More of the TRUTH slowly leaks out...Iraqi Scientists tell of obfuscation

E. Coli? And Staphylococcus??
Are you sure it wasn't someone's leftover lunch that went bad??


I think as usual you're reaching.

 

Thanks for updating us on the futility of finding WMD despite $200,000 rewards. I didn't expect you to post another article informing us we haven't found anything for at least another day or two.

 

Where? What evidence? Evidence doesn't count if it's been FORGED!!! Even the Scientists at the University were laughing at the inspections. Destroying EMPTY petri dishes inside what amounts to an industrial dishwasher. Gimme a break.
Now, with the US just dying to find something to give em a reason to invade they were probably freaked out at the notion of a professor farting and an inspector screaming "WMD! WMD!" and causing an incident; then subsequently disappearing thanks to Saddam's baddies.

What a truly ignorant thing to say. Oh I'm a Democrat so I want someone to come and bomb the dog crap out of America. WTF?

I certainly hope so. I WANT to see proof! Believe it or not, I DO think removing Saddam was justifcation enough to invade Iraq. However, I don't enjoy being lied to by the government about why they have decided that we must invade right this moment.

 

In all seriousness, I guess that would depend on what he had for lunch...

 

"You libs can bark all you want about "no WMD found yet" but you will just look silly in the end."



In the immortal words of our dear Bushwick Bill, "If you're waiting on that to happen sucker, you'll be a waiting mother****er."

 

What Iraqi threat? Penicillin?!?! You're re-defining silly on a daily basis. Clearly all what evidence? Every time you post all I hear is the theme music to Inspector Gadget.

 

Thanks for the article, John. The evidence continues to mount in Iraq. The lunatic fringe liberals will continue to deny the obvious in a shallow attempt at attacking the Bush Administration. The one thing that has been consistent throughout this war has been the liberals' unwavering trust of the former Iraqi government and support for its policies and propaganda.

It saddens me that people rush to dispute any potential evidence of WMD, choosing instead to give Saddam the benefit of the doubt. He and his administration have proven themselves to be outright liars repeatedly, yet this does nothing to quell the left-wing extremists' support. It's amazing how emotion clouds their judgment.

 

Trader,

I wonder if the liberals were believing Baghdad Bob.....nah even they would not believe that....would they?

DD

 

Evidence would be something that would hold up in a court of law.

Just a thought. I know our legal system isn't real big on giving anyone without a high powered attorney a chance in hell of winning, but we can always hope.

 

In further evidence, I just talked to a neighbour who says that he knows of a guy who said that, when visiting Calcutta, India in 1977,he saw a dog with 5 legs...Five legs, people! If the liberals want to dismiss this too, to just throw it away with all the other heaps of mounting evidence of Iraq's WMD, well it just wouldn't surprise me. Freaking tree-huggers. Next you'll actually expect our troops to find WMD, just because we said they were there, distributed to the troops, etc. If finding people who say that they saw someone once having access to chemistry, some of which are even the same kind of chemicals used in pesticides..er..scratch that, WMD, then I don't know what will ever satisfy you...


Re: Staphylococcus and E-Coli...


I talked with one of my roommates, who, while not having the expertise of johnheath, or others, is in fact a chemistry major working in the pharmaceutical industry, and when I showed her this stuff she laughed...then told me the following:

Staphylcoccus is a naturally occuring bacteria which could, were you to look, be found on the average human hand.

Escherichia coli ( E-Coli) is a naturally occuring bacteria found in the average human stomach.

Both are charecterized as ubiquitous, and common place in any lab, including 1st year Chem labs...They are used as a standard comparative bacteria...ie you take a sample of Staph, say Staphylococcus aureas, and compare its responses to stimuli with whatever culture you're experimenting on. In other words, it's a standard testing sample. She herself has worked with both countless times, and has yet to be accused of WMD production.

My roommate also showed me a mailing order where both Staphylococcus aureus ATCC 25923 and Escherichia coli ATCC 25922 ( The lethal strain of the bacteria ) are available to anyone in the field. This is the chemical equivalent of finding a screw driver in a garage, and concluding that they were developing bombs...


'Mounting evidence'...lol

It might be evidence that, contrary to pro-war reports, the Iraqis were taking the UN inspections very seriously...as they were trying to destroy any evidence that could in any way be construed as anything linked with WMD..but as evidence of WMD production, this is laughable...not that that will, in any way, deter the pro-war crowd from listing this along with other similar reports in their 'mounting evidence' to be refered to in the future....

 

It's funny to me that the same appeasers who were screaming about giving the un inspectors more time to find WMD's (12 years isn't enough ?!?) are the same ones who aren't willing to give the US more than a few weeks. How does that work?

 

Ok. First of all lets end the "Democrat" and "Liberal" generalizations. I am a conservative Republican and voted for Bush and worked with various Political groups in Houston supporting the Republican platform. I will probably vote for Bush again, because any international damage he may cause is nothing compared to some of the socialist programs that I feel the democrats would waste our tax money on. I am also thrilled of the new tax reform on dividends and feel the tax cuts will push our economy and create more by the American people for the American people.

BUT. I honestly feel the American public is being lied to and its not a good feeling. The administration stated the reason we are attacking Iraq is a pre-emptive strike against a dictator with WMD and ties to Al-Queda. Now we are publicizing every find of anything when it usually turns out to be nothing. I stated this earlier, we were wrong on either of these counts:

1.) Saddam did have chemical/ biological and other WMD but refused to use them on us, though one of his sons had been killed and his country had been bombed severely. This means that he was not as 'Insane' as we projected him to be and not even close to the threat we projected him as. This means there is no reason to attack Iraq.

2.) There were no WMD, therefore nothing was used against an invading army. Once a chemical/bio or other WMD is used it is very tracable. If there were no WMD then why did we attack??

Either way, I feel lied to. If they wished to attack Iraq for economic reasons, for oil and stability in the region; then simply tell me that. I don't like being patronized by my government.
I mean, for god's sake, they are offering $200,000 for information about it?? Do you honestly think some scientist shmuck may not just make up something to get in good with the Americans and make some money. And it seems the administration wouldn't mind if it was made up.

*NOTE* I have stated this many times as well though. If in five years, America has created a free capitalist democracy in Iraq then I will be ecstatic. The public is educated enough to understand if that is what we want to do, but lets not sully our international reputation by making claims that very few in the world agreed with and that we are not finding any true evidence to back up.

 

huh??? so it would have been ok to invade Saddam if he had used WMD on our invading troops...but if he doesn't it's all a big mistake?? I'm thinking there are countless reasons why Saddam didn't/wouldn't/couldn't use WMD other than the alternatives you presented.

years of tyranny aren't suddenly erased by an omission to use wmd.

 

It's Occam's Razor at work. The simplest explanation is most often the correct one.

Question: Why didn't Saddam or his forces use WMD's of any kind against an overwhelming advancing army that he surely knew would topple his regime?

Simplest Answer: Because he didn't have any.

Khan: I for one will be the first "lib" or "dem" to applaud you for stating what you believe and not just the tired rhetoric spewed by ANY party. You are fiscally conservative, you work to advance the goals of the party that promotes that agenda. However, you are also free thinking and your finely tuned BS detector is fully charged and operating with great efficiency.

I like you, will be the first to say "WTF?" if the Democratic party / candidate starts doing or saying something that sounds like complete crap. I'm glad that you can step up and admit that your (and for that matter no) political party or administration is perfect.

 

If years of tyranny were a reason, than so be it. But it was stated all along. IRAQ has WMD and Saddam is insane/psycho/idiotic enough to use them. Either he doesn't have them or if he does he's not as insane as we thought. That is the point I was trying to make.

Lets say we find huge amounts of weapons of mass destruction and chemical and biological weapons in Iraq yet Saddam refused to use them. Even after the death of his own son, he refused to use them. Doesn't that alter the demonized perception of Saddam that we have been force fed for years. Its so much easier to just label people 'insane'.

And please wait till there is some true evidence of WMD besides Staphylococcus and E-Coli (which is actually in human excrement as well) to post that "WMD Found!!"

 

And I'm saying, in determining his insanity (or whatever you want to call it), you're overlooking a lifetime of tyranny over his people simply because he MAY have chosen not to use WMD against the coalition.

 

in a world of chaos, i'll disagree with occam's razor then.

by the way...there is ZERO question the man was in violation of UN orders...just the missiles, alone, which he fired around were clearly beyond the range prescribed by those resolutions.