question

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 3/19/2003, 4:16 pm

it is the argument of the war hawk crowd that saddam hussein has chemical weapons and intends to use them.

i would just like to know what evidence you have been supplied with to prove this assertion. i'm only asking because i keep hearing that you've got some but i cannot seem to find any. so far, the best you've managed to come up with is:

a fox news report stating that saddam's troops are armed with chemical weapons
a quote from a french minister saying that the WMD programs are frozen. [ which would actually mean that saddam does not have chemical weapons, but whatever. ]

just curious as to see what the rest of it is.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 3/19/2003, 4:40 pm

Though there are an undeniably number of resources we do not have access to, here is just a sample of some we do:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 57,00.html

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/ ... 175407.asp

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/8105/8105notw4.html

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 3/19/2003, 5:08 pm

so basically you have one piece of hard evidence [ the unmanned plane, which is not, i might add, a weapon of mass destruction, or even capable of delivering a WMD across the ocean. ] and 3 or 4 counts of hearsay, especially that limp dicked attempt from fox.

would you setance a murder suspect to death based on that?

Ignignokt · Post by **Ignignokt** » 3/19/2003, 5:10 pm

ok let me ask you a question......... what HASN't saddam done to warrant his own death? he murders his own fucking people for christs sake. how can you even think that he deserves to live or to rule a country?

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 3/19/2003, 5:11 pm

no, he didn't. and even if he did that's neither here nor there considering your military is about to murder a whole bunch of his people.

Ignignokt · Post by **Ignignokt** » 3/19/2003, 5:12 pm

oh yea, all the people who rebelled against him in the early 90's , yea he didn't kill them did he?????

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 3/19/2003, 5:13 pm

they were violent revolutionaries and he's a violent governor

he killed them, sure. but tell me your government doesn't and hasn't done the same? because they have.....

Ignignokt · Post by **Ignignokt** » 3/19/2003, 5:28 pm

yes, we kill them , but we give them this thing called a trial first. you see, there they get a chance to defend themselves in a legal sense instead of being gunned down in a street.

you're starting a witch hunt , thats exactly what you're doing.

mosaik · Post by **mosaik** » 3/19/2003, 5:32 pm

yeah but has anybody accused of treason ever won?

and if the iraqi government gave his dissenters a trial, would you accept that?

happening fish · Post by **happening fish** » 3/19/2003, 6:42 pm

Shooting protestors in the streets is not much of a trial.

Corey · Post by **Corey** » 3/19/2003, 8:53 pm

chrisaddam hussein wrote:so basically you have one piece of hard evidence [ the unmanned plane, which is not, i might add, a weapon of mass destruction, or even capable of delivering a WMD across the ocean. ] and 3 or 4 counts of hearsay, especially that limp dicked attempt from fox.

would you setance a murder suspect to death based on that?

its no less hearsay than some of the "evidence" and "proof" I've seen you post in the past. Sorry I only posted 3 links. That doesn't mean this is ALL there is not to mention the countless number of documents that aren't public domain yet.

starvingeyes · Post by **starvingeyes** » 3/20/2003, 8:25 am

i don't have to proove saddam hussein doesn't have weapons. bush hs to prove that he does, can and will use them against the united states. he hasn't done that.

ClumsyMonkey.net

ClumsyMonkey.net

question

question