Text 16657, 147 rader
Skriven 2005-11-20 22:12:02 av Raymond Yates (1:3613/48)
  Kommentar till text 16619 av Michiel van der Vlist (2:280/5555)
Ärende: Collateral Damage
=========================
 MV>>> The satellites see everywhere. Such a big digging operation
 MV>>> would leave traces that can be seen by the infrared sensors in
 MV>>> the satellites.

 >>>> one good sandstorm, and the traces are gone..

 MV>>> The satellites will already have spotted the places of unusual
 MV>>> acitivity.

 >> Unless it looks innocuous. Absent "Ground Truth," buildings
 >> look like...buildings.

 MV> U=In the middle of desert nowhere? One day the building is there and
 MV> the next day it is gone? Does that look innocuous?

Only if it's gone. Suppose it's just deserted. there slot of building like
that i Ira, I have seen the overhead photos

 >>>> Common pesticides. they found gallons of those, /thousands/ of
 >>>> gallons.. Saddam had a high-security "pesticide" plant, wiht
 >>>> stuff stored in bunkers..

 MV>>> yet, the inspector said that there was noting to show there were
 MV>>> chemical weapons.

 >> Have you read the reports?

 MV> Not all of it. Just the summaroies actually.

Read the reoprts from the troops that found it, when the test-strips tested
positve for nerve agents, the inspectrs calimed otherwise, but the test strips
were  double-checked. Insectisides are nerve agents, some of them..

 >> some of the inspectors put really confining limits on what was
 >> and was not Chemical Weapons. I have the snealing suspicion that
 >> there was an Agenda afoot.

 MV> What agenda?

 MV> They were George Bush' own inspectors remember. The only agenda that
 MV> seesm plausible is that they would - at all cost - like to prove the
 MV> WMD's were there.

Not everyone in the government is fond of George, y'know. There are agendas.
I've seen it when the Civil Service disagrees with a Policy, and the wheels
grind to a halt. Nothing provable, but it happened..

 MV>>> There must be hundreds if not thousands of people involved.
 MV>>> You can't get them all, there are always a few who manage to
 MV>>> get away. Or who tell someone else before they are silenced.
 MV>>> And even if you manage to kill them all, how do you get rid
 MV>>> of the killers? And the killer's killers?

 >> Diffcult, but not impossible. there are people that would be
 >> executioners willingly and keep silent, knowing the consequences.

 MV> What consequences? Saddam is neutralised, they don't have to fear him
 MV> any more.

No, but they could be prosecuted for their actions.

 >>>>>> All you need is one night and a convoy, and poof, they're gone.

 MV>>>>> Without a trace showing they were there? And with all the
 MV>>>>> people knowing about it remaining silent? I don't buy that.

 >> Of course not. but it's possible nonetheless. and if the
 >> trucks are pre-loaded, the drivers present no problem as they
 >> don't know anything.

 MV> The drivers would know they were transporting something they were not
 MV> supposed to know what it was. And why would *they* remain silent?

 MV> History tells us that in the end there is alway some who talk. If only
 MV> posthumously. In the end it always comes out.

 MV>>> Even so: Saddam was captured alive and I am sure he was
 MV>>> thouroughly "debriefed".

 MV>>> Don't you think that by now his "debriefers" would have
 MV>>> "persuaded" him to tell about the hiding places if there was
 MV>>> someting to tell.

 >> Possibly not, he's been handeled with relative kid gloves.

 MV> I am sure he was offered some deal: tell us where the WMD's are and we
 MV> will see that you do not get the death sentence.

 MV> When that failed, he got the treatment with the glove off.

 >>>> I noticed no one saw my earlier post about the items that
 >>>> /were/ found.

 MV>>> Perhaps the readers get tired of reading old reporst that turned
 MV>>> out to be based on false information.

 >> Or perhaps they choose not to believe what they see. and what
 >> about the new reports?

 MV> What about them? I think you (the USA) has manouvred itself on a "cry
 MV> wolfe" situation.

I can agree with that, sadly.

 >>>> I'm not going to repost it, y'all can look on your own, it was
 >>>> within the last few weeks In a nutshell it quoted the Duelfer
 >>>> an Kay reports, and delineated the items that /were/ found,
 >>>> including parts of nuclear enrichment centrifuges,

 MV>>> Them aluminium tubes again. Debunked long ago.

 >> And later verified /by testing/ that they were more then
 >> suitable for centrifuges, by an outside nuclear agency. In France.

 MV> You'r clutching at straws....

Not me, I just report facts. I'm not advocating anything, just saying what's
out there.


 >>>> Chemicals that were "precursors" for chemical weapons

 MV>>> Every "precursor" for pesticides is also a "precursor' for
 MV>>> chemical weapons. Steel for a plow is steel for a sword.

 >> Exactly !

 MV> So presence of steel is not proof of presence of a sword.

True, but.. when you have a bunker full of "pesticide" placed next to rocktes
capapble of carrying liquid agents, a conclusion could be drawn.. "pesticide"
does not require it be kept in bombproofs.

 MV> It looks like we are looking at this from totally different sides. You
 MV> seem to believe or at least to have believed at some time the WMD's
 MV> existed during or shortly before the invasion.

Based on the troops that had come down with Gulf War Syndrome after
sestroyting munitions in GUlf One, of course.

 MV> I and many, if not most people this side of the pond on the other
 MV> hand
 MV> never believed they were there in the first place.

The where did they all go?
---
 * Origin: Ray's Rocket Shop - Out to Launch (1:3613/48)