Why does the left continue to HUMILIATE themselves on the WMD issue?

[IlarMeilyr]

A first tidbit from (of all sources) Wiki.

Criticism

Former Ambassador Wilson had claimed that he found no evidence of Saddam Hussein ever attempting or buying yellowcake uranium from Niger on his trip to Niger.

The Senate Select Committee on Intelligence suggested that the evidence Wilson found could be interpreted differently:
“

[Wilson's] intelligence report indicated that former Nigerien Prime Minister Ibrahim Mayaki was unaware of any contracts that had been signed between Niger and any rogue states for the sale of yellowcake while he was Prime Minister (1997-1999) or Foreign Minister (1996-1997). Mayaki said that if there had been any such contract during his tenure, he would have been aware of it. Mayaki said, however, that in June 1999, (REDACTED) businessman, approached him and insisted that Mayaki meet with an Iraqi delegation to discuss "expanding commercial relations" between Niger and Iraq. The intelligence report said that Mayaki interpreted 'expanding commercial relations' to mean that the delegation wanted to discuss uranium yellowcake sales. The intelligence report also said that "although the meeting took place, Mayaki let the matter drop due to the UN sanctions on Iraq".

Niger uranium forgeries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And by the way, Niger wasn't famous for many products if you don't count yellow cake and some weird form of onion.

Who knows why you call Joe Wilson's version of events, "bullshit,", but then rely on his word as proof that Iraq was seeking to purchase yellowcake, but be that as it may, you merely reiterated what I said earlier in post #204:

"There was no effort to purchase yellowcake. That was based on a forged document and a meeting between Iraqis and the Nigerian PM, who said he thought the Iraqis wanted to meet with him to inquire about purchasing yellowcake, but that it was never actually discussed." ~ faun, 2.27.2013​

Well, I'm sorry, but not discussing the purchase of Uranium is not evidence of an intent to purchase Uranium.

Now you said you would prove ... so prove it ...

DISCUSSING business with Niger is discussing the purchase of uranium. (Even you should be able to acknowledge they weren't actually discussing purchasing onions.)

And discussing the purchase of uranium IS an indication that Saddam was interested in creating some nuclear WMDs.

Now, you go ahead and prove that just because the Italian forged documents were almost certainly forgeries that Iraq had no interest in obtaining yellowcake.

 

[BlindBoo]

The documents might have been forged, and I am content to assume that they were.

And?

That does NOT (as you falsely claimed) mean that the claim that Iraq had sought yellowcake was BASED on those forgeries.

And we know (as I have already posted) that Iraq evidently DID seek additional yellowcake.

Plus we know that after the war we had to remove about 550 tons of yellowcake FROM Iraq.

We ALSO KNOW that Saddam had been attempting to build nuclear reactors.

So, do you have anything of merit to offer?

Turn off Fox
It's Bad New for America

France was building a Nuclear Power Plant in Iraq like the ones it built Israel years before. It began in 1976.

The Uranium ore was in Iraq at the time Israel bombed the shit out of that plant.

So yes in a way you are correct, Iraq did seek yellowcake for it's nuclear reactor, in the 70's

Stop listening to CNN. It's bad for whatever tiny bit of "mind" you have left in your head.

YES, Iraq did have nuclear ambitions and yes they did seek to procure additional yellowcake and no it was not to create "clean" energy in a land sitting on large oil deposits. It was for weaponry.

And while we know they had one in the 1970's that does not preclude the notion that they wanted to build one again.

Try using your mind and not simply relying on your comic-book liberal stereotypes.

Like I said France was building them one, just like the one they build one for Israel. Thanks to St. Raygun, Iraq had a Manhatten Project style N-bomb program hidden from the world. That one was bombed by the US actually during the 1st gulf war. His nuclear program never recovered as two of the highest ranking officials in President Bush(43) administration stated in 2001.

 

[Faun]

The documents might have been forged, and I am content to assume that they were.

And?

That does NOT (as you falsely claimed) mean that the claim that Iraq had sought yellowcake was BASED on those forgeries.

And we know (as I have already posted) tht Iraq evidently DID seek additional yellowcake.

Plus we know that after the war we had to remove about 550 tons of yellowcake FROM Iraq.

We ALSO KNOW that Saddam had been attempting to build nuclear reactors.

So, do you have anything of merit to offer?

The 550 tons of yellowcake were known about from long before and was not proof that Iraq was seeking to purchase yellowcake around the time we invaded. That yellowcake was from when Hussein started his nuclear program in the late 70's/early 80's. It was seized by U.N. weapons inspectors after the first Gulf War and after Bush went into Iraq, that yellowcake was found in the same location and condition as when it was first sealed by the U.N. more than a decade earlier.

At any rate, I'm still waiting for you to prove your claim.

Unlike you, I already have.

Go back. Re-read. For example, START here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/6881685-post212.html

Open your diminutive little "mind." Try to get your first glimmer of education beyond the propaganda you suckle at the tit of liberal media.

You've proven nothing. All you've done is regurgitate what I said earlier when I pointed out that Nigerian's PM met with some Iraqis but never discussed purchasing Uranium.

That is not proof by any stretch of the imagination that Iraq sought to purchase Uranium.

So do you have proof or not? You said you did, and frankly, I was actually expecting something substantiative. Not you relaying the version of events as told by Joe Wilson, which you earlier called, "bullshit."

So is that it? Is that all you've got? Please tell me you've got something?? To quote the great Harry Stamper ...

"And this is the best that you c - that the-the government, the *U.S. government* can come up with? I mean, you-you're NASA for cryin' out loud, you put a man on the moon, you're geniuses! You-you're the guys that think this shit up! I'm sure you got a team of men sitting around somewhere right now just thinking shit up and somebody backing them up! You're telling me you don't have a backup plan, that these eight boy scouts right here, that is the world's hope, that's what you're telling me?"​

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The 550 tons of yellowcake were known about from long before and was not proof that Iraq was seeking to purchase yellowcake around the time we invaded. That yellowcake was from when Hussein started his nuclear program in the late 70's/early 80's. It was seized by U.N. weapons inspectors after the first Gulf War and after Bush went into Iraq, that yellowcake was found in the same location and condition as when it was first sealed by the U.N. more than a decade earlier.

At any rate, I'm still waiting for you to prove your claim.

Unlike you, I already have.

Go back. Re-read. For example, START here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/6881685-post212.html

Open your diminutive little "mind." Try to get your first glimmer of education beyond the propaganda you suckle at the tit of liberal media.

You've proven nothing. All you've done is regurgitate what I said earlier when I pointed out that Nigerian's PM met with some Iraqis but never discussed purchasing Uranium.

That is not proof by any stretch of the imagination that Iraq sought to purchase Uranium.

So do you have proof or not? You said you did, and frankly, I was actually expecting something substantiative. Not you relaying the version of events as told by Joe Wilson, which you earlier called, "bullshit."

So is that it? Is that all you've got? Please tell me you've got something?? <<The rest of Fauny's insipid bullshit is snipped>>

Again. Unless you want to pretend that the discussion was over the unstated desire to purchase fucking onions, then it is crystal clear that there was a business overture to purchase uranium.

You are the one with nothing.

And it shows.

 

[Faun]

A first tidbit from (of all sources) Wiki.

Niger uranium forgeries - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And by the way, Niger wasn't famous for many products if you don't count yellow cake and some weird form of onion.

Who knows why you call Joe Wilson's version of events, "bullshit,", but then rely on his word as proof that Iraq was seeking to purchase yellowcake, but be that as it may, you merely reiterated what I said earlier in post #204:

"There was no effort to purchase yellowcake. That was based on a forged document and a meeting between Iraqis and the Nigerian PM, who said he thought the Iraqis wanted to meet with him to inquire about purchasing yellowcake, but that it was never actually discussed." ~ faun, 2.27.2013​

Well, I'm sorry, but not discussing the purchase of Uranium is not evidence of an intent to purchase Uranium.

Now you said you would prove ... so prove it ...

DISCUSSING business with Niger is discussing the purchase of uranium. (Even you should be able to acknowledge they weren't actually discussing purchasing onions.)

And discussing the purchase of uranium IS an indication that Saddam was interested in creating some nuclear WMDs.

That is the small thinking of the limited Conservative brain; which first reaches a desired conclusion and then works its way backwards to make said erroneous conclusion plausible.

In this case, your God given limitations not only preclude you from understanding that "expanding commercial relations" could have meant any of Niger's exports, but also you mentally block out the possibility that "expanding commercial relations" could have also have meant discussing Iraqi exports.

All we do know is that Niger selling Uranium to Iraq was never discussed.

Funniest part is -- that's your proof that Iraq sought to purchase Uranium!

Now, you go ahead and prove that just because the Italian forged documents were almost certainly forgeries that Iraq had no interest in obtaining yellowcake.

The evidence that Iraq was not seeking to obtain yellowcake lies in the fact that there is no evidence they were seeking to obtain yellowcake. The forged documents only serve to contribute to the lack of evidence. The onus is on you to prove your claim that, "in reality, no question but that some representatives of the Iraqi Government DID seek to purchase yellowcake."

 

[Faun]

Unlike you, I already have.

Go back. Re-read. For example, START here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/6881685-post212.html

Open your diminutive little "mind." Try to get your first glimmer of education beyond the propaganda you suckle at the tit of liberal media.

You've proven nothing. All you've done is regurgitate what I said earlier when I pointed out that Nigerian's PM met with some Iraqis but never discussed purchasing Uranium.

That is not proof by any stretch of the imagination that Iraq sought to purchase Uranium.

So do you have proof or not? You said you did, and frankly, I was actually expecting something substantiative. Not you relaying the version of events as told by Joe Wilson, which you earlier called, "bullshit."

So is that it? Is that all you've got? Please tell me you've got something?? <<The rest of Fauny's insipid bullshit is snipped>>

Again. Unless you want to pretend that the discussion was over the unstated desire to purchase fucking onions, then it is crystal clear that there was a business overture to purchase uranium.

You are the one with nothing.

And it shows.

Right, I have nothing ... I have no evidence that Iraq was trying to purchase yellowcake (which you said they already had 550 tons of the shit); but neither do you.

You have failed miserably to prove your claim that, "in reality, no question but that some representatives of the Iraqi Government DID seek to purchase yellowcake."

 

[IlarMeilyr]

You've proven nothing. All you've done is regurgitate what I said earlier when I pointed out that Nigerian's PM met with some Iraqis but never discussed purchasing Uranium.

That is not proof by any stretch of the imagination that Iraq sought to purchase Uranium.

So do you have proof or not? You said you did, and frankly, I was actually expecting something substantiative. Not you relaying the version of events as told by Joe Wilson, which you earlier called, "bullshit."

So is that it? Is that all you've got? Please tell me you've got something?? <<The rest of Fauny's insipid bullshit is snipped>>

Again. Unless you want to pretend that the discussion was over the unstated desire to purchase fucking onions, then it is crystal clear that there was a business overture to purchase uranium.

You are the one with nothing.

And it shows.

Right, I have nothing ... I have no evidence that Iraq was trying to purchase yellowcake (which you said they already had 550 tons of the shit); but neither do you.

You have failed miserably to prove your claim that, "in reality, no question but that some representatives of the Iraqi Government DID seek to purchase yellowcake."

YOU rejecting the evidence is not the same thing, you imbecile.

And the fact that they had 550 tons does not preculde them from seeking more.

How fucking stupid are you on a scale of 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 where anything above 9.9 is fucking brain dead?

No, you worthless twat. You don't have a single fucking thing. Not the first clue.

 

[kiwiman127]

The Yellow Cake had already been discovered and tagged by UN inspectors prior to "W" invading Iraq.
snopes.com: Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq
Another futile attempt by the clueless.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The Yellow Cake had already been discovered and taged by UN inspectors prior to "W" invading Iraq.
snopes.com: Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq
Another futile attempt by the clueless.

SOME yellowcake which we knew about had indeed been tagged.

The concern was that we had discovered that Saddam was seeking additional supplies. Perhaps replacement supplies.

The clueless ones are all of those who refuse to admit evidence right under their noses. We usually call them "liberals."

 

[BlindBoo]

The Yellow Cake had already been discovered and taged by UN inspectors prior to "W" invading Iraq.
snopes.com: Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq
Another futile attempt by the clueless.

SOME yellowcake which we knew about had indeed been tagged.

The concern was that we had discovered that Saddam was seeking additional supplies. Perhaps replacement supplies.

The clueless ones are all of those who refuse to admit evidence right under their noses. We usually call them "liberals."

Some hell. It was the 550 tonnes you were whinning about a few posts back.

You have no evidence that anyone discovered Saddam was seeking additional supplies. It was all hearsay.

But then again hearsay was factual evidence during the Bush years........

 

[Faun]

Again. Unless you want to pretend that the discussion was over the unstated desire to purchase fucking onions, then it is crystal clear that there was a business overture to purchase uranium.

You are the one with nothing.

And it shows.

Right, I have nothing ... I have no evidence that Iraq was trying to purchase yellowcake (which you said they already had 550 tons of the shit); but neither do you.

You have failed miserably to prove your claim that, "in reality, no question but that some representatives of the Iraqi Government DID seek to purchase yellowcake."

YOU rejecting the evidence is not the same thing, you imbecile.

And the fact that they had 550 tons does not preculde them from seeking more.

How fucking stupid are you on a scale of 1,000,000 to 10,000,000 where anything above 9.9 is fucking brain dead?

No, you worthless twat. You don't have a single fucking thing. Not the first clue.

Holy shit! No matter how many times you insist, you guessing they discussed Niger exporting uranium when it was explicitly reported that exporting Uranium was NOT discussed, is not evidence that Iraq sought Uranium. All that is, is evidence that you have to rely on your fervent imagination to fill in the details to fit your agenda.

whether you accept it or not, your imagination is NOT proof.

 

[JoeB131]

Two ways you can tell when Poodle has lost an argument.

He uses bigger fonts, and calls people who he disagrees with "communists".

Two things you can guarantee when it comes to JoeB:

1. Everything he says is a lie
   
   
2. Because of #1, give him enough time and he will always contradict himself

Post #127 from the thread linked below:

"I just see no reason to support a system that is both evil and inefficien. You can scream about Communism until you are blue in the face, but their system works and ours doesn't." - JoeB131

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/275392-the-2nd-amendment-for-dumbocrats-9.html

Again, I was talking about Western Europe and not a Communist state... but you go on, you are probably too retarded to tell the difference anyway.

 

[JoeB131]

Oh, you mean like liberal whores who get knocked up with 5 different children by 4 different baby-daddy's and who then expect society to care for them and all of their needs? You mean that kind "who is responsible for their own problems"?

Or do you mean like the crack-addict liberals who expect society to care for them and all of their needs? You mean that kind "who is responsible for their own problems"?

Or do you mean like the heroin-addict liberals who expect society to care for them and all of their needs? You mean that kind "who is responsible for their own problems"?

So you really think there are crack whores living in mansions on your dime? really?

Shhh.. Reagan's "Welfare Queen" was a myth.

Or do you mean like the lazy liberals who are just too lazy to work expect society to care for them and all of their needs? You mean that kind "who is responsible for their own problems"?

Or do you mean like the greedy liberals who spend their money on smartphones, plasma tv's, stereo equipment, and don't put a dime away for their insurance, healthcare costs, and other critical necessities - and who are then "shocked" when they can't pay their bills expect society to cover their healthcare needs? (gee - who does that sound like Joe?) You mean that kind "who is responsible for their own problems"?

I wouldn't know. I don't own a plasma TV or a smartphone. I'm like an old person, phones that don't plug into walls are fucking sorcery! But I did put a lot of money into my own health insurance plan. Paid for the premium plan because I know at my age, more likely to have health problems. Until the assholes I worked for decided to fire all the old people.

As I keep saying - give JoeB. enough time and he will contradict himself 100% of the time.

This man is the glaring example of a liberal. His true colors are "fuck society and everyone in it" - but he requires the narrative of "I cry for these poor, innocent people who are hungry, and homeless, and who need us" because that narrative actually fulfills the redistribution of wealth he desires due to his greed and laziness.

Typical....despicable..... fucking..... liberal

Yawn, guy, it isn't even a comparable thing.

If my boss had said to me, the day I before I accepted the job. "I'm going to lie to you cheat you and if you ever get sick, I'm going to find an excuse to fire you." Then I really wouldn't have taken that job.

The Zionist scum were told by the Arab World- You declare a Zionist state on OUR holy land, we will do our level best to KILL you.

And they did it anyway.

So when they get pushed into the sea, they have no one to blame but themselves.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

The Yellow Cake had already been discovered and taged by UN inspectors prior to "W" invading Iraq.
snopes.com: Yellowcake Uranium Removed from Iraq
Another futile attempt by the clueless.

SOME yellowcake which we knew about had indeed been tagged.

The concern was that we had discovered that Saddam was seeking additional supplies. Perhaps replacement supplies.

The clueless ones are all of those who refuse to admit evidence right under their noses. We usually call them "liberals."

Some hell. It was the 550 tonnes you were whinning about a few posts back.

You have no evidence that anyone discovered Saddam was seeking additional supplies. It was all hearsay.

But then again hearsay was factual evidence during the Bush years........

bullshit. We just went through some of the evidence that he WAS seeking additional yellowcake.

Denying historical evidence will never win you any debate points, you dip shit.

 

[Faun]

SOME yellowcake which we knew about had indeed been tagged.

The concern was that we had discovered that Saddam was seeking additional supplies. Perhaps replacement supplies.

The clueless ones are all of those who refuse to admit evidence right under their noses. We usually call them "liberals."

Some hell. It was the 550 tonnes you were whinning about a few posts back.

You have no evidence that anyone discovered Saddam was seeking additional supplies. It was all hearsay.

But then again hearsay was factual evidence during the Bush years........

bullshit. We just went through some of the evidence that he WAS seeking additional yellowcake.

Denying historical evidence will never win you any debate points, you dip shit.

You mean the "evidence" of a meeting between Iraqis and the Nigerian PM where they DIDN'T discuss Uranium??



You sure do have a strange definition of "evidence."

I know, maybe the PM was really a Vulcan and he communicated a Uranium sale with a mind meld!!

 

[P@triot]

Umm, who knows better if Bush was wrong? Mr. Pfarerr ... or Bush himself?

Wait, wait, wait... The entire official narrative of you wing-nuts is "Bush LIED us into war". But now, when you think it helps your argument, you suddenly believe what George W. Bush says and cite him as a trustful source?

Holy shit, you can't make this stuff up folks.....

Yes, it's hard to feign ignorance like yours. You can't even grasp the concept of truth in confession. Like when a criminal suspect denies he's guilty, his denials alone do not lend him credibility; but when that same person confesses to the crime, his confession is accepted as truthful.

So yes, it's perfectly reasonable to accept Bush was being truthful when he finally confessed that the WMD for which he went into Iraq, weren't there -- he was believable, even though he wasn't believable earlier.

And again, you attempt deflection to avoid answering a question, so I'll repeat it ... who knows better if Bush was wrong? Mr. Pfarerr ... or Bush himself?

Wow - you have taken ignorance to a level seen before on USMB (and that is saying a LOT). You see, when someone "admits to being guilty" (as in your example), they are NOT seen as being truthful unless they can corroborate that admission with facts that only the criminal would know (the fact that you don't know that shows how stupid you really are - you hide in your little liberal web sites and don't know a damn thing beyond what they tell you).

So I'll repeat what's already been stated (only this time I'll sum it up in my own words since you're clearly too stupid to understand what Mr. Pfarrer stated in his book): who has more to hide - the highest politician in the land who needs to be re-elected and/or needs to maintain a certain level of "respectability" to increase his party's chances of re-election, or a former Navy Seal turned author who has no horse in the race?

Seriously - with each post you expose your ignorance. I highly recommend you stop before the entire world knows how dumb you are.

 

[P@triot]

Two ways you can tell when Poodle has lost an argument.

He uses bigger fonts, and calls people who he disagrees with "communists".

Two things you can guarantee when it comes to JoeB:

1. Everything he says is a lie
   
   
2. Because of #1, give him enough time and he will always contradict himself

Post #127 from the thread linked below:

"I just see no reason to support a system that is both evil and inefficien. You can scream about Communism until you are blue in the face, but their system works and ours doesn't." - JoeB131

http://www.usmessageboard.com/politics/275392-the-2nd-amendment-for-dumbocrats-9.html

Again, I was talking about Western Europe and not a Communist state... but you go on, you are probably too retarded to tell the difference anyway.

Then why did you say COMMUNISM? I don't see the words "Western Europe" any where in your post - do you? Your quote is out there for everyone to see, and no amount of spin is going to change what you said.

As I figured out long before you ever made this post - you are a communist. And the fact that you're too ashamed to admit it speaks volumes....

 

[IlarMeilyr]

Some hell. It was the 550 tonnes you were whinning about a few posts back.

You have no evidence that anyone discovered Saddam was seeking additional supplies. It was all hearsay.

But then again hearsay was factual evidence during the Bush years........

bullshit. We just went through some of the evidence that he WAS seeking additional yellowcake.

Denying historical evidence will never win you any debate points, you dip shit.

You mean the "evidence" of a meeting between Iraqis and the Nigerian PM where they DIDN'T discuss Uranium??



You sure do have a strange definition of "evidence."

I know, maybe the PM was really a Vulcan and he communicated a Uranium sale with a mind meld!!

Where they discussed doing business. And, despite your massive ignorance, you suck hole, that means that they were either discussing the purchase from Niger of some fucking onions or of yellowcake uranium.

I know. I know. You fucking liberal droids will insist it HAD to be the onions.

Damn, you liberal hacks are dumb.

 

[P@triot]

So you really think there are crack whores living in mansions on your dime? really?

Shhh.. Reagan's "Welfare Queen" was a myth.

Where did I even imply "mansions", much less use the actual word "mansions"?

More importantly, why do you avoid the issue when I corner you with your own words? You started out with "fuck Israel". When I stated how that was a typical liberal statement - falsely claiming to care about their fellow man and then turning around and reveling in the awful demise of their fellow man (including women and children), you next come up with "hard to feel sorry for someone who creates their own problems" - which I had a field day with considering us conservatives have been saying that about all of the government parasites that you support. You're only answer to that is "they don't live in mansions" as if that somehow applied to the conversation.

By the way, it's an absolute fact that SOME on government programs have intentionally had more children to get more aid - and they are on record admitting as much. The only thing that has been proven a myth is your ability to have an honest conversation (typical of communists though, isn't it?).

 

[P@triot]

George W. Bush: "We have reason to believe that Saddam has WMD's"
Faun: "GWB has lied us into war - he's a blood-sucking vampire who deserves to rot in hell"

George W. Bush: "We have not found any WMD's"
Faun: "GWB is an HONEST man, and damn it, the world needs to listen to what he's saying and believe him because he's a good man who would never lie"

Seriously folks, you can't make this stuff up. Give an idiot liberal enough time, they will contradict 100% of what they've said. These people can't even remember their "official stance" on an issue from what post to the next. It's how you know they are the wrong side - they have to spin everything, and when you spin, you never know where you will end up