Jump to content

Theme© by Fisana
 

Photo

How is he going to prove it ?


  • Please log in to reply
24 replies to this topic

Poll: How is Powell going to prove it ? (0 member(s) have cast votes)

How is Powell going to prove it ?

  1. He is going to pull white rabbit out of a hat (4 votes [17.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 17.39%

  2. He knows from Pentangon where the weapons were delivered 10years ago (7 votes [30.43%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.43%

  3. The satelite discovered secret stash in the desert (1 votes [4.35%])

    Percentage of vote: 4.35%

  4. He had a dream ! (6 votes [26.09%])

    Percentage of vote: 26.09%

  5. Saddam called Bush and told him to make him pissed (5 votes [21.74%])

    Percentage of vote: 21.74%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:43 AM

....

U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell said on Wednesday he would next week present evidence proving Iraq still had weapons of mass destruction as well as linking Baghdad to Osama bin Laden's al Qaeda network


  • 0

#2 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:49 AM

....

But seriously.

Why on Earth the US admin. is coming out with the prove now ?
  • 0

#3 Uncle Sam

Uncle Sam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 134 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:57 AM

I want to see the evidence. I know it is there, they released the evidence verbally this morning, I want to see pictures of the SCUDS and the 8000 gallons of VX
  • 0

#4 Saddam

Saddam

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 4071 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:57 AM

I'm pretty sure that American proof is gonna look like Blair's dossier on Iraq last year.
  • 0

#5 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 07:15 AM

....

Accorrding to your location you are from Greece.
It is nice to see somebody from Greece here :)

"I know it is there"

.. it is also cool to see we have a visionary here on Forum.

Perhaps you can tell how did you come to 'know' ?

Thank you :D

....
  • 0

#6 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 08:32 AM

Originally posted by TSCRYPTO
...looks like we will get to see it soon.

I grand work of fiction, no doubt.

Directed by: Spielberg


:D
  • 0

#7 Guest__*

Guest__*
  • Guests

Posted 31 January 2003 - 08:39 AM

'manufactuured evidence' - ROTFLMAO!!!!

That's how it always is with you guys. USA has better documentation, pictures, evidence than anyone else in the world (They won't release ALL Intel - that's NEVER done by anyone), YET you guys just call it fake (EVEN BEFORE IT IS PRESENTED!). There IS NO form of evidence you guys would EVER accept and YOU KNOW IT! Name some form of evidence you'd accept. Video? You'd call it fake. Sat photos? You'd call it fake. Actual Iraqi Scientist spilling the beans - You'd call him a plant - AND FAKE! Yet the resolution and detail of any Photographic evidence would be second to none in the world - and you'd STILL call it fake. Oh that's right - we had Hollywood fake the moon shot!!! :D

But to cut to the real point. Iraq has not shown where they have destroyed the Bio-Chemo weapons they had 12 years ago. They also NEED to account for what they had - they haven't -it dissappeared - but NO evidence that it was ever destroyed - NOT ONLY THAT - they haven't EVEN offered any evidence of it being destroyed when asked.

The USA doesn't have to find their eveidence of destroyed stuff they had, IRAQ HAS TO SHOW IT WAS DESTROYED. I'm sure you'd accept a note from Saddam's mother that it was destroyed and what quantities though!
  • 0

#8 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 08:48 AM

....

Thank you for your post :D

Any comment from you on the timing?
Why the inspectors were not told about the evidence before ?

Thank you
  • 0

#9 Source

Source

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9046 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 09:56 AM

"'manufactuured evidence' - ROTFLMAO!!!!"

let me think, oh yeah, i have vague recollections of babies being hauled out of incubators. now who did that? oh yeah, saddam before the last 'war'. ummm, what was the name of the american president who promoted this lie?


perhaps you could remind me.
  • 0

#10 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 10:32 AM

Nice to see you "here"...by the style of writing it must be you, so let me congratulte you on : finding your moniker untouched :D
I hope you have not lost anything while moving houses :)
  • 0

#11 Marko

Marko

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:08 AM

Originally posted by JezMan
....
Any comment from you on the timing?
Why the inspectors were not told about the evidence before ?



Because said evidence was gleaned through the same channels that the US is currently using to monitor Iraqi preparations for the war, or the placement of weapons caches, for example?

Spill the beans too quick and all of a sudden, your source of intel can dry up just when you need it most - during the conflict.

But as Cheborneck pointed out to you, this is all beside the point. Implicit in your question is the assumption that the inspectors were there to play hide-and-seek with Saddam, and so needed "intelligence" to go find what's there.

That's not what the inspectors went to Iraq to do. They went there to verify, not engage in some fools errand with an uncooperative regime.

-Marko
  • 0

#12 Source

Source

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 9046 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:09 AM

hi jez,

i'm actually atossa but i decided to steal sources name.

i just have to make sure i never use CaPiTaLs.
  • 0

#13 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:19 AM

Thank you for your post. :D

I am not sure why did you go to such extend to tell me that the inspectors were only a play.

IMO if the inspectors were informed where the evidence is, the whole situation would be clearer. (Or maybe I live on diferent planet all together :))

Simply:
  • 0

#14 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:24 AM

...lol

It is you. But hardly recognizable with the beanie on...lol :D
  • 0

#15 Marko

Marko

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 26 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:50 AM

[QUOTE]Originally posted by JezMan
[B]Thank you for your post. :D

Simply:
  • 0

#16 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 12:00 PM

Thank you Marko.

No need to elaborate.

I read spy novels too.

tks :D
  • 0

#17 nitemere

nitemere

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 3986 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 06:19 PM

now every country has the right to defend it's self the problem is the united states has no legal right to ask a solvern nation to disarm and demand a war.

secondly when i wrote the former united states president of the united states george h.w. bush....sr. apout a conspericy with his own government he didn't act apon it. he did act apon how to run the war in iraq which i wrote in my letter. the first gulf war was an act of high treason in it's self as the second perpose action in iraq.

i hope the united states resorces does not go to war in irag but knowing personally how this current admistration is ran it will go through like the warmongers plan following a back burner plan of illegal agression.
  • 0

#18 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 31 January 2003 - 11:39 PM

[quote] The inspectors aren
  • 0

#19 SmallMind

SmallMind

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPip
  • 387 posts

Posted 01 February 2003 - 12:14 AM

US senators question Iraq evidence



http://news.bbc.co.u...cas/2711253.stm




US is misquoting my Iraq report, says Blix




http://www.smh.com.a...3804520548.html
  • 0

#20 JezMan

JezMan

    Registered User

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 117 posts

Posted 01 February 2003 - 12:21 AM

...not even a little comment ?

Thank you for the links....rushing to read it :)
  • 0




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Copyright © 2016 Pravda.Ru