Re: Arab World Stunned by Baghdad's Fall

From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Apr 14 2003 - 01:08:12 MDT

  • Next message: Samantha Atkins: "Re: FITNESS: Diet and Exercise"

    Harvey Newstrom wrote:
    > Samantha Atkins wrote,
    >
    >>Mike,
    >>
    >>When will you learn that I stopped considering your opinion
    >>worth taking into account long ago? No such barrels or weapons
    >>grade plutonium were reported in anything I saw. I suspect if
    >>something like this was found it would be front page news. If
    >>you think they were found then give us the urls to see them
    >>oruselves. Otherwise take it elsewhere.
    >
    >
    > Actually, there were a lot of these report on CNN and elsewhere. The only
    > problem is that the follow-up tests always showed that they were not
    > chemical weapons or plutonium. People who believe there are weapons of mass
    > destruction tend to remember all these findings. People who don't believe
    > there are weapons of mass destruction tend to remember all the negative
    > tests. In the end, both sides remember clearly reports that supported their
    > side. Either way, it is too early to tell, and preliminary tests aren't
    > accurate anyway. The real answer will come weeks or months down the road.
    > We either will find a smoking gun, or there will be no smoking gun.

    I follow CNN. At no time did they report thousands of barrels
    of VX or weapons grade plutonium being found since we started
    attempting to justify this war. So I am not sure you what you
    are referring to. Since whatever was found was shown to be
    nothing of the kind I would assume that this would be enough to
    dispose of the so-called "evidence". What findings? The
    findings were that even the supsected things didn't pan out. It
    is not "too early to tell" about the particular incidents in
    quesiton. They were tested and tested by people that would have
    referred a postive finding in most cases. Yet they turned up
    negative. There is no doubt about those particular tests on
    those particular materials whatsoever. I am very surprised that
    you would suggest there is. Either soemthing is weapons grade
    plutonium or it is not. Period.

    We may find other things that may or may not be a smoking gun.
    But there is no doubt whatsoever that we haven't found a smoking
    gun yet.

    >
    > (Or as usual in these conspiracy theories, we will have missiles that go
    > slightly over their range allowance, or precursor chemicals that might be
    > used to make something else, or witnesses that think they saw something
    > which is long gone, etc.... And everybody will think the evidence supports
    > their side.)
    >

    Clearly none of these is adequate to support the claims of
    massive WMD that have been made here. It will take a real
    smoking gun, the whole gun and nothing but the gun and several
    of those.

    - samantha



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 14 2003 - 01:09:30 MDT