Subject: Re: weather
To: Perry E. Metzger <>
From: Jim Wise <>
List: regional-nyc
Date: 06/14/2003 21:18:25
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

>Jim Wise <> writes:
>> On Sat, 14 Jun 2003, James K. Lowden wrote:
>> >What is it with this weather?  Will we ever have one sunny day in a row in
>> >June?  Is this the karmic reward for invading Iraq on the strength of a
>> >lie?
>> Easy there, big guy -- does anyone really believe that finding `only'
>> two mobile labs
>There are folks at the CIA who claim they are no such thing at all but
>won't let themselves be identified in the press for obvious
>reasons. However, might I suggest that rather than defending the
>administration's lies here, you find another forum for doing it?

Tch, tch, temper, temper, Mr. Metzger -- I didn't raise the subject, and
you do yourself no credit by objecting only to the presence of opinions
which you disagree with.

In either case, while I'm sure you can find `anonymous sources' to say
that Scott Peterson dumped Hussein's WMD in the San Francisco Bay if you
want to, I have yet to see a single credible source, on or off the
record, suggest what else one would be doing in camoflauged vans full of
fermentation vats.  Perhaