Did the administration lie about WMDs - GoFuckYourself.com

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:00 AM

being in Iraq? All of you haters keep accusing the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Powell of lying about WMDs.

The House and Senate Intelligence Committees are reviewing intel reports. If they conclude that the intel from the various agencies indicated that Iraq had WMD's will you still say that President Bush and the others were lying?

4Pics · 06-16-2003, 01:02 AM

Weapons were there, they were moved prior to the war.

Forgot to mention, we sold them to them so we know they had them.

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:03 AM

Like Ollie North taking the heat for Reagan, this administration will attempt to blame its lies on the intelligence community.

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 4Pics
Weapons were there, they were moved prior to the war.

Forgot to mention, we sold them to them so we know they had them.

We know where the WMD's are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

-------------

Just when did this massive movement of weapons take place, and how did it escape our notice?

<IMX> · 06-16-2003, 01:07 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking
being in Iraq? All of you haters keep accusing the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Powell of lying about WMDs.

The House and Senate Intelligence Committees are reviewing intel reports. If they conclude that the intel from the various agencies indicated that Iraq had WMD's will you still say that President Bush and the others were lying?

Their little war part II reminds me an awful lot of the Nixon administration. Back channel fuckers.

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by 4Pics
Weapons were there, they were moved prior to the war.

Forgot to mention, we sold them to them so we know they had them.

US companies sold dual use materials (as did other countries) and never sold WMD's. Iraq chose to apply the dual use capability and produce "WMDs".

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy
Like Ollie North taking the heat for Reagan, this administration will attempt to blame its lies on the intelligence community.

Ollie North did not take the heat for President Reagan...quite the opposite.

mule · 06-16-2003, 01:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

US companies sold dual use materials (as did other countries) and never sold WMD's. Iraq chose to apply the dual use capability and produce "WMDs".

edit: let me elaborate.
Say that it's a well-known fact that I like to blow things up, and am generally disliked because of it. Say you run a store, and I purchase large quantities of fertilizer and fuel oil from you. You're really gonna believe it's for my crops and my tractor, right?

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

We know where the WMD's are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

-------------

Just when did this massive movement of weapons take place, and how did it escape our notice?

Deciphering intel is not a science (this is real life and not a movie)...it is an art and is wrong more often than it is 100% correct.

4Pics · 06-16-2003, 01:25 AM

I believe either they are in Iran or Syria.

Very easy to get it out without us knowing, they've been able to hide it from the UN for how long?

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Deciphering intel is not a science (this is real life and not a movie)...it is an art and is wrong more often than it is 100% correct.

----------
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002

We know where the WMD's are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.

George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003

--------------------

You mean its wrong 100% of the time, but only.. conveniently.. when it being wrong is to your political advantage.

funkmaster · 06-16-2003, 01:31 AM

reminds me pretty much of iraqies killing kuwait babies in the first gulf war ... ahhh well, you always have to give something to the public to get them behind your plans ... this time they just lied about WMD´s ...

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill...-iraq-lie.html

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

----------
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002

We know where the WMD's are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.

Donald Rumsfeld
ABC Interview
March 30, 2003

Our intelligence officials estimate that Saddam Hussein had the materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent.

George W. Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003

Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.

George W. Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002

Well, there is no question that we have evidence and information that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, biological and chemical particularly . . . all this will be made clear in the course of the operation, for whatever duration it takes.

Ari Fleisher
Press Briefing
March 21, 2003

We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.

George W. Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003

There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. And . . . as this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them.

Gen. Tommy Franks
Press Conference
March 22, 2003

--------------------

You mean its wrong 100% of the time, but only.. conveniently.. when it being wrong is to your political advantage.

Do you seriously believe that the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and multiple four star Generals as well as Congressmen on the Intelligence committees are so stupid that they would publically predicate a war on WMDs knowing that WMDs would not be found? Isn't it more logical to assume that is the intel they were provided?

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:37 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Do you seriously believe that the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and multiple four star Generals as well as Congressmen on the Intelligence committees are so stupid that they would publically predicate a war on WMDs knowing that WMDs would not be found?

hahahaha, Bush apologists are so pathetic. Where did I, or any of the Bush doubters for that matter, imply that they knew these weapons wouldn't be found?

As usual, you are playing the staw man card.

People don't lie in these circumstances because they know their lies will be found out, nitwit, they stretch the truth in the beginning because they really believe that evidence will be found later to support them. In many cases, if they guess right, politicians get away with it.

Fact is they were so gung-ho about going to war they played fast and loose with the truth in the belief that their lies would be vindicated after the war, and that no one would ever know that they weren't as sure about the WMD's as they appeared to be beforehand.

unfortunately it hasn't turned out that way, so now they have to use the intelligence community as a scapegoat.

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

hahahaha, Bush apologists are so pathetic. Where did I, or any of the doubters, imply that they knew these weapons wouldn't be found?

As usual, you are playing the staw man card.

The administration believed it would find WMD's after the war, but not because of any rock solid intelligence. Which is where the deception comes in.

They were so gung-ho about going to war they were willing to play fast and loose with the truth in the belief that their lies would be vindicated after the war, and no one would ever know that they weren't as sure as they appeared to be beforehand.

And if the Congressional intel committes conclude that the administration was provided with intel that concluded Iraq had WMDs are the afore mentioned people still lying or couldn't it be that they were provided more intel?

sacX · 06-16-2003, 01:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Do you seriously believe that the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and multiple four star Generals as well as Congressmen on the Intelligence committees are so stupid that they would publically predicate a war on WMDs knowing that WMDs would not be found? Isn't it more logical to assume that is the intel they were provided?

yes.

Mr.Fiction · 06-16-2003, 01:42 AM

Another pathfinder thread about how Bush would never lie.

spamofon · 06-16-2003, 01:44 AM

i fucked theking

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:46 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

And if the Congressional intel committes conclude that the administration was provided with intel that concluded Iraq had WMDs are the afore mentioned people still lying or couldn't it be that they were provided more intel?

lol Don't you watch the news? Several members of the intelligence community have already stated that they were under tremendous pressure by the administration to find WMD evidence that wasn't there.

The ploy should be obvious.. use backdoor pressure to force intelligence agencies to tell you the weapons might be there, then if they aren't found, you can use the intelligence people as a scapegoat.

evilpurple · 06-16-2003, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Do you seriously believe that the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, Powell, Rice, and multiple four star Generals as well as Congressmen on the Intelligence committees are so stupid that they would publically predicate a war on WMDs knowing that WMDs would not be found? Isn't it more logical to assume that is the intel they were provided?

Given the way they have behave, I would say it's more logical to assume that they would say whatever they believed neccessary to get the results they wanted: Support for war against Iraq. I don't think whether their statements are true or not even entered into their consideration - only whether they could be defended later.

If they'd gotten more public support by saying that small green martians had invaded Iraq and they needed to save mankind, I'm sure we'd heard that too. The reaction of people like you makes it quite easy to get away with lies and more lies.

Sure, there is absolutely a _possibility_ that they actually believed there were WMD's there. There's even a possibility there actually was WMD's there. But fact is, so far they haven't been found, despite statements engineered to at least give the impression that there were rock hard proof (which would indicate that one knows WHERE they are as well, or they couldn't know whether they'd later been disposed of).

Given the statements that have been coming out of the US government it appears extremely likely that someone has at the very least been stretching the truth, or done a very ad job at fact checking. Whether it's the administration or the intelligence community? I would say the administration, for the very simple reason that the CIA recommended AGAINST a war, and the Rumsfeld and in particular Wolfowitz are well known to have wanted a reshaping of the Middle East for years and years.

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

Moron. Haven't you been watching the news? Several members of the intelligence community have already stated that they were under tremendous pressure by the administration to find WMD evidence that wasn't there.

The ploy should be obvious.. use backdoor pressure to force intelligence agencies to tell you the weapons might be there, then if they aren't found, you can use the intelligence people as a scapegoat.

No one from any intelligence agency has publically said that they were "under tremendous pressure by the administration to find WMD evidence that wasn't there". This is a media report using un-named "sources".

ThunderBalls · 06-16-2003, 01:50 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by spamofon
i fucked theking

slavdogg · 06-16-2003, 01:51 AM

Iraq's WMD are in Syria or in worst case in Belarus

Saddam and his sons are in one of those places as well

small chanse that they might be in N Korea or Lybia

4Pics · 06-16-2003, 01:52 AM

We could have just planted the weapons there and went oh we found some. Well they still could plant them I guess.

Centurion · 06-16-2003, 01:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

hahahaha, Bush apologists are so pathetic. Where did I, or any of the Bush doubters for that matter, imply that they knew these weapons wouldn't be found?

As usual, you are playing the staw man card.

People don't lie in these circumstances because they know their lies will be found out, nitwit, they stretch the truth in the beginning because they really believe that evidence will be found later to support them. In many cases, if they guess right, politicians get away with it.

Fact is they were so gung-ho about going to war they played fast and loose with the truth in the belief that their lies would be vindicated after the war, and that no one would ever know that they weren't as sure about the WMD's as they appeared to be beforehand.

unfortunately it hasn't turned out that way, so now they have to use the intelligence community as a scapegoat.

Right on bro!
But you know the king..."My Bush Right or Wrong!"

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 01:55 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

No one from any intelligence agency has publically said that they were "under tremendous pressure by the administration to find WMD evidence that wasn't there". This is a media report using un-named "sources".

Tell me some more lies...

--------

"Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research working on weapons, said it appeared to him that intelligence had been shaped "from the top down."

"The normal processing of establishing accurate intelligence was sidestepped" in the runup to invading Iraq, said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector who is president of the Institute for Science and International Security and who deals with U.S. intelligence officers"

--------

Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of Central Intelligence Agency counterterrorist operations, said he knew of serving intelligence officers who blame the Pentagon for playing up "fraudulent" intelligence, "a lot of it sourced from the Iraqi National Congress of Ahmad Chalabi."

---------

"This team, self-mockingly called the Cabal, "cherry-picked the intelligence stream" in a bid to portray Iraq as an imminent threat, said Patrick Lang, a former head of worldwide human intelligence gathering for the Defense Intelligence Agency, which coordinates military intelligence.

The DIA was "exploited and abused and bypassed in the process of making the case for war in Iraq based on the presence of WMD," or weapons of mass destruction, he added in a phone interview. He said the CIA had "no guts at all" to resist the allegedly deliberate skewing of intelligence by a Pentagon that he said was now dominating U.S. foreign policy. "

---------

And that is only what I found in the top 5 hits on my Google search. There have been, and will be, more.

funkmaster · 06-16-2003, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by slavdogg
Iraq's WMD are in Syria or in worst case in Belarus

Saddam and his sons are in one of those places as well

small chanse that they might be in N Korea or Lybia

... may I call you ... donald ???

theking · 06-16-2003, 01:57 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr.Fiction
Another pathfinder thread about how Bush would never lie.

I of course know that President Bush would lie...just as every President in my life time has been caught lying...and at least three have lied about war.

FYI

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by theking
It is difficult for me to understand why some of you people are so obessed with PF. It is difficult for me to understand why you cannot accept the fact that a seventy year old man died of a stroke. Doing a quick search of PF's posts I quickly found at least one post where he had spoke about having had strokes.

On 07-02-2002 PF posted this and actually understated the extent of damage that having strokes had caused him. He had many strokes over a period of several years. It was clear to those that knew him that his memory had been affected, but probably not as clear to those that did not know him as he would have appeared to still be sharp to them. The last stroke that he had prior to his death left him partially paralyzed and with slurred speech. The doctor had told us that he would undoubedtly have a stroke that would kill him and there was not alot that could be done about it. We, the family, were prepared for his death on any given day. He also was a diabetic. At least two people that are members of this board knew him (three counting me) and at least one other member other than myself has posted that he is in fact dead. Read it, learn it, know it and get the fuck over it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Pathfinder

Actually this is new information that I cannot recall ever hearing about. I am old and I have had a few minor strokes that have affected my memory to some extent, so I am not intellectually as sharpe as I used to be. It is possible that this info disappeared as did the "piano lessons".

I am intrigued by it and will read some more about it. One thing I did run across on one of the links:

http://www.thethresher.com/indiscreet.html

"The most frequently cited and circulated source of Bush-Nazi investigations/conspiranoia, George Bush-The Unauthorized Biography (a biography of George Herbert Walker Bush) by Webster Griffin Tarpley and Anton Chaitkin, published in 1992, while well-documented, is also the most suspect. The problem is that Tarpley and Chaitkin are colleagues of the political cult leader Lyndon LaRouche. Not surprisingly, they insist on overlaying otherwise solidly researched data with wildly speculative interpretations. The book, originally published by LaRouche's Executive Intelligence Review, though "out of print," is ubiquitous on the web, and freely used and quoted by Bush conspiranoia buffs of all persuasions."

This makes me think that alot of what is said about this subject will have to be taken with a grain of salt, but apparently the government did take control of the company.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Thank you for the compliment. PF was a great man, a unique man, a mans man, and a warrior. I have spent most of my life trying to emmulate him (unsuccessfully I might add), may he rest in peace.

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

Tell me some more lies...

--------

"Greg Thielmann, who retired in September after 25 years in the State Department, the last four in the Bureau of Intelligence and Research working on weapons, said it appeared to him that intelligence had been shaped "from the top down."

"The normal processing of establishing accurate intelligence was sidestepped" in the runup to invading Iraq, said David Albright, a former U.N. weapons inspector who is president of the Institute for Science and International Security and who deals with U.S. intelligence officers"

--------

Vince Cannistraro, a former chief of Central Intelligence Agency counterterrorist operations, said he knew of serving intelligence officers who blame the Pentagon for playing up "fraudulent" intelligence, "a lot of it sourced from the Iraqi National Congress of Ahmad Chalabi."

---------

"This team, self-mockingly called the Cabal, "cherry-picked the intelligence stream" in a bid to portray Iraq as an imminent threat, said Patrick Lang, a former head of worldwide human intelligence gathering for the Defense Intelligence Agency, which coordinates military intelligence.

The DIA was "exploited and abused and bypassed in the process of making the case for war in Iraq based on the presence of WMD," or weapons of mass destruction, he added in a phone interview. He said the CIA had "no guts at all" to resist the allegedly deliberate skewing of intelligence by a Pentagon that he said was now dominating U.S. foreign policy. "

---------

And that is only what I found in the top 5 hits on my Google search. There have been, and will be, more.

Not a single active intel person on that list...and the media report referred to those that are still active.

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 02:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Not a single active intel person on that list...and the media report referred to those that are still active.

Can't you read? The guy who retired from the State department and the weapons inspector were both serving when Bush started pressing the WMD issue last year.

Do you think active intelligence people could speak up without losing their jobs and/or any chance of advancement if Bush was reelected?

Even you aren't stupid enough to believe that.

And, of course, not a single former intelligence person on that list really knows anything, all of them are lying about their knowledge and their active contacts just for publicity and because they hate bush, right?

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:04 AM

FYI I am not a fan of the President...did not vote for him...and will not vote for him and seriously hope that he is not re-elected.

Paul Markham · 06-16-2003, 02:06 AM

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2970784.stm

What you all have to remember is theking lives in his own world where Presidents are honest men like George Washington and Abe Lincoln.

Presidents do not lie, Clinton never had sex with Monica, Nixon never heard the Watergate tapes. They bend the truth until it's a joke.

theking also lives in a world where killing thousands of innocent people is acceptable.

Imagine someone walking into your house and shooting your Mother because they thought you was going to hurt them. Think of it in that context, because this is how a lot of Iraqi's are thinking.

That is how it happened, the bombs sent to the restaurant where the thought Saddam was killed waiters and cooks.

But you would take up arms and protect your house and your mother or you would take revenge?

Well the next suicide bomber who hits a US target is not so different is he?

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

Do you think active intelligence people could speak up without losing their jobs and/or any chance of advancement if Bush was reelected?

Even you aren't stupid enough to believe that.

Of course they could not speak out in a negative manner with out losing their job...but there have been those that have spoke out in the past

Quote:

And, of course, not a single former intelligence person on that list really knows anything, all of them are lying about their knowledge and their active contacts just for publicity and because they hate bush, right?

Could very well be the case or just disgruntled ex employees...who knows...certainly not you. They are not important...as they are not current...but there are those that are...and if they begin to speak out it will have meaning.

Centurion · 06-16-2003, 02:11 AM

King..wtf is the point of this thread/your question?

If the REPUBLICAN MAJORITY on the committee votes 7-6 that yadda yadda yadda..that supposedly proves WHAT?

"Tilting windmills in the wind.."

Gutterboy · 06-16-2003, 02:12 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking
They are not important...as they are not current...but there are those that are...and if they begin to speak out it will have meaning.

Why do I bother?

Thwump!

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:14 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2970784.stm

What you all have to remember is theking lives in his own world where Presidents are honest men like George Washington and Abe Lincoln.

Presidents do not lie, Clinton never had sex with Monica, Nixon never heard the Watergate tapes. They bend the truth until it's a joke.

theking also lives in a world where killing thousands of innocent people is acceptable.

Imagine someone walking into your house and shooting your Mother because they thought you was going to hurt them. Think of it in that context, because this is how a lot of Iraqi's are thinking.

That is how it happened, the bombs sent to the restaurant where the thought Saddam was killed waiters and cooks.

But you would take up arms and protect your house and your mother right or you would take revenge?

Well the next suicide bomber who hits a US target is not so different is he?

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

I of course know that President Bush would lie...just as every President in my life time has been caught lying...and at least three have lied about war.

Pay attention Clueless.

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:15 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Gutterboy

Why do I bother?

Thwump!

You really shouldn't...hatred of America has blinded you.

mule · 06-16-2003, 02:16 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking
At least two people that are members of this board knew him

So you keep saying. Who are they?

Paul Markham · 06-16-2003, 02:18 AM

And this guy has nick named me "Clueless" I look on that as the best compliment any one has ever paid me here.

Paul Markham · 06-16-2003, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mule
So you keep saying. Who are they?

theking and pathfinder. You have not figured that one out yet?

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mule
So you keep saying. Who are they?

One will identify himself if and when he chooses and the other already has and is a well known member of this board. Do a fucking search dumb "ASS".

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
theking and pathfinder. You have not figured that one out yet?

Read the post below Clueless.

mule · 06-16-2003, 02:20 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

One will identify himself if and when he chooses and the other already has and is a well known member of this board. Do a fucking search dumb "ASS".

Can't you ever answer a question?

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by charly
And this guy has nick named me "Clueless" I look on that as the best compliment any one has ever paid me here.

That is because you are not very bright...Clueless.

Centurion · 06-16-2003, 02:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

Pay attention Clueless.

Note: In EVERY thread when King starts losing the argument, he always tries to nail you to the wall with his vicious retorts!

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:22 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mule

Can't you ever answer a question?

I did.

mule · 06-16-2003, 02:29 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

I did.

Quoting yourself and two unnamed sources to prove that you aren't pathfinder makes your answer extremely credible, yes.

Paul Markham · 06-16-2003, 02:32 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by theking

I did.

You see how he answers questions, so we should not be surprised when he see's nothing wrong in Bush side stepping the truth.

He is lying I do not know anyone here other than him who knew PF, when asked a direct question he gives an indirect answer.

No you did not answer the question. Two reasons;

(1) You are lying.
(2) You are lying.

When you say they knew him, they met him or swapped emails? Or maybe bodily fluids.

I got it theking and PF were lovers in the army together.

Paul Markham · 06-16-2003, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Centurion

Note: In EVERY thread when King starts losing the argument, he always tries to nail you to the wall with his vicious retorts!

This from an ex soldier, what corp were you in? Catering, Admin or Latrines.

theking · 06-16-2003, 02:34 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by mule

Quoting yourself and two unnamed sources to prove that you aren't pathfinder makes your answer extremely credible, yes.

I am not here to prove anything to anyone...I use the board for my amusement...and do not give a fuck if you find any answer I give to any question to be credible. If you are interested use the fucking search feature...I get bored with rehashing the same shit over and over.

06-16-2003, 01:00 AM	#1
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	Did the administration lie about WMDs being in Iraq? All of you haters keep accusing the President, Chaney, Rumsfeld, and Powell of lying about WMDs. The House and Senate Intelligence Committees are reviewing intel reports. If they conclude that the intel from the various agencies indicated that Iraq had WMD's will you still say that President Bush and the others were lying? __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

06-16-2003, 01:51 AM	#23
slavdogg Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 3,570	Iraq's WMD are in Syria or in worst case in Belarus Saddam and his sons are in one of those places as well small chanse that they might be in N Korea or Lybia __________________ Adult Traffic for Sale

06-16-2003, 02:04 AM	#31
theking Nice Kitty Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: The good old USA!!! Posts: 21,053	FYI I am not a fan of the President...did not vote for him...and will not vote for him and seriously hope that he is not re-elected. __________________ When you're running down my country hoss...you're walking on the fighting side of me! FOR THE LYING LOWLIFE POSTING AS PATHFINDER...https://gfy.com/fucking-around-and-pr...athfinder.html

06-16-2003, 02:06 AM	#32
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/2970784.stm What you all have to remember is theking lives in his own world where Presidents are honest men like George Washington and Abe Lincoln. Presidents do not lie, Clinton never had sex with Monica, Nixon never heard the Watergate tapes. They bend the truth until it's a joke. theking also lives in a world where killing thousands of innocent people is acceptable. Imagine someone walking into your house and shooting your Mother because they thought you was going to hurt them. Think of it in that context, because this is how a lot of Iraqi's are thinking. That is how it happened, the bombs sent to the restaurant where the thought Saddam was killed waiters and cooks. But you would take up arms and protect your house and your mother or you would take revenge? Well the next suicide bomber who hits a US target is not so different is he? __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70 Last edited by charly; 06-16-2003 at 02:13 AM..

06-16-2003, 02:18 AM	#39
Paul Markham Too old to care Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: On the sofa, watching TV or doing my jigsaws. Posts: 52,943	And this guy has nick named me "Clueless" I look on that as the best compliment any one has ever paid me here. __________________ Blowout deal. 880 videos, 2,400 image sets, plus many RAW videos. $500. PM me for a deal. Skype Paulmarkham70

06-16-2003, 01:02 AM	#2
4Pics Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 7,952	Weapons were there, they were moved prior to the war. Forgot to mention, we sold them to them so we know they had them.

06-16-2003, 01:03 AM	#3
Gutterboy So Fucking Banned Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Dis Posts: 4,751	Like Ollie North taking the heat for Reagan, this administration will attempt to blame its lies on the intelligence community.

06-16-2003, 01:25 AM	#10
4Pics Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 7,952	I believe either they are in Iran or Syria. Very easy to get it out without us knowing, they've been able to hide it from the UN for how long?

06-16-2003, 01:31 AM	#12
funkmaster So Fucking Banned Join Date: Sep 2001 Location: shell beach Posts: 7,938	reminds me pretty much of iraqies killing kuwait babies in the first gulf war ... ahhh well, you always have to give something to the public to get them behind your plans ... this time they just lied about WMD´s ... http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill...-iraq-lie.html

06-16-2003, 01:42 AM	#17
Mr.Fiction Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Free Speech Land Posts: 9,484	Another pathfinder thread about how Bush would never lie.

06-16-2003, 01:44 AM	#18
spamofon Confirmed User Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Toronto Posts: 2,999	i fucked theking

06-16-2003, 01:52 AM	#24
4Pics Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Posts: 7,952	We could have just planted the weapons there and went oh we found some. Well they still could plant them I guess.

06-16-2003, 02:11 AM	#34
Centurion Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: SeATtle Posts: 6,033	King..wtf is the point of this thread/your question? If the REPUBLICAN MAJORITY on the committee votes 7-6 that yadda yadda yadda..that supposedly proves WHAT? "Tilting windmills in the wind.."