all as the
true criminal mastermind...


#8 of 14 by slestak on Tue Jul 15 08:40:31 2003:

re#7 Point taken. "Obsolete" is an exaggeration. Gasohol or some other hybrid
fuel will burn clean and cheap in a combustion engine. I agree that conspiracy
theories are abundant and can be connected to any meaningless object,idea or
person. I do believe that the facts and progression of events since early 2001
should be investigated. Perhaps investigated with at least as much push as
Clinton and his sexual habits while in office. Anthrax and cocaine are very
different substances. The anthrax spores used in the US are part of a
particular strain. More important is the milling process used to make the
anthrax effective while airborne. Anthrax is considered by some experts as
a garden variety microbe. In some places cocoa leaves are abundant too.
Hopefully military grade milled anthrax will never be as commonplace in mail
as cocaine on money.


#9 of 14 by bru on Tue Jul 15 14:00:14 2003:

yes we have to worry about the Saudis, but I think Iran, Lebanon, and North
Korea are the next on the hit list if such a thing exists.

The Isrealis may take care of Lebanon, we will have to take care of N. Korea
along with our allies, adn the Canadians will have to take out Iran.

Why the Canada vs. Iran?  Because a very popular canadian journalist has just
been beaten to death by the Iranian religious police.  Course they may have
to get rid of Chretien first.


#10 of 14 by russ on Tue Jul 15 21:47:13 2003:

Re #6:  You've got some of your facts wrong:  Diesel-electric locomotives
do not use batteries (they dump energy into resistor banks when they
need to do dynamic braking), and some combustion engines reach efficiencies
up in the neighborhood of 60%, which is fuel-cell territory.

Re #7:  (I don't notice those churches teaching hatred of the USA...)
It doesn't follow that an advocate of higher petroleum taxes also
advocates higher government revenue; it is perfectly feasible to cut
taxes elsewhere.

That would probably be a good thing, because "consumption taxes" would
spur investment and taxing the consumption of what is perhaps the world's
most problematic legal commodity and prompting investment in ways to
reduce its use sure isn't going to hurt the country.  By reducing our
capital outflows it would probably help the economy out of recession;
I think it's no coincidence that the slow recovery is going hand-in-hand
with high oil prices and record-low vehicle fuel economy.


#11 of 14 by slestak on Wed Jul 16 01:41:25 2003:

Re #10 Interesting stuff about the diesel-electrics. I've just begun to learn
about energy and different types of engines. The National Railway Historical
Society has a cool site:
http://www.crisny.org/not-for-profit/railroad/en_info.htm#dc They talk
about several models of locomotives and advantages / disadvantages of DC and AC
motors applied to working tractors. What sources have you found for information
on combustion engines? I'd like to read more ... Cheers


#12 of 14 by sabre on Wed Jul 16 12:44:45 2003:

I have dealt with this issue in a previous thread. None of the elite grexers
could withstand my logic or reason. I provided proof positive that this is
liberal propaganda. I hardly think your pea brain could stand in the fray.


#13 of 14 by sj2 on Thu Jul 17 09:18:51 2003:

You have logic/reason? Huh!!
.
.
.
.
Are you sure??


#14 of 14 by spectrum on Wed Jul 23 23:55:35 2003:

sj2....you're a one line,hit and run post whore.STFU.


There are no more items selected.

You have several choices: