Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-30-2004, 10:16 PM   #1
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
Default Chief weapons inspector: WMD still might be out there

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/03/30/ira...fer/index.html

New inspector won't rule out finding Iraqi WMD
Duelfer: Captured regime leaders not cooperating
From David Ensor
CNN Washington Bureau
Tuesday, March 30, 2004 Posted: 8:50 PM EST (0150 GMT)


WASHINGTON (CNN) -- In prepared testimony, the CIA's new chief Iraq weapons inspector said he does not rule out finding weapons of mass destruction, adding "we regularly receive reports, some quite intriguing and credible, about concealed caches" of weapons.

Charles Duelfer said, however, that former Iraqi senior officials -- now prisoners of U.S. forces -- are not talking.

"Over the past 10 months, we have learned that [deposed Iraqi President Saddam Hussein's] most senior and trusted officials can hold their tongues," Duelfer said.

"We know from high-level briefings that Saddam conveyed his most sensitive messages to particular individuals orally," he said. "Moreover, there were explicit instructions not to repeat such conversations."

Saddam's government collapsed April 9, 2003, when U.S. troops entered Baghdad. U.S. forces captured the fugitive leader in December near his ancestral homeland of Tikrit.

U.S.-led forces had invaded Iraq a month earlier after the Bush administration argued that Iraq was concealing stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, a nuclear weapons program and long-range missiles in violation of U.N. resolutions.

No stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction have been found despite an intensive search.

Critics have accused the administration of overstating the threat Iraq posed in order to go to war.

Duelfer is testifying Tuesday behind closed doors before the Senate Armed Services and Intelligence committees. His comments contrast with those of his predecessor, David Kay, who has said he does not expect that any weapons of mass destruction will be found in Iraq.

In prepared testimony, Duelfer said fear of retribution is still a significant stumbling block as the Iraq Survey Group he heads seeks information from Iraqi managers, scientists and engineers.

"Many perceive a grave risk in speaking with us. On one hand, there is a fear of prosecution or arrest. On the other, there is a fear [that] former regime supporters will exact retribution. This is, in part, why we do not yet fully understand the central issue of regime intentions," Duelfer said.

Duelfer, who is a special adviser to CIA Director George Tenet, said he is providing only a status report -- not a preliminary assessment of findings, which will come later.

Like Kay, Duelfer said that the regime was in "clear" violation of several U.N. resolutions banning WMD programs in Iraq, including the ban on certain biological research and the ban on deploying missiles or unmanned aerial vehicles with a range of more than 93 miles (150 kilometers).
These guys are still looking, why would people who are "LIEING" continue searching for something they know isnt there?
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-30-2004, 10:44 PM   #2
Ramesses Elliscer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 160
Send a message via Yahoo to Ramesses Elliscer
here we go again.....
Its over guys, regardless, we are here and we are not going anywhere. I have the simplest solution to all our problems concerning this topic, if you like the prez. vote for him in Nov, if you dont vote for Kerry in Nov.
There, only a few months away.
But please tell me, what will change if we find them or not? if we dont are we going to impeach the prez? If we do are we going to give him an automatic 4 year term bypassing the elections?
VOTE VOTE!!!!!!!!! thats the answer.
__________________
Ramesses Elliscer
Paladin of the 65th Blade
Eternal Crusaders

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower
Ramesses Elliscer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 12:08 AM   #3
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
It may not be something you care about , but its a pretty hot topic here on a daily basis. Forget about Bush for a second, this is a CIA issue, the CIA hung their ass out on the line when they claimed Iraq was holding many WMDs and had an ongoing nuclear program, so much so that Iraq was considered a danger to the US. If CIA is still sticking by their story that Iraq had WMD and is still actively hunting for it then they must have really thought there was WMD. There was no "LIEING" going on i just hope they do find some, becuase CIA took a huge hit to their rep over this issue.
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 01:41 AM   #4
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
the CIA hung their ass out on the line when they claimed Iraq was holding many WMDs and had an ongoing nuclear program
Still not willing to accept the truth Chuk? Your president lied to you. We told you this from the start. Egg in your face. Dead soldiers, billions in debt, you were following the wrong prescription for the war on terror. Its over! admit it for once!
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 02:18 AM   #5
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
George Tenet head of the CIA is the one who told Bush about the WMD, do you think he made that up? do you think George Tenet was also making it up when he said the same thing to Bill Clinton? Clinton bombed Iraq for a reason dude.
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 02:27 AM   #6
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
No, I think you are not willing to assign any responsibility upon Bush. You are however, willing to assign him hero status which makes no sense if you are giving him a pass on responsibility.
All evidence points to this war on Iraq as being trumped up. Not a shred of evidence showing anything but that.

That being said, Bush had my allegiance until he started going after Iraq. A conventional war is not remotely how you win a war on terrorists. I have also noticed some other flaws in the last couple of days by Bush and other Republicans. They point to Iran allowing inspectors and Libya giving up WMD programs as victories on the war on terror. News for everyone... the war on terror is not a war against states, it is a war against terrorists. That is one of the primary failures of the way Bush has conducted this war. This is the wrong war at the wrong time and its done in the wrong way. Bush has gone to war ONLY for politics and not out of sensibility. The wrong reason to conduct an endless war.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 02:30 AM   #7
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
do you think George Tenet was also making it up when he said the same thing to Bill Clinton?
We had no evidence of any WMD after 1998. So two assumptions are possible. Either they were hidden or they were gone. If they were hidden, the goal was to find them and punish Hussein for having them. If they were gone the goal was to keep Hussein from getting them again. Either way, war was not the first step as Bush had taken.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 02:42 AM   #8
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Originally Posted by Chukzombi
These guys are still looking, why would people who are "LIEING" continue searching for something they know isnt there?
Ok, could you be any more naive?

The day they stop searching is the day they are admitting they will not be found. I suspect they will continue searching till;

a) November when Kerry becomes president or

b) December, one month after Bush wins the election.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 03:21 AM   #9
Ramesses Elliscer
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 160
Send a message via Yahoo to Ramesses Elliscer
have to agree with Kerryn, but will had a third option..
c) one week before the elections.

And Chuck, I do care, I care so much i'm out here .
Its not that I dont care, I've only recently started to monitor this site, its my way of staying in touch with EQ and keep down the withdrawls . And I see some awsome posts with awsome discussions, but I do fine that posts like this only bring the worse out in ppl. not trying to be high and might, I'm a dog once in a while too.
I apologize if my response came across as a " pffft stop this shet already". But the truth is that we really cant do anything else anymore short of giving up or praying fora miracle to happen in order to find these weapons.

I meant to say in option C that they would be "found" 1 week before the elections. sorry for the mistake
__________________
Ramesses Elliscer
Paladin of the 65th Blade
Eternal Crusaders

I hate war as only a soldier who has lived it can, only as one who has seen its brutality, its futility, its stupidity.
General Dwight D. Eisenhower

Last edited by Ramesses Elliscer; 03-31-2004 at 05:08 AM. Reason: I'm retarded....sometimes
Ramesses Elliscer is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 04:08 AM   #10
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Your president lied to you.
Bullshit. The whole point Chuk is trying to make is that you have to know for a fact to the contrary of what you're saying in order to be lying. He might have been wrong about the WMD, but that doesn't make him a liar.
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 04:24 AM   #11
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Wildane is a cross-dresser who regularly molests farm animals.

I don't know for a fact that the truth is contrary to what I'm suggesting therefore I'm not lying am I?

For what it's worth I don't think Bush lied. I think he had a hard-on for invading Iraq due to the need to prove himself to his father. I think it may have been a main aim of his since he started running for office.

So when he was told by his intelligence service that their may be weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, he jumped up and down in glee like a little schoolboy. What he neglected to do was perform any due diligence before attempting to push this invasion through a UN resolution.

Then when the UN refused to grant that resolution he tried to bully his way into the war, and when that failed he simply went ahead and did it anyway.

Edit : I don't think Wildane really molests animals and I don't think option c is accurate. If Bush were to stop looking, thereby admitting they didnt exist one week before the election it would deal a severe blow to his election campaign.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 04:33 AM   #12
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
I don't know for a fact that the truth is contrary to what I'm suggesting therefore I'm not lying am I?
No, you're just ignorant "Lie - A false statement deliberately presented as being true; a falsehood." You could say you don't believe in God. I disagree with you, but that doesn't make one of us a liar, does it? No, because when you lie, you are intentionally attempting to deceive someone. If you don't know it to be true, then you aren't lying, you're simply wrong.
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 05:56 AM   #13
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Then I will liken the situation very much to this example;

Someone mentions on the board Wildane, that you're a cross-dresser who molests farm animals. I personally have no evidence either way but I don't like you very much and use this as motivation, not only to attack you, but to have others attack you also. I tell everyone that we are going to attack you because you are an animal molester.

After 2 years of searching no evidence is presented that you do molest animals, but you have been unable to prove that you dont. Many people refuse to attack you for an act there is no proof you have commited. So despite protestations a select group of us attack you anyway. It doesn't matter since we're bigger then you anyway.

1 year later no evidence has been presented to prove that you are in fact a cross dresser who molests animals. However my friends and I will look like total twats if we later say "Er yeah, perhaps he wasn't an animal molester after all"
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 06:30 AM   #14
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Lie - A false statement deliberately presented as being true;
Exactly, he lied.
There is shitloads of evidence pointing to him lieing. You are just too fixated on this vision of what you want your president to be. Somehow I believe you cons believe a president ought to be a super-hero. Your concept of people tends to be plastic.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 06:55 AM   #15
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Originally Posted by Bumbleroot
Exactly, he lied.
There is shitloads of evidence pointing to him lieing. You are just too fixated on this vision of what you want your president to be.
Let's turn that around for a different spin. Yes, Bumbleroot all you are saying is spin. There are no shitloads of evidence pointing to him lieing.

Better to have said:
There are shitloads of evidence proving that he went on the information he was given at the time. You (Bumbleroot) are just too fixated on this vision of what you want people with tunnel vision to believe.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 07:01 AM   #16
Kerryn
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Keren, Naboo
Posts: 1,030
Either way...he lied, or he's completely ignorant.

Really pointless arguing either way.
Kerryn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 07:05 AM   #17
linnet
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 38
Depending on your political bias, you will choose to believe the Administration did or did not lie about WMD. However, just as a reality check, the website at the bottom of the page has a copy of a letter signed by a number of Senators during the Clinton Administration. In the letter, these Senators clearly believe there are WMD in Iraq and it's not because of Bush Administration lies.

When you are dealing with a regime like the one that existed in Iraq, you have to piece together information and hope you put the right bits in the right places. Based on their best guesses, the people with the most access to the most knowledge believed Iraq had WMD. Until 9/11, we could afford to give Iraq the benefit of the doubt. But our perspective changed after the destruction of the two towers. It became clear that some people hated the idea of the United States so much, they would act on that hate.

Only time will tell if they are wrong, but it appears that the Bush Administration came to the same conclusion that everyone else did... that Saddam Hussein had WMD. But for those convinced that they were lied to, being wrong when viewed with 20-20 hindsight is not lying. And there appears to have been no question prior to our search for the weapons that Saddam had them.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1068186/posts
linnet is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 07:37 AM   #18
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Let's turn that around for a different spin. Yes, Bumbleroot all you are saying is spin. There are no shitloads of evidence pointing to him lieing.
That's simply wrong. The rest of the world had no evidence of WMD in Iraq. This administration said they KNEW where the WMD were. They said they knew what the WMD was. They didn't KNOW this. This was a lie. I can bring up the exact quotes if you want. They lied, its simple as that. It wasn't an error of ignorance as you suggest it was. It was a straight lie.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 07:43 AM   #19
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
There is shitloads of evidence pointing to him lieing
Let's see it. I want to see this mounds of evidence that shows he KNEW there were no WMD but stated there were anyway. You are the accuser here, YOU put up or shut up.

Kerryn, that analogy doesn't work for a number of reasons. Saddam spent years slaughtering his own people by testing chemical weapons on them. We KNOW this. He has a history of non-compliance with UN inspectors (what's he got to hide if he's innocent?). He was on his way to becoming the next Hitler, for cryin' out loud. Me? I'm just a junkie with a monkey.
Either way...he lied, or he's completely ignorant.

Really pointless arguing either way.
When it comes to knowing for a fact if there are WMD in Iraq, we're all completely ignorant. He was shown evidence that could point to those weapons being in Saddam's possession. Instead of waiting for that iron-clad proof to be flying at surrounding countries at hundreds of miles per hour, he chose to act, based on his intelligence reports and on what type of man Saddam has proven himself to be. He did not just make up the notion of WMD off the top of his head
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 07:44 AM   #20
Deadscale
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,140
Earlier this month, 2 CIA members came over to my university. They basically came over to try and get rid of any stereotypes i.e. Bond, and later talked about what they did on their job.

