quote:SARGAT, Iraq, April 4 � Preliminary tests conducted by MSNBC.com indicate that the deadly toxins ricin and botulinum were present on two items found at a camp in a remote mountain region of northern Iraq allegedly used as a terrorist training center by Islamic militants with ties to the al-Qaida terrorist network
quote:The field tests, developed by Osborn Scientific Group in Lakeside, Ariz., are regarded by some experts as very effective and have been used by U.N. weapons inspectors and federal government agents around the Sept. 11, 2001, attack site in New York City.
quote:Although U.S. officials for months have leveled charges that the Ansar al-Islam and al-Qaida militants were producing poisons in northern Iraq, it wasn�t until this week that specialist U.S. teams were able to gain access to the Sargat camp to test for traces of biological and chemical weapons.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Well, first off, I'm going to refrain from placing my confidence in a test carried out by MSNBC. I'm not saying I think they're necessarily wrong, but I'm not going to assume they're right.
But, if they're right, for the sake of arguement... We've found that a terrorist organization in a remote area of Iraqi Kurdistan (almost in Iran) had at least traces of agents used in chemical and biological weapons? What, exactly, is that supposed to prove? This, of course, is assuming that we aren't the ones who bombed them w/ the stuff in the first place...
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
Could have been executed; there is also evidence of torture.
The Iraqis have claimed that it is storage for bodies of soldiers from the Iran-Iraq war that have recently been returned. Iran has said that some of the remains may be their soldiers.
-------------------- "I am an almost extinct breed, an old-fashioned gentleman, which means I can be a cast-iron son-of-a-bitch when it suits me." --Jubal Harshaw
Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged
"I think this discovery shows what kind of guy is running this country. "This stuff is just dumped in the Euphrates without any concern for the many people who drink and wash with water from the river."
And this differs from the US how? In that the dangerous chemicals being dumped into the waterways are different ones?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
You see, what they dump in there water are "terror toxins," or, in other words, "bad toxins." What we dump in our rivers here are "good toxins." See, there's a difference.
posted
Actually around 10:30am (Baghdad time), right after the U.S. destroyed Saddam's self portrayed "Chief Crazyhorse" statue, their propaganda minister claimed to have poisoned the U.S. troops that 'weren't' in Baghdad.
Now obviously EVERYTHING that piece of shit was saying was a lie...but does it really look good for him/Iraq to say to the rest of the world that the they 'poisoned' American troops, in a lie, mind you, when in fact a good chunk of the point of this whole crazy war is to essentially prove that the Iraqis had such "poisons"??
First they lie about not having chemical weapons and then they lie about using them to kill US soldiers...that man much jerk off to his own voice because I really don't see him possibly accomplishing much else with what he is saying, especially when US tanks were only a few blocks away.
Hell, I bet if a US tank rolled by in the background while he was giving one of his interviews, he would probably still tell the world Saddam is baking him brownies in the kitchen rather than admit the ignominy of defeat.
-------------------- Hey, it only took 13 years for me to figure out my password...
Registered: Jan 2003
| IP: Logged
quote:Originally posted by Futurama Guy: but does it really look good for him/Iraq to say to the rest of the world that the they 'poisoned' American troops, in a lie, mind you, when in fact a good chunk of the point of this whole crazy war is to essentially prove that the Iraqis had such "poisons"??
Because a large portion of the rest of the world doesn't care about that anymore. They care about the fact that the US has steamrollered in without (in their opinion) sufficient evidence to warrant such an action. They care that the US has taken this action without support from the larger international community. They care that the US has (possibly) broken international law. The argument about whether Saddam actually has illegal weapons anymore is moot.
Or, alternatively, if the police started breaking down doors and searching houses, without warrents, simply because they think that some of those houses might have cannabis in, do you think it'll matter if they actually turn up some cannabis, when the search was illegal in the first place?
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Interesting analogy. If this war were a police investigation in the US, any weapons we find there would be inadmissable in court, Saddam Hussein would be released for lack of evidence, and he couldn't be tried again because of double jeopardy.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, the real reason that the "large portion of the rest of the world doesn't care about that anymore" is that when they started to realize that they were going to be proven wrong, that Hussein had retained chemical weapons and was daily misleading their much-vaunted "inspectors," they had to change the main focus of their argument.
Because it was either that, or stock up on K-Y jelly to make it less painful when the US shoved all the chemical weapons it would find in Iraq up their collective asses.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
They WERE separate articles. Looks as though they've been merged.
-------------------- "The best defense is not a good offense. The best defense is a terrifyingly accurate and devastatingly powerful offense, with multiply-overlapping kill zones and time-on-target artillery strikes." -- Laurence, Archangel of the Sword
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
quote: April 7 � The U.S. military is testing samples from a site in Iraq where soldiers found possible chemical weapons, defense officials said Monday. Embedded journalists in Iraq reported instances where banned weaponry was found, including on some 20 rockets armed with warheads containing deadly sarin and mustard gas that were apparently ready to fire.
So they have this stuff. They know the USA is going to kick their collective asses. They know if the stuff is found, and Sadam is captured, that he and all of his captured cronies are going to stand trial for war crimes against the Kurds.
I don't know about you, but if I knew it was going to be my ass anyway, I'd have used the things and taken as many people with me as possible. I had figured that we would find WMD the hard way, by having them go off in the midst of Coalition Troops.
Are the Iraqi's so incompetant?
-------------------- Sparky:: Think! Question Authority, Authoritatively. “Believe nothing of what you hear, and only half of what you see.” EMSparks
Shalamar: To save face, keep lower half shut.
Registered: Jun 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Of course, while it's quite acceptable to think the Iraqis would run truckloads of civilians at US checkpoints or bomb their own marketplaces and leave bits of cruise missile lying around as evidence, to imagine that the US would start planting WMD caches (which the Iraqis had unaccountably failed to use) is totally beyond the pale. The good guys would never do something like that.
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic
