muddysmind.com

where's the problem ?
French is an old colonial power. This is well known.

There are elections on a regular basis in french guyana, and there have been no independantist movements so far. The main problems overthere are related with gold seekers who pollute the rivers in searchng for gold, thus killing local indians.

French Guyana is a bit like Hawai.

Nobody ever asked the US out of Hawai.

People have only asked the USA not to launch wars on false motives (WMDs)just because it suits its own political agenda.

Just for the sake of it, please note that the satellite was launched by Europe.

In fact, tired of being ridiculed when divided and wary of centuries of wars, european countries have united.
Hopefully we'll get a better constitution that the one proposed right now. And then we'll get the strength necessary to oppose the bully GW Bush.

DF, Your a huge hypocrite just like your country. This story and your answer to it are proof.

Cwilli if you would stop insulting my country for a minute, it would give you some time to think, and possibly eventually miracles happen, say something meaningful.
The fact is facts are against your constant ranting, and this is why all you can do is insulting others, me in this case.
You're bound to end up like those communists who 25 years later found out they were wrong. In fact you're deja vu from the start.

Cwilli if you would stop insulting my country for a minute, it would give you some time to think, and possibly eventually miracles happen, say something meaningful.
The fact is facts are against your constant ranting, and this is why all you can do is insulting others, me in this case.
You're bound to end up like those communists who 25 years later found out they were wrong. In fact you're deja vu from the start.

"Cwilli if you would stop insulting my country for a minute"

No.

"and this is why all you can do is insulting others, me in this case"

DF, Look at my other posts, Your the only one I insult. This is because I have zero respect for your opinions, I dont like you, and I think your an idiot. Therefore, I find it hard to hold back.

ESPECIALLY when you refuse to see your own hypocracy.

Call it my weakness. I have a hard time with idiots.

There s not a drop of hypocrisy in my comments. French guyana is an old colony of France. THis is well known. As is hawai for united states.
Where is the problem ? The people living there now approve being part of France-the USA.
If there was a liberation movement, I would understand your post. But as there is none, it is just another sign of your stupidity.

You may believe I'm an idiot, but comming from one of the rare individuals still believing there were WMD's in Irak, it can only make me laugh.

You're a joke. From the start.

DF, The hypocracy is right in front of your face. Its laughable that you cant see it.

sure ... 't must be the same with those WMD's.
They were there. You're just the only one to have seen them.

On an aside note, why do you spell : hypocracy and not "hypocrisy"... Is there a specific intent there ? Ruling by hypocrisy ? Or is it just an error ?

Do we have to revisit the whole WMD thing again? Is it so impossible to believe that they had WMD and they moved them?

of course it is. Because that would make you wrong.

Iraq had WMD (ask the Kurds) and just before we arrived, they moved them to Syria (just like they did with their entire Air Force in the first gulf war)

Now can you disprove that? If not shut up about it.
Case closed.

Cwilli. On the eve of a new year, can't you just pause for a minute and try to look back at the past and think. Just for a minute.

The wmd's alledged by the US administration (manipulated by chalabi and Iran) included :
Nuclear bomb ... It was shown before the war that the documents used were GROSS fakes.
No nuclear program was found.
No nuclear bomb was shipped out of Iraq

Tons of chemical weapons and a chemical weapon program, including buses used to make them on decentralised basis.
This was disproved too.
It could be possible to move some chemicals to Syria, some may even have been moved. But : tons can not disappear, and the thing is no chemical weapon program was found in the firt place.

I could develop also the would be drones ... There was a post on the subject on this very website ...

On another site, last time they moved their planes to a foreign country (Iran), Iraq never got them back. SO why would they ship their weapons abroad (if they had any ...).

Besides from the start you have it wrong, when someone or a country accuses someone else, or another country of doing something wrong, or illegal IT bears the burden of the proof.

You have to prove that there were WMD's or shut up, I don't have to prove that they were not moved to syriah.

Finally, no serious human being on earth believes that there were dangerous WMDs in Iraq. It is now admitted by the US authorities themselves that intelligence was mislead.
Just you, go on ...
And you also post stupid posts on France.
You seem to have a problem in fact...
Move on.
It's good sometimes to admit a mistake.

Cwilli. On the eve of a new year, can't you just pause for a minute and try to look back at the past and think. Just for a minute.

The wmd's alledged by the US administration (manipulated by chalabi and Iran) included :
Nuclear bomb ... It was shown before the war that the documents used were GROSS fakes.
No nuclear program was found.
No nuclear bomb was shipped out of Iraq

Tons of chemical weapons and a chemical weapon program, including buses used to make them on decentralised basis.
This was disproved too.
It could be possible to move some chemicals to Syria, some may even have been moved. But : tons can not disappear, and the thing is no chemical weapon program was found in the firt place.

I could develop also the would be drones ... There was a post on the subject on this very website ...

On another site, last time they moved their planes to a foreign country (Iran), Iraq never got them back. SO why would they ship their weapons abroad (if they had any ...).

Besides from the start you have it wrong, when someone or a country accuses someone else, or another country of doing something wrong, or illegal IT bears the burden of the proof.

You have to prove that there were WMD's or shut up, I don't have to prove that they were not moved to syriah.

Finally, no serious human being on earth believes that there were dangerous WMDs in Iraq. It is now admitted by the US authorities themselves that intelligence was mislead.
Just you, go on ...
And you also post stupid posts on France.
You seem to have a problem in fact...
Move on.
It's good sometimes to admit a mistake.

That is where your wrong DF, they already Found WMD evidence. When will "you" pause and take a look back to realize your hatred of the U.S. blinds you to even see the truth.

That is the exact hypocrisy that I was talking about.

You're amazing...
Everybody knows there are no WMD's in Iraq. Your president has admitted it. Blair has admitted it, but you claim something else.
What are your sources ? Direct link to god ?

Besides I don't hate the USA.
I don't even hate stupid morons like Bush and his so called "hawks".
It's not a question of feeling. It's a question of facts.
I dislike Cwilli for being so uselessly agressive. I dislike you muddy for lying like you just did.
I've posted several times links with proofs of the lies of your administration. There never has been any proof of WMD in Iraq. And never a link posted in here. (all we got, some lousy airplanes 30 years old ...)

Burke once said.
THe only thing necessary for the victory of evil is for the good people to do nothing.

The only reason I remain here is to see how much time it will take until you finally admit you were misled ... I find you're more hard headed than brain washed communists...
How such a thing is possible remains a complete mistery to me. But after all, God knows why the world is as is.
I'll ask Him.

"Everybody knows there are no WMD's in Iraq."
"What are your sources ?"
"And never a link posted in here."

Well, since you weren't paying attention the first time, here you go...

http://www.muddysmind.com/archives/000682.html

...but, of course, I don't expect you to buy any of it so only God knows why I'm bothering.

"The only reason I remain here is to see how much time it will take until you finally admit you were misled..."

So, you *are* one of those obnoxiously, annoying people who hound everyone until they reluctantly agree with your point of view. Well, if you're sticking around just to change our minds into what would better suit *your* interrests then find a comfortable spot, baby, 'cause you're going to be here for the long haul.

"...God knows why the world is as is.
I'll ask Him."

So...you believe in God now? Hmmm....looks like *we're* the ones changing your mind.

Happy new year mds Muddy.

My relationship with god-cosmos is a private matter. It follows its path.

I'm sorry to have to correct you but the link you posted related the founding of parts of al samoud missiles.
Not to WMDs ... Conventional missiles are allowed. Iraq was barred the possession of missiles that would go further than a given distance. The al samoud goes a little further that this. This is why the UN inspectors were allowed to destroy many of them before the war started.
IT seemed some remained.
Whatever.

However ... No sign of nuclear bomb, no sign of nuclear program, no chemicals or even a chemicals program etc.

Your post is as if, pretending to find an elephant, I came up and said, hey, I found a mouse, it sure is a mammal.

You can look here for some complete information
http://www.amenusa.org/iraq163.htm

if you want to check the history from first false claims to final discoveries
go here
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

Have especially a look at :

Source: http://www.ceip.org/files/projects/npp/ pdf/Iraq/kaytestimony.pdf

David Kay appeared before the Senate Armed Services Committee shortly after he resigned as special advisor to the Iraq Survey Group. Kay states, referring to the expectation that there would be substantial stocks of, and production lines for, chemical and biological weapons in Iraq, that "we were almost all wrong, and I certainly include myself here." He also notes that other foreign intelligence agencies, including the French and the German, also had believed that Iraq possessed such stocks and production lines. In addition, he discusses the issue of whether political pressure had any impact on the content of the October 2002 national intelligence estimate (Document 15). Kay also notes that "based on the work of the Iraq Survey Group … Iraq was in clear violation of the terms of [U.N.] Resolution 1441. He goes on to note the discovery of hundreds of instances of activities prohibited by U.N. Resolution 687.

It's not about
"annoying people who hound everyone until they reluctantly agree with your point of view"

it's fighting outrght lies in order to create some common ground for quieter discussion.
If you deny facts, then no discussion will be possible with others. Facts have to be acknowledged, when this is done, then one can discuss about diverging interpretations. This goes on in a serene way.
But if one single person start to lie, distort facts, it has to be put back on tracks. If not, then only trouble can follow. It's not possible to discuss with someone if that person denies basic facts. The only solution left are fighting or fleeing (out of UN for instance).

It remains to be proven that Bush and Co purposively lied on all the WMD case. It seems many believed the same thing as they did back in 2003, that Saddam had some weapons of mass destruction.
However it is proven, fact, that none were found, that errors were made.

Those who believe otherwise are not member of the fact based community.
Those people, all of them, are a threat to the rest of humanity. Their denial is a sign that they will follow their leader where ever it goes, what ever it does. They have lost all capacity to independant thinking.
Any attempt to free these people from their dangerous illusions is a charitable act that will be rewarded by God whatever be Its form.

DF, The link that Mrs Muddy gave you contains the following lines that you must have missed. Maybe you were thinking of eating more snails instead of reading;

"The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003."

The UNITED NATIONS said he had them. Wow, not the United States, THE UNITED NATIONS. I used caps in case you were thinking of snails again, instead of reading.

Then perhaps you did not read my response to that post;

"The argument from the other side:

1. This is not the smoking gun.
2. This does not mean anything.
3. There is no proof that they used this for WMD.
4. There is no 8X10 glossy of these engines and Saddam with a sign saying 'these are what you have been looking for'

There will NEVER be enough proof for them. That is until one of thier family memeber gets killed by a terrorist.

Then you will hear nothing but 'we should have been more protected' and it will STILL be our fault."

You just proved me right, DF. Thanks!

Look there... I don't see your point.
There's no doubt some weapons of mass destruction had to be found, you d find some in any country in the world.

The question is wether they were any threat, wether there was a dangerous amount of them.

The picture drawn by the admistration was scary, nuclear program, chemical weapons.
What was found was close to nihil. If you follow the link I posted, you'll find that david Kay says that some WMD indeed may have been shipped to syriah, but no serious amount, nothing close to what the US intelligence had guessed would be in Iraq. The intelligence had it wrong.

If you want to get destroy all the weapons of the other countries, why don't you forbid US citizens to buy guns. After all that's the same thing. People like you won't care about the second ammendment until they get shot by a criminal, worst than that by a teenager holding an assault weapon.

But you may think, well I have the right to carry weapons, so I can defend myself.
Well basically that's what Iraq was thinking. It bought weapons to defend itself. You bet Iran is working on a nuclear program. If were in Iran I'd be working to get a nuclear bomb as fast as I could in order to protect my country.

The final point is that the USA invaded Iraq because they wanted to, not because it was threatening others or dangerous to anybody. In fact it invaded it because it was not dangerous to US armies.

The message it sent to the world is pretty clear : get nuclear weapons, get them fast, build WMD's, lots of them. That's the only way you'll escape my wrath. Scare me, or I'll crush you.
I'm pretty sure the rest of the world got it clear, they're working on those weapons right now.

"There's no doubt some weapons of mass destruction had to be found"

Now your changing your story. Just earlier in this EXACT same post you said, very clearly I might add;

"Finally, no serious human being on earth believes that there were dangerous WMDs in Iraq."

So now your talking shades of gray? Before there were absolutly NO WMD in Iraq. Now that the UN says your wrong, you change it to there are SOME in every country??? HYPOCRISY!

This is two part hypocrisy because not only are you changing your story, but you say your waiting around for us to admit we are wrong, when you CLEARLY will not do that yourself.

HYPOCRISY,HYPOCRISY,HYPOCRISY!!!!

"The message it sent to the world is pretty clear : get nuclear weapons, get them fast, build WMD's, lots of them."

Wow I guess Lybia got the opposite message. They willingly gave all theirs up. Thats exactly what it told Iran, now that they have suspended all nuclear building and are FINALLY in talks with Europe. Those are just TWO things that we have been trying to get BEFORE we went into Iraq.

Your so wrong its funny.