Message-ID: <45081507.1040601@sdf.lonestar.org>
Date: Wed, 13 Sep 2006 10:26:15 -0400
From: bkfsec <bkfsec@....lonestar.org>
To: Throwaway1@...umbus.rr.com
Cc: full-disclosure@...ts.grok.org.uk
Subject: Re: RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is
	apt	for this

Throwaway1@...umbus.rr.com wrote:

>
>It's not a joke Gary.
>If you are attempting to make the claim that Saddam NEVER had WMD you are
>either Profoundly Misinformed, Astonishingly Ignorant of Late 20th Century
>History; or simply Lying.
>  
>
Wow.  How utterly intellectually dishonest of you...

Saying that the Bush administration knowingly lied about Weapons of Mass 
Destruction is *NOT* saying that Saddam never had WMD.  What planet do 
you live on?  Are you really that fucking dense to believe that people 
claiming the administration lied believe Saddam never had WMDs?

This is an old right-wing, dittohead radio talking point from 2003 that 
never was grounded in reality and shows exactly where you're coming from.


>
>We never did find the stockpiles we were looking for. The closest we came
>was a shitload of bunkers filled with nerve agents that were still in their
>unmixed binary form; and some bio-warfare reference strains. 
>  
>
Disproven... you fell into a hoax yourself.. or really, you bought the 
rhetoric which took bits and pieces of a weapons inspection report and 
piecemealed it to death until it said "WMDs" when it didn't.


>So that means that either damn near every major intelligence agency in the
>world was wrong at the SAME TIME, or Saddam did a better job of hidin' 'em
>than we did of lookin' for 'em.
>  
>
Bullshit.  Not all intelligence agencies agreed on the existance or 
number of WMDs in his possession.  In fact, there was significant 
disagreement in our own governmental agencies regarding those points.  
In fact, our own former weapons inspecters made statements saying that 
there's no way he had the levels that we were claiming.  The UN weapons 
inspection team disagreed with those figures and, golly gee, they might 
have a good reason to have disagreed.

Yet again you dredge up another bullshit right-wing talking point that 
is not grounded in reality...

I don't need to listen to you, all I need to do is turn on the fucking 
radio and switch to my local fascist propaganda channel.


>
>Now I realize that there are a lot of people who don't like GWB. That's
>fine with me. Not my problem. What IS my problem is those same people
>sacrificing LOGIC and COMMON SENSE on the alter of their rage at Bush and
>as a result perpetuating a completely false history of the past 5-6 years. 
>
>  
>
Bullshit. You know what's sacrificing logic and common sense?  Ignoring 
the facts in front of you, which is precisely what you're doing.

Common sense says that there's no way he could have still had WMDs that 
our own people destroyed.  Common sense says you question the validity 
of sources used to provide proof.  Common sense says you interpret all 
of the data, not piecemeal specific portions of it.

You say you have a problem with people creating a conclusion and picking 
and choosing evidence to support it?  How ironic that that's precisely 
what the Bush administration did.  You'd have to be a moron not to see 
that at this point.  And not only that, but at this point you're not 
just a moron, you're also a hypocrite for defending the Bush 
administration for doing precisely what you're accusing the rest of us 
for doing.

Hey buddy, you chose the wrong side.  Don't take it out on us.

             -bkfsec


_______________________________________________
Full-Disclosure - We believe in it.
Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html
Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists