But as insurance – invest in mobile laboratories…
Subject: Investment Plan for the year 2003
In regards from the letter singed with you on 12/10/2002 regarding our company investment plan to the year mentioned above, included is the technical report according to the letter showing its details below:
1. Develop and enlarge existing laboratories, 178,000,000 Dinars
2. Prepare MOBILE LABORATORIES , In Iraqi Dinar 128,413,00 + 273,445 Euros with 10 Dinar/Euro, 27,344,500, 155,757,500 Dinars.
Total 333,757,500 Dinars
Remark: The cost of the vehicles related to the Mobile Laboratories is not determined yet.
Please review and do what is necessary… with regards
Another Hussein document translated, up at Captains Quarters.
Here is a quote from the UK Observer from June 15, 2003. regarding the use of the mobile labs:
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.’
Hey Steve,
Ya wanna buy some swampland…
Daniel
Daniel
I see you are convinced Saddam was up to no good in those mobile labs. You have “faith” in Bush then. Well, even Colin Powell will tell you the labs weren’t biological labs, he says he was wrong in making that claim. You are in a shrinking minority. Jump off the boat before it sinks!
-The Iraq Documents–
Steve d, what would be the point in buying up all kinds of mobile lab equipment if they were just making hydrogen for weather balloons? Doesn’t that seem like alot of money to be spending on such an endeavour? Perhaps Saddam was simply interested in the weather, but why not just buy stationary equipment to produce the hydrogen, wouldn’t it be cheaper? And why buy so much of the equipment, did they really need that many weather balloons put up out in the desert?
Lets play devil’s advocate. Hypothetically, lets rule out any possible use of these labs for biological weapons creation purposes, and lets also say he didn’t need a whole bunch of weather balloons. What would you be doing with all that hydrogen production capability, and why would you want it to be mobile so it could be hid in the desert?
I know you’ll probably accuse me of “having ‘faith’ in Bush” or being part of his “cabal” or something for simply asking you to engage in a little critical thinking, but it might be more constructive to ask questions “Why did they need so much of this equipment, and what was it being used for?” instead of something along the lines of “Some scientist said it couldn’t be used for biological weapons” and asking no more questions of the matter.
Am I correct in hazarding a guess that you don’t really care about information as to what Saddam might have been doing, unless if it happens to discredit President Bush or Prime Minister Blair?
Yes Steve I still believe there were weapons of mass destruction. Just because there are various agents and agencies at work using “weapons of mass confusion” doesn’t mean that there were no WMD. There are pictues on the net of Iraqi mig jets buried in the sand that had been covered over with plastic and buried 10 feet deep to be recovered later. The American military dug them out. It is a big desert, perhaps the WMD are buried there too.
There are credible reports continuing to come out of the area that trucks with WMD aboard fled Iraq for Syria and Iran as the war began.
Hmmm, faith in Bush or faith in Sadaam and his sons? I’ll side with Bush. I think Bush did the best he could with the intel that he had available. Right decision or wrong decision, I don’t know, history will be the judge of that. At least Bush and Blair made a decision. Strike one more regime of tyrants off the list!
Perhaps you had a better solution Steve. Oh ya, trust in the UN…Bush or the UN Hmmm, I’ll side with Bush. With all the “Oil for Food” corruption that was taking place through the auspicis of the UN to the tune of billions of dollars. The UN is corrupt, weak and indecisive. Left to the UN, Sadaam and his sons would still be repressing the Iraqi people, raping the women at will and killing off anyone that dared speak for freedom or democracy.
Now about that swampland…
Daniel
Well, I tend to go along with Kate about not feeding the trolls. However for once, let’s do what the lefties do, namely, jump from one argument to another.
Putting aside possible mobile WMD laboratories, let’s talk about something definite. There ARE over 300 identified mass burial sites in Iraq. Nobody, including international forensic experts, disputes their existence.
The one mass grave site that most struck me most in my reading was one in northern Iraq, in Kurdish territory. There were approx. 250 graves, each with one woman and each with one or more small children. Each skeleton of a woman or small child had a single bullet hole in the skull.
Does our favorite lefty troll have an opinion on that? Or would he prefer changing the subject back to Evil Moron Bush, yadda, yadda?
The leftist trolls are a waste of time. They’re closed-minded and cannot think for themselves, nor do they want to.
The live in a fantastical, utopian world in which all they have to do is talk with and be nice to the evil tyrants of the world and there’ll be peace.
Neville Chamberlain and his ideological followers believed the very same thing about Hitler… and history proved them DEAD wrong.
No point engaging the leftist trolls. They cannot be turned… probably too far gone already, except for a minority of them who’ll come over to the side of the right on their own when they see the truth for themselves and accept it.
BTW, I wonder how many clicked on the link to Captain’s Quarters? He debunked the hydrogen-for-balloons theory.
What’ll the left believe next? That Michael Jackson is perfectly sane? Oh, probably… as they believe Cindy Seehan is perfectly sane. And Howard Dean. And Paul Martin… wherever he is… not in the House of Commons, for sure.
it is unbelievable and frightening that neo-cons are still trying to defend the Iraq war. Stay away from the purple juice. Bush lied and is a mo-ron. Get over it.
It’s curious to me that years after the fact there is still need for justification for the Iraqi invasion. Whether there were WMDs there or not, the larger issue needing resolution seems to be that considerable segments of the American public are still oppossed to it and the polls remain pretty much split on the issue….no such civil reluctance existed in WW1 or WWII or Korea.
Successful or not, neccessary or not, the Iraq war/occupation was not acheived through a decisive mandate from the public…..the need for intervention supporters to consistantly reassure us this was a right move by grasping at every straw of justification is begining to wear thin …that is if we are completely honest with ourselves.
More fake Hussein Documents. Big deal. Nobody believes this stuff. Nobody believes the good Captain, either.
More fake Hussein Documents. Big deal. Nobody believes this stuff. Nobody believes the good Captain, either.
I apologise to all for highlighting this troll’s post from another thread,but I believe it is too valuable a tool for all to witness(including myself)the utter waste of bandwidth in trying to enlighten them:
“How do we deal with Iran?
If I were President I would send the Secretary of State to talk to Iranian leaders. I would offer to end the trade embargo on Iran. I would offer ongoing dialogue and respect. In return I would ask them to hold off on developing nuclear capabilities until we see how well this new relationship works.
Once both sides get to know each other each becomes less suspicious, paranoid and is more open to suggestion and reason.
Historically, trade has opened up cultures and made them more open to outside ideas as well as goods. If it is change we want then it is more surely developed by dialogue than by the big freeze or worse, attack.”
Posted by: steve d. at May 14, 2006 01:42 AM
How freakin’ naive can someone over the age of 10 be?Where I enjoy a good back-and-forth with someone of a different opinion on things,I do expect more intelligent understanding of a jihad than my 8 year old daughter could muster.
Kate,I am the last one to condone censoring someone’s voice,but it is becoming ridiculous how this one-track troll is trying to commandeer EVERY thread on this site.In fact,he is no longer as much of a troll as a virus!
I’m starting to believe SDA actually stands for Steve D is Assinine!(Steve you are very welcome for this extra attention that you crave so much)
Hey steve. Put a housecoat on and go upstairs and make your mother breakfast. It’s Mothers Day.
Hahaha, I like it when Kate makes a post about two things no sane person can reasonably support anymore: Iraq and Bush. It’s sort of like watching Tiger Woods slice a drive into the rough and reminds us that even the best among us are human. As for Captain’s Quarters, last week he claimed that the UN is nothing more than a cover for some world pedophile conspiracy. I’m no fan of the UN, but that absoutely crossed the line of reasonable and civil debate. Those who support Bush and his PNAC fantasy are not only on the wrong side of history but on the wrong side of America. The Bush administration’s foreign policy is not in America’s interest and it’s time to hold the last of the Bush supporters to account for that.
I’d say to the leftist trolls: At least Bush is smarter than you guys. Smart enough to be President. Kerry wasn’t, and HE’s smarter than you leftist trolls. So quit smokin’ the dope, ye dopes, and start using your noodles. Not THOSE noodles; you use those enough… I mean the noodles that are your brains!
Bah!
Very, very sorry about that outburst against the trolls, Kate, but seeing as you’re away, I thought perhaps they needed to be warned, and the good people needed a reminder to not feed them, as we shouldn’t feed the bears, else they’ll eventually eat us up…
Over and out… stuff to go do…
Gentlemen
I am sorry if a difference of opinion is upsetting. I know perfect agreement is comforting even soothing but that is not reality.
Getting elected doesn’t make you best or right.
Those that are intransigent in the face of failure are sad and dangerous. Bush’s policy in Iraq is a complete failure on every level. What is his alternate plan? He has none.
America’s Iran policy is a miserable failure. By the way their policy since 1979 has been to isolate them with a no trade policy. You know, make them knuckle under, like Castro, uh no, not like Castro but like most of the South American nations used to do. It’s been 27 years of plan “a” in Iran. The question is “hows it workin’for ya?” Not so much? Is there a plan “B”? Attack? Provoke more jihad? Convince every Arab on earth you hate them and are after them? Good plan. If you aim to keep the war on terror going for another fifty years. Its good for the Military Industrial Complex but is it good for McDonalds? Not so much. America Inc. being blown up all over the world? You want to incite that? Are you sure? Is there no other way?
The UN is almost literally owned by the members of the security council. After WWII, America was the protector against communism. America got exactly what it wanted in the UN. Now the other members are expressing themselves more freely and are not agreeing with the US as much. It is interesting that the two countries that suffered most in the last two world wars are most hesitant to use military power now.
Saddam Hussein was paranoid most dictators are, they have to be to stay in power. He maintained respect through military might. After the first gulf war he was virtually stripped of this military capability. He was embargoed so he wasn’t going to re-militarize anytime soon. The only thing he had left was his enemies believing he had WMD. Part of the bluster to keep enemies at bay could have been these mobile labs. That is why George Tenet said Iraq would be a “slam dunk” they knew the emperor had no clothes.
Democracy: The God That Failed
“Likewise, is contemporary America wealthier because of higher taxes and more regulations or in spite of them? That is, would America be even more prosperous if taxes and regulations had remained at their nineteenth-century levels?
…
My theoretical interpretation is entirely different. It involves the shattering of three historical myths. The first and most fundamental is the myth that the emergence of states out of a prior, non-statist order has caused subsequent economic and civilizational progress. In fact, theory dictates that any progress must have occurred in spite – not because – of the institution of a state.
…
The second myth concerns the historic transition from absolute monarchies to democratic states. Not only do neoconservatives interpret this development as progress; there is near-universal agreement that democracy represents an advance over monarchy and is the cause of economic and moral progress. This interpretation is curious in light of the fact that democracy has been the fountainhead of every form of socialism: of (European) democratic socialism and (American) liberalism and neo-conservatism as well as of international (Soviet) socialism, (Italian) fascism, and national (Nazi) socialism. More importantly, however, theory contradicts this interpretation; whereas both monarchies and democracies are deficient as states, democracy is worse than monarchy.
…
In particular, democracy is seen as promoting an increase in the social rate of time preference (present-orientation) or the “infantilization” of society. It results in continually increased taxes, paper money and paper money inflation, an unending flood of legislation, and a steadily growing “public” debt. By the same token, democracy leads to lower savings, increased legal uncertainty, moral relativism, lawlessness, and crime. Further, democracy is a tool for wealth and income confiscation and redistribution. It involves the legislative “taking” of the property of some – the haves of something – and the “giving” of it to others – the have-nots of things. And since it is presumably something valuable that is being redistributed – of which the haves have too much and the have-nots too little – any such redistribution implies that the incentive to be of value or produce something valuable is systematically reduced. In other words, the proportion of not-so-good people and not-so-good personal traits, habits, and forms of conduct and appearance will increase, and life in society will become increasingly unpleasant.
…
Finally, the third myth shattered is the belief that there is no alternative to Western welfare-democracies a la US. Again, theory demonstrates otherwise. First, this belief is false because the modern welfare-state is not a “stable” economic system. It is bound to collapse under its own parasitic weight, much like Russian-style socialism imploded a decade ago. More importantly, however, an economically stable alternative to democracy exists. The term I propose for this alternative is “natural order.”
http://www.lewrockwell.com/hoppe/hoppe4.html
BTW,Happy Mother’s Day to all those who qualify!
I will never understand why the left are so outraged that no WMDs have been found yet in Iraq.
If Hussein had them and dared to use them (again) we could have seen almost 3 thousand dead American soldiers in a few hours instead of in a few years.
I can only to assume our own left wingers (the so called loyal opposition) are disappointed.
Why do lefties always assume that they are the majority in their thinking??!! Are they taking polls or something??! At the time of the last UN security council resolution regarding Iraq (the 16th I believe), the resolution ordered Sadaam Hussein to prove that he had destroyed all of his WMD or face invasion, there was absolute consensus among all nations at the time that he did, indeed, have WMD (especially since he had used them against the Kurds in the past), that fact was simply NOT in dispute. The fact that Hussein never complied with this resolution is what prompted the U.S. invasion. (I don’t count handing over hundreds of thousands of useless documents as compliance). Obviously (to me anyway), Hussein managed to get rid of the WMD by either hiding them in the dessert or shipping them off to Iran and Syria before the invasion – why is this so hard for anyone to believe?? Why do some people prefer to believe Hussein over George Bush? Why do some people continue to blame Bush when all Hussein had to do to avoid this war was come clean about the WMD? It’s totally beyond my comprehsion how twisted these people must be to side with terrorists over the U.S. – our friend and neighbour and one of the few countries who has actually helped liberate many in this world from tyranny. This is the thanks they get? I understand the U.S. made some mistakes regarding Iraq (they should have maybe waited a little while so they could have reallocated some additional troops from Afghanistan to Iraq so that they would have had sufficient troops for invastion). And now the same left are screaming about Dafur – all I can say is the only explanation for this bizarre attitude is brain damage!! Dafur is just another Iraq (without the WMD)!
How does that quote go “Those who don’t learn from History…. are destined to repeat it” Or words to that effect. I’m constantly amazed at the rantings of the moon-bat from the left that drible inanely here. Their ancestors were probably the people that didn’t believe Nazi Germany had the capability of building a war machine or the the will to use it. In 1936 the keel to the biggest ship in the world was put down and the French, British, and American navies despite having their inspectors on site failed to realize that between them they did not have a battleship in their navies of comparable size. So much for inspectors. Jump ahead 60 years and we have a vocal group of leftists that are vehement in their denouncement of the Bush administration for its attitude in attacking Saddam because of suspected WMD. Nazi Germany allowed inspectors (naval engineers and naval attaches) to inspect the building of the Bismark, Saddam was hiding in the desert. something for the Moonbats to think about if they are open-minded about it enough to try. Perhaps if the leaders of the 1930’s had acted with the same dispatch as the Bush and Blair administrations, WWII might have only been a footnote in the annals of the Twentieth Century.
Do not feed the trolls!
Everyone knows that when the WMD are found we can be sure Bush and Harper planted them. sarcasm off/
Happy Mother’s Day to those who are or have mothers and condolances to steve d.’s mom. We know she tried to raise her son right.
Right and Left are one and the same: socialism/fascism are Siamese twins; same body with two heads, yes, with two heads sharing one tongue: same message.
Socialism is fascism; fascism is socialism.
Cindy Sheehan and Lew Rockwell have collided; the left moonbats and the right moonbats have fornicated and brought forth Cindy and Lew’s abortions: “zenon” and “steve d.” and et al. …
The left moonbats and the right moonbats are one and the same. They are aliens from Uranus; trolls from Uranus. … Do Not Feed The Trolls. ….
The Right’s Left Turn
By Jacob Laksin
FrontPageMagazine.com | October 5, 2005
Excerpt:
And no wonder. With its foam-flecked denunciations of the United States for “the evil of imperialism, the immorality of enslaving a foreign people, the malice of colonialism, and the intolerable brutality of authoritarianism,” its paranoiac allusions to a dissent-crushing “state,” and its unelaborated call for “resistance,” Rockwell’s speech could have been given by any of the more literate ringleaders of the anti-war left.
It might be supposed that Rockwell’s base of operations, LewRockwell.com, a gathering ground for a querulous cult of libertarian-anarchist true-believers, would be less amenable to the APJC’s members. On the contrary, a left-wing extremist would find much to admire among the site’s standard fare. Rockwell describes it as “unapologetically idiosyncratic.” That is putting it mildly. Although occasionally plumping for some eccentric ventures—LewRockwell.com is an enthusiastic supporter of the cause of the Confederate South—the default mode of the site is unsubtle ant-Americanism clothed in the garb of “anti-state” libertarianism.
Certainly that’s Rockwell’s stock-in-trade. In the disturbed worldview of Rockwell and his ideology-blinkered acolytes, the U.S. government, far from representing the democratic consensus of the American people, is the world’s most oppressive regime. “We are talking about the greatest centralized power on the globe, the world’s largest, most well-armed, and most dangerous government, the only government to have ever used nuclear weapons against civilians and the government that has invaded more countries than any other in modern times,” complained Rockwell in June of 2004. Rockwell was still stuck on that theme one year later, even going so far as to endorse the caricature of America as the avatar of the Evil Empire. “Americans need to face the reality that most of the world sees our nation as the new evil empire, and many people in the Gulf region are dedicated to making sure that the Iraq War is the last hurrah for American militarism,” he wrote in June of 2005. “How tragic to admit that the analogy is not entirely implausible.”
Rockwell’s underlings are even more candid about their contempt for the U.S. The American-led war in Iraq has afforded them the occasion to vent their hostility. For evidence, one need look no further than a December 2004 entry on LewRockwell.com’s blog by contributor Mike Rogers. In the course of cheering the terrorist holdouts in Fallujah, Rogers put up a picture of a bombed-out American tank. In case the message was too muddled, Rogers appended it with a caption: “A toast to the defeat of the evil empire – A prayer for the poor fallen souls.” One might have been forgiven for wondering whether the poor souls in question were American troops or the terrorist diehards responsible for their deaths.
More explicit still was LewRockwell.com columnist Karen Kwiatkowski. In a June 2005 column entitled “Unleashing the Resistance,” Kwiatkowski issued a blanket endorsement of the terrorist insurgency in Iraq. “They don’t understand everything that is happening, but most Iraqis have decided to pursue one or more of the countless paths of resistance to the state. All are qualified to resist. None are excluded.” Not only that at, but Kwiatkowski advised American opponents of U.S. foreign policy to take their cues from the insurgents: “We might take a lesson from the growing Iraqi insurgency and the response of that nation nearly destroyed by our pretext-laden invasion and the American neo-Jacobin possession of that country,” she wrote. Kwiatkowski declined to offer specifics. She noted, however, that “my gentle thoughts are increasingly turning to murder.”
In common with the more unhinged elements of the far left, LewRockwell.com is committed to propagating the notion that the U.S. is in the grip of a fascist government. Again, Rockwell himself is among the more ardent spokesmen for that view. His political opponents, he insists, are “fascisti,” while anyone with the temerity to voice support for American policies is dismissed as one of the “storm troopers of the regime.” As for the 62 million Americans who voted to reelect George W. Bush, they are—you guessed it—the proponents of “red-state fascism.” Lest such comments be dismissed as mere overheated sloganeering, Rockwell stresses that this “not just rhetoric.” Rather, Rockwell urges his readers “to recognize that fascism is a reality, not just a smear term.” …
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19727
When Hussein used the WMD on the Kurds don’t forget who his biggest ally was, America. If you haven’t seen pictures of Rumsfeld shaking hand with Saddam in the mid 80’s then you should look it up. It is certain to be on the internet. So the USA was supplying Saddam with weaponry before they weren’t.
Hussein was not a threat to the US. He was a threat to no one. He was defeated, embargoed and monitored. They knew he had no military bite and no way to deliver any WMD he might have saved.
Even when he did have WMD and the means to deliver it in the first gulf war he didn’t.
Most of the world knew that the US was using any excuse it could to attack Iraq. That is why there were protests all over the world prior to the war. Americans were the only people polled who supported the war(70%).
You don’t support friends right or wrong. You support them when they are right and give em hell when they are wrong.
Antenor
Talk about history repeating itself. America invaded what is now Canada but were British colonies in 1812. They fully expected to be greeted as liberators. Sound familiar?
Steve D, don’t let warped wingnuts such as Chicken Sentinel get to you. They would be destitute without their phantasms of conservative certitude, moral rectitude and intellectual superiority.
You are trying to challenge their fantasies with facts, which marks you as a “leftist troll” and danger. Wear the “moonbat” label proudly as a distinction from that crowd!
The documents that Captain’s Quarter’s is commenting on can be found here:
http://70.168.46.200/
At the top of the site is a disclaimer that says this:
“The US Government has made no determination regarding the authenticity of the documents, validity or factual accuracy of the information contained therein, or the quality of any translations, when available.”
He has never got confirmation as to whether these are legitimate documents. With this latest posting, there is no real proof that these units were used for biological weapons. The comments are full of assumptions and accusations, but no one has any real proof. In fact, the Captain himself states:
“Nothing in this document says anything explicit about chemical or biological weapons.”
This is followed with a very large “however,” after which he rolls out his theory – this is not proof.
You guys can call me a troll or whatever, but there has to be some standard of proof here. If a liberal posted something using this level of proof arguing against WMD’s, you would rip them to shreds (and rightfully so).
Troll said: “Wear the “moonbat” label proudly as a distinction from that crowd!”
The left liberal trolls/moonbats love/condone their thugs and murderers: Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro, Kim, Mugabe, Ahmajihad, … Saddam, et al.
Buruma attributes the left’s approbation of thugs and murderers to “radical Third Worldism.” He writes:
The common element of radical Third Worldism is an obsession with American power, as though the US were so intrinsically evil that any enemy of the US must be our friend, from Mao to Kim Jong-il, from Fidel Castro to Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. And if our “friends” shower us with flattery, asking us to attend conferences and sit on advisory boards, so much the better. …
powerlineblog.com
Antenor,
you state in your post of 12.45 to-day that, as an example of the failure of inspection, in Nazi Germany –
“In 1936 the keel to the biggest ship in the world was put down and the French, British, and American navies despite having their inspectors on site failed to realize that between them they did not have a battleship in their navies of comparable size.”
Accustomed as I am to the Right playing fast and loose with facts and history when it suits a purpose, would you mind telling me the construction number, name or whatever designation you may have for this monster ship? I do have a published list of all keels laid and vessels constructed for the German Navy between 1921 and 31 August 1939, so this fact will be easy to verify.
The fact of the matter is everyone knew in the 70’s that supporting Saddam against the Ayatollah Khomeini was a dubious prospect at best but the lesser of the evils of letting the Imans in the middle east begin to take over the middle east begining with Iraq. Their ultimate goal back then was to destroy Isreal.
Iran has alway been a far larger and greater threat than Iraq. Iraq was the buffer. The problem being that Saddam was a brutal vile man witb no compunction for killing maiming or torturing anyone who defied him. He was aggresive and imperilistic with his own designs on the middle east.
Amercian foriegn policy after WW2 was a dervative of MAD they tried to keep everything in balance which of course over time either failed or came back and bit them in the ass. They attempted to support those regimes friendly to America in regions that where trouble spots. In order to maintain a balance of power.
The middle east being a 1500 year old trouble spot for the West Bush took a bold new approach. The straw that broke the camels back being 9/11. With Iran after 20 years going Imperialistic again Saddam just plain crazy and evil the American looked for a new approach.
The Marshall plan was the blueprint. Rebuild a failed state. Make it democratic make it so the middle class was safe and prosperous.
To say Iraq failed is utter nonsense these guys are trying to rebuild a country form the ground up in just a few years. A endevour that took decades to occur in the west.
Should this modified Marshall plan work and it appears it may, as in Europe it tends to spread to other parts of the region. Folks become more interested in growing their own lives than following someone who either through fear or poverty commands their attention and gives them their marching orders as it where.
Already other states the Saudi Arabia and Egypt are feeling the pressure to move toward Democracy and freer more open states.
If you are a Cleric used to commanding total control over peoples lives this is not a good thing. Therefore you are going to throw everything you got a trying to make it fail because if it succeeds you are just another guy in a mosque.
So the I would expect that as Iraq moves closer to Democracy and freedom you will see increased fear and panic from the Imans to shut it down. This will show up in increased violence.
At some point it will burn itself out. People will go enough of this nonsense we want to live out lives in peace and worship our God in the same manner.
They will become more engrossed in their own lives after seeing increased prosperity and peace in Iraq. It will spread and maybe just maybe the greatest hurdle to world peace will have been overcome.
However they got there its worth a shot a stopping 1500 years of war.
At last, some good news for the left moonbat trolls:
Maddas says he is ready to die. …
More: Saddam’s keel was laid “in the land between the rivers”. Da proof is da proof here:
http://www.magisociety.com/saddamhussein.htm
THE BIRTH CHART OF
SADDAM HUSSEIN
March 30, 2003
The country of modern day Iraq is where the biblical Babylonia used to be. Babylonia means the “land between two rivers” and it is in that land between the Tigris and Euphrates rivers that was the birthplace of astrology. To this day, astrology is a deep tradition in Iraq. One of astrology’s greatest adherents is Saddam Hussein. During the months leading up to the Gulf War, many newspapers in countries that border Iraq joked about how Saddam Hussein kept changing his astrologers.
With that as background, it should be obvious that Saddam Hussein, who has lied about almost everything else, has also lied about his birth date. Saddam Hussein was not born on April 28, 1937 as he claims. He was actually born one year earlier.
The Magi Society has clear proof of this in our possession. (Our website was also the first to unequivocally and clearly give the correct birth date for Osama Bin Laden less than a week after the 9/11 attack. Many e-mailers doubted us but we have been vindicated since that time; we were correct.)…
Freerepublic.com:
Saddam the Poet Ready for Hangman (“I am Ready to Die,” He Tells His Lawyer)
Posted by KentTrappedInLiberalSeattle
On 05/14/2006 10:09:37 AM PDT · 19 replies · 183+ views
Times Online ^ | 05/14/2006 | Widiane Moussa
THE former Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein has resigned himself to being sent to the gallows. “I am ready to die,” he told his lawyer and confidante in an interview in his Baghdad prison. “I am not scared of execution.” Saddam is expected to return to court tomorrow for the resumption of a chaotic trial on charges of genocide and crimes against humanity that has lasted almost seven months. “I do not attend this trial to spare my life,” he said. “I attend it to defend Iraq.” Saddam, who refuses all visits from his family, was talking to Bushra Khalil, a…
I”m speculating that Antenor is talking about either the Bismarck, the Tirpitz or both.
Hmm… I think Agitfact is clever to project the tactics of the left onto their conservative opponents, slandering us as playing fast and loose with facts and with history while Agitfact knows full well it’s the left that has mastered this form of dishonesty with a view to political gain. This is the hallmark of “liberalism”. This is how they won four consecutive elections. Pure, unadulterated, lying Machiavellianism.
The Canadian people are increasingly seeing the truth, which is that the left not only lies, but that they also falsely accuse regular folks like us conservatives of all sorts of dishonesties to detract from their own obfuscation and wool-pulling.
Forget about it, Agitfact. The tables have turned and Canadians prefer hard truth to the lies that used to give them false comfort in you guys.
Apparently the Leftists in the crowd are quite comfortable leaving an administration in power that runs its citizens through wood chippers.
I’m not surprised the left claims Iraq is a disaster, but it sickens me that it makes them so happy when they talk about that possibity. I would think elementary human compassion would cause a person to want this effort to succeed, despite hatred for Bush. But I’ve never hated that much, so I suppose I underestimate the crippling effect it can have on one’s intellect and humanity.
Agitfact
Thanks. I am quite used to it. In fact I come to this conservative site to see what conservatives are thinking about and to give my views which are usually, but not always, an alternate view. Some people have no tolerance for opposing views I understand that. But others are at least thinking and have taken some time to seek information. Its all good. It is nice that Kate is broadminded enough to let me express myself. I think she knows I am sincere and not just mean and intolerant.
Amazing how in denial are leftists.
They claim that conservatives are intolerant of opposing viewpoints. Yet leftists don’t tolerate any viewpoint that doesn’t conform to their dogmatic politically correct views. This isn’t debatable; everyone with their eyes, ears and minds open knows this.
The new tactic of the left to go back to using gross generalizations about conservatives that have already been soundly and thoroughly debunked isn’t going to work. Canadians have become wise to the left, so I would suggest that leftists instead start being honest. They should prove their claims rather than just making them and then demonizing those who have a different idea to offer.
As we’ve seen with the Liberal Party of Canada, the left still hasn’t learned why it has lost the respect and trust of the Canadian people. So all ye leftists, please continue doing what you’re doing. Your words will consequently fall upon deaf ears.
We don’t want the left telling us what to think anymore. We’ve already been there and know better.
Sentinel – do you ever engage in debate, or just slander of the left? Why not engage my criticism of Captain’s Quarter’s documents? Why do you insisit instead of making the same rants over and over about people who disagree with your point of view. I read this site each and every day and everytime someone disagrees with the majority, instead of getting engaged, they get dismissed and subjected to rants about the left. What are you afraid of? If you are so sure of your position – back it up with facts.
Hey Steve,
Ya wanna buy some swampland…
Daniel
Why would Steve want to buy some swampland that Bush suckered you into buying?
Bruce, Thanks for the back up I very seldom indulge in trying to educate the liberal left as their heads are so far in the sand or elsewhere they are incapable of listening. As to the invasion of Canada or Upper Canada that was referred to, if it hadn’t have been for the self armed militia of the time we’d all be singing “Yankee Doodle” today, another reason why we should not submit to the liberal gun registry.
Bruce, forgot to mention the keel for the Bismark was laid at the Blohm and Voss, ship yards in Hamburg 1936. The Tirpitz was not constructed until after the war had started. Some people on the left, mainly in the MSM don’t yet know how to google as a method of research, that is why I don’t go out of my way to indulge them.
If CQ’s knowledge of Irag is any simlar to his knowledge of Canada (several miles to his north), look out! Anyone remmeber his “coverage” of the last Canadian election? I thought the WMD fantasy had been kissed goodnight and put to bed some time ago. Now, we’re on to gun control! It’s going to be a long tedious summer!
Andy
I have a friend in Iraq who is working as a private security contractor there, in Baghdad. He says that the situation there is not as bad as it seems to be described in the media. According to him, there are hot spots, mainly in the Sunni triangle,and those are obviously the principal focus of the media. But he also says that life seems to be getting better for the locals, most of those he met are quite happy Saddam has gone.
I haven’t been there, don’t know the situation for myself, just repeating what he says.
steve d.
Just for the record I generally find your comments quite interesting. After all, if everyone here agreed, it would be a little boring. I visit a few of the left-wing blogs on occasion and am usually treated with courtesy…
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060514/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_wmd_trailers_2
“Much sought after for his expertise, Barton served on the U.N. Iraq arms inspection teams of 1991-98 and 2002-03. After the U.S. invasion, he was an aide to chief U.S. inspector Charles Duelfer.”
And your comments, Antenor, about the inspectors being on-site at the shipyards bring up an intersting question. How could supposedly qualified people mistake a keel etc for what I think became a warship in excess of 50000 tonnes for a ship within the conditions of Versailles?
Or did the allies know and just didn’t care any more?
Peter D., I wasn’t addressing you. The above was merely a reminder to not feed trolls and a counter to the leftist self-assuredness being pretentiously flaunted. It was so ludicrous I felt there needed to be a countervailing position. That’s all.
I think the Iraq issue has already been argued to death. The relevant fact is that Saddam had thumbed his nose at the world for twelve years, defying the UN and causing reasonable people to fear he had WMDs by refusing to allow weapons inspectors unfettered access. Moreover, he was a terrible butcher of many, denying the most fundamental of human rights and dignity to all and invading other nations. There was no doubt he was and would’ve again been a threat. All sorts of evidence (eg., former Iraqi generals) is available for your viewing out there should you try to search for it, that the WMDs were transported into Syria prior to the latest war.
Further, I would suggest that we admit that we have different values: I believe that sometimes there needs to be war to defend freedom, democracy, the rule of law and human rights from those who threaten them (Hitler, Hirohito, USSR, Saddam, Bin Laden, Arafat, Ahmadinejad, Kim Jung II…) and you believe that all we need to do is talk to them and be nice to them and they’ll be nice to us…
I’m getting tired of hearing the left go on and on, saying the same stuff every day, doing more and more bizarre things to try and get attention. We got their point… they’re just carrying on like a broken record and we’re tuning them out. The war happened. Democracy has already happened in Iraq. Good things are happening. Sure, there’s “insurgent” violence and all, but it’s dissipating all the time, notwithstanding all the MSM coverage of the negatives and ignorance of the positives.
And I make no apologies whatsoever for my hits against the left. You guys brought it upon yourselves; no doubt about it. I didn’t imagine it, nor did anyone tell me to think so. I listened to and watched you guys for years with an open mind, going along only to find that the real world simply doesn’t match your claims about it. No one with an independent, active brain is going to surrender to your dogmas and so on.
I am surrounded by leftists. I’m a conservative in a leftist world, so I know you people extremely well… in fact, I used to be one of you, except… I’m immune to indoctrination. Ask yourself if you truly think for yourself or if you go along with what your peers say just so they’ll accept you. Do you conform out of fear of rejection? Do you have the self esteem and self confidence to be independent and focus on the relentless pursuit of the truth? Or are you addicted to “being part of the crowd” no matter how much it might diminish you as a sovereign individual?
Good night, Peter D.
Antenor,
I guessed that you would be referring to the battleships “Bismarck” and “Tirpitz.” The “Bismarck” was construction no. 509, keel laid 1 Jul 36, launched 14 Feb 40, commissioned 24 Aug 40, and displaced 41,700 tons. The “Tirpitz” (no. 128)had her keel laid on 2 Nov 36, was launched on 1 Apr 39, commissioned on 25 Feb 41, and displaced 42,900 tons. Don’t quite follow your point about those ships proving inspection failure in Iraq, but I am getting used to points being stretched in the bogosphere.
By the way, where do you think the facts (and interpretations)for your fast-food research in “Google” come form? The authoritative text on German inter-war naval plans is Jost Duelffer’s “Weimar, Hitler und die Marine: Reichspolitik und Flottenbau 1920 bis 1939” (Duesseldorf, 1973) whose annex on construction data I used.
Agitfact, are you really Cliff Clavin from “Cheers”? The resemblance is uncanny… walking around spewing what may be facts…
Couldn’t help myself there… 🙂
Oh, BTW, a professor of mine once declared: “Understanding is more important than facts”.
I agree with him. Facts are good, but too many obsess over facts whilst failing to understand their meaning/relevance to things.