The proof that Saddam worked with bin Laden

[Tmy]

Is this like the chemical weapons plant that wasnt, or the chem warheads that werent. So whats this one "Joe AlQueda took a crap in the Baghdad Airport Hilton 7 yaers ago." Every day theres a new story about the "smoking gun" that turns out to be bogus.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

So far all evidence is pointing to there not being any WMD's in Iraq, but hey, it's POSSIBLE that they exist so let's just believe it anyway.

It's also possible that invisible pink unicorns exist, we just haven't found any yet.

Nothing like exercising pseudo skepticism eh crackmonkey?

It certainly shows an interest in working together, something that the anti-war crowd sneered at as ridiculous.
The WMD is being tracked down. You'll hear plenty soon... it's early yet.
How do you prefer your crow? Rare? Well done?

 

[ImpyTimpy]

Why are we even CONSIDERING this as evidence? Come on people, this line should make your bull**** meters go off:

Iraqi intelligence documents discovered in Baghdad by The Telegraph have...

The Telegraph discovered secret intelligence documents?? I think we should forget the troops and inspectors, just send those journalists in. They'll find those alleged WMD's even faster!

 

[crackmonkey]

Oh, I see... you only believe documents provided by the government? Don't trust the press - at least if they report things you find displeasing.

 

[Tricky]

The WMD is being tracked down. You'll hear plenty soon... it's early yet.

They is?
Wall hush my mouf!

 

[Baker]

So far all evidence is pointing to there not being any WMD's in Iraq, but hey, it's POSSIBLE that they exist so let's just believe it anyway.

It's also possible that invisible pink unicorns exist, we just haven't found any yet.

Nothing like exercising pseudo skepticism eh crackmonkey?

Most of the major networks are starting to report the story.
Maybe pink unicorns do exist

A chemical team checked the drums, one of which tested positive for cyclosarin (search), a nerve agent, and a blister agent which could have been mustard gas, Martin said.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85273,00.html

Also, this deals with the same story from the Telegraph.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85256,00.html

 

[crackmonkey]

I do find it amusing that the same people who were advocating for an extension of the UN inspectors mission in Iraq to track down WMDs are ready to declare Iraq WMD-free after a couple of weeks.
Most curious... so you folks have THAT much faith in the US - you expect us to find in days the WMD that the inspectors couldn't locate in years? That's beautiful. Thanks for the vote of confidence, guys.

 

[Tmy]

I think its just a reaction the the "I told you so" crowd. Teh anti -war types have been quite humble if you ask me, but then youll get some pro invasion type saying "Oh you were wrong, we'll find this in that and prove your wrong." Of course until that happens you really cant take the highground,

I think all sides can agree that finding WMD's is not that easy> whether your hans Blix or the Us military.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

Do I even need to comment?

Let's see... From the first article:

nitial tests by Army equipment are designed to favor a positive reading, erring on the side of caution to protect soldiers. Further, more sophisticated tests will be necessary to determine whether the find is evidence of an illegal weapons program.

and

So far, no conclusive evidence of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons have been reported by coalition forces.

So your own article says that the find is yet to be confirmed and that no evidence has been found so far. Remember those pesticide drums they found? Same deal - they thought it was chemical weapons too...

Onto second article:

Journalists from the British Sunday Telegraph newspaper found documents revealing a meeting between an Al Qaeda (search) envoy and officials in Baghdad in March 1998.

Wow, they're reporting what the newspaper reported. Talk about some brilliant journalistic work. Hmm.. Let's see, what's on the front page of that magazine.. Oooh, looks good, let's report that!

Please, show some skepticism will you?

Most of the major networks are starting to report the story.
Maybe pink unicorns do exist




Also, this deals with the same story from the Telegraph.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85256,00.html

 

[ImpyTimpy]

Wow... First I hear inspectors are not detectives, they're there to 'inspect' now I'm being told that they were there to TRACK DOWN those alleged weapons but weren't doing it fast enough? So which is it?

We were told that the US knew Saddam had those weapons and showed pictures of sites where the weapons were stored in U.N. address. Now we're told US can't find the weapons and frankly doesn't know where to look...

So how did they know Iraq had WMD's if they don't even know where to find them?

Call me skeptical but it seems US just took a blind guess and went with it.

I do find it amusing that the same people who were advocating for an extension of the UN inspectors mission in Iraq to track down WMDs are ready to declare Iraq WMD-free after a couple of weeks.
Most curious... so you folks have THAT much faith in the US - you expect us to find in days the WMD that the inspectors couldn't locate in years? That's beautiful. Thanks for the vote of confidence, guys.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

Sorry, I disagree. It seems US was certain Iraq possessed WMD's and knew all about their weapons programs. If they knew so much, why can't they find the weapons now? If I'm told because they were hidden, how did they know they were there in the first place? They just guessed?

I think its just a reaction the the "I told you so" crowd. Teh anti -war types have been quite humble if you ask me, but then youll get some pro invasion type saying "Oh you were wrong, we'll find this in that and prove your wrong." Of course until that happens you really cant take the highground,

I think all sides can agree that finding WMD's is not that easy> whether your hans Blix or the Us military.

 

[ssibal]

Sorry, I disagree. It seems US was certain Iraq possessed WMD's and knew all about their weapons programs. If they knew so much, why can't they find the weapons now? If I'm told because they were hidden, how did they know they were there in the first place? They just guessed?

Come on, we knew Bin Laden was in Afghanistan but we still do not know exactly where he is. We knew Saddam was in Iraq but do not know his exact location. It is possible to know something is in a country without knowing exactly where it is.

 

[Baker]

So your own article says that the find is yet to be confirmed and that no evidence has been found so far. Remember those pesticide drums they found? Same deal - they thought it was chemical weapons too...

Oh but you are so sure they don’t have them.
And you have replied with nothing but ad hominem comments to any suggestion of possibly finding WMD.
Why take every post on subject so personally?

 

[ImpyTimpy]

Two huge differences. We didn't show pictures of where Bin Laden was hiding to U.N. and WMD's don't run away by themselves.

Come on, we knew Bin Laden was in Afghanistan but we still do not know exactly where he is. We knew Saddam was in Iraq but do not know his exact location. It is possible to know something is in a country without knowing exactly where it is.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

I'm not sure psychic phenomena is real but I am yet to see evidence it is. Do you see where I am going with this?

Also it's funny how you failed to address any of the points I made. Argumentum Ad hominem for asking you to be more skeptical?

Look, this is a skeptical board. If you don't want to exercise critical thinking skills, that is your right but don't expect people to just take your word for facts. You provided shoddy evidence which I debunked pretty quickly. I hope you can be more skeptical when it comes to the issue of WMD's in Iraq and news reports.

Oh but you are so sure they don’t have them.
And you have replied with nothing but ad hominem comments to any suggestion of possibly finding WMD.
Why take every post on subject so personally?

 

[Baker]

Look, this is a skeptical board. If you don't want to exercise critical thinking skills, that is your right but don't expect people to just take your word for facts. You provided shoddy evidence which I debunked pretty quickly. I hope you can be more skeptical when it comes to the issue of WMD's in Iraq and news reports.

Yes but you have to be skeptical in both sides of the argument.
You have never once showed any skepticism for the ant-war side.

But you seem bent on finding anything wrong with the pro war arguments.
I’m not buying your just being skeptical excuse if you where you would be showing fults on both sides.

 

[ssibal]

Two huge differences. We didn't show pictures of where Bin Laden was hiding to U.N. and WMD's don't run away by themselves.

Right, they are moved by people, especially when they know which sites we knew about.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

I'm not the one making claims Iraq has WMD's.. I'm simply stating no evidence has been presented for their existence and the evidence which HAS been used was shoddy to say the least.

Now how about you actually address what I said properly rather then skip over the points I made and selectively quoting what I wrote? Or is it you agree that the evidence you provided is worthless but don't want to admit it.

Yes but you have to be skeptical in both sides of the argument.
You have never once showed any skepticism for the ant-war side.

But you seem bent on finding anything wrong with the pro war arguments.
I’m not buying your just being skeptical excuse if you where you would be showing fults on both sides.

 

[ImpyTimpy]

What people would they be? Moved to where? Are you saying someone threw a blanket over the trucks containing tons of Sarin/Mustard Gas/Anthrax so the satellites couldn't see them anymore? Then under the cover of the said blanket, they drove away deep into Syria maybe?

Seriously though, US is supposed to know about these sites so it's reasonable to assume they keep an eye on them. How then can those said WMD's just disappear from right under their nose?

*EDITED TO ADD*

Iraq would have to also develop the technology to cover up TRACES left behind at those sites from all those nasty chemicals.

Right, they are moved by people, especially when they know which sites we knew about.

 

[DrChinese]

As with all such stories claiming some purported connection between person A and person B, what does it really add up to?

So what if A approaches B? What was discussed? When was it? Was it illegal? Was it for immoral purposes? The fact that there was communication is - by itself - meaningless. Don't you agree?

Oh, and by the way, I'm not referring to Saddam and Osama. I was referring to Saddam and then Vice President George Bush Sr., whom have met in person behind closed doors. What are we to make of that? Sinister stuff... I wonder if the CIA knows about that?