After the presentation, I talked to one of the men who's job was to pretty much pick out the agents to get information. The process on how they picked out agents was of course very strict. You all might know by now that the CIA put information together piece by piece, and this is what the agent stressed on. The claim that they made for Iraq having WMD was never wrong and if they were "wrong", it wasn't completely wrong is what the guy said (being that they just need more information on where to find them).

Forgetting to add stuff, but it'll get picked off anyways
__________________
I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party.
Deadscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:13 AM   #21
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Let's see it. I want to see this mounds of evidence that shows he KNEW there were no WMD but stated there were anyway. You are the accuser here, YOU put up or shut up.

Kerryn, that analogy doesn't work for a number of reasons. Saddam spent years slaughtering his own people by testing chemical weapons on them. We KNOW this.
I will link you the site that monitors his lies because you are so lazy and choose ignorance
http://www.bushlies.net/pages/1/index.htm
Have a field day lazy ass.

Now since you are a proponent of putting up or shutting up- tell me where you get this info that Saddam TESTED chem weapons on his citizens, because that simply is not true or known either. The only record of him using chem weapons on his citizens is a dubious record. It was in the Kurdish territories and there is some question as to even whether he or Iran used the weapons on the Kurds. It is one incident. And since you are lazy and ignorant I will provide you with some GOVERNMENT info disproving your assessments...
http://www.polyconomics.com/searchbase/11-18-98.html
From the 1990 Pentagon report
One incident
Having looked at all of the evidence that was available to us, we find it impossible to confirm the State Department’s claim that gas was used in this instance. To begin with there were never any victims produced. International relief organizations who examined the Kurds -- in Turkey where they had gone for asylum -- failed to discover any. Nor were there ever any found inside Iraq. The claim rests solely on testimony of the Kurds who had crossed the border into Turkey, where they were interviewed by staffers of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
and the other incident referred to
Iraq was blamed for the Halabjah attack, even though it was subsequently brought out that Iran too had used chemicals in this operation, and it seemed likely that it was the Iranian bombardment that had actually killed the Kurds.
Now I ask you- where did Bush Sr. come up with the lies about Iraq and chemical weapons? The Pentagon report shows differing information than the LIE he told us on that also. Perhaps as President of the United States he was not required to be familiar with reports from the Pentagon.
Like father like son. Wag the Doggers if you ask me.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 08:22 AM   #22
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Are you fucking serious? How about coming up with a more credible (not to mention objective) resource than bushlies.net. LMAO!
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 10:38 AM   #23
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Why don't you look up the QUOTES. Instead of worshipping Lieboy.
Now praytell have you any defense on Iraq using Chem weapons or are you sitting there with egg in your face also?
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 11:25 AM   #24
Wildane
Psychopath w/a conscience
 
Wildane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Hospitality State, asshole!
Posts: 10,540
Ok, here you go.

Here's one from the Department of Defense - Saddam Hussein's Iraq actively supported terrorism and Hussein was actively seeking a weapons of mass destruction program. Hussein had launched wars on neighbors – Iran and Kuwait – and used chemical agents against the Iranians and his own people.

And here's the actual report from the State Department, just so you can see it's dubious nature for yourself - "Iraqi government troops would be surrounding the attack site and they would have chem-bio suits on...included would be doctors and interested observers...they would go in and find out how many people were dead...and how many survived. What ages ...did men, women or children or the elderly suffer more? From there they would shoot the survivors and burn the bodies... "


Dr. Christine Gosden, Liverpool University,
who has developed treatment and research programs for Halabja survivors


Here's another interesting article from the Department of Defense. Kinda makes you wonder if Clinton would agree with Bush's decision, since he stipulates that Saddam used weapons against his own people... - "Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said. The Iraqi dictator has used these weapons against his neighbors and his own people, he said, and "left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."
__________________
"I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth." - Umberto Eco

"Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear." - Thomas Jefferson
Wildane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-31-2004, 12:27 PM   #25
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
Nothing there of substance. These are news articles and not documents. These documents are based upon innuendo and none of these has anything to support it other than the words of someone saying something. Nobody anywhere is arguing that the Kurds were not attacked, however, there is nothing linking it to Hussein and the Pentagon even shows how the State Department is dubious.
The point is that crediting this to Hussein is highly dubious. It may or may not be propaganda on our behalf. Using your methods of people saying something but not supporting it is nothing of an official document type where someone's ass is on the line for lieing. In other words as a public official one can lie all day until they are required to put it in writing or under testimony.
Hmmm, isn't it funny how hard the Bush team works to avoid testimony.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:30 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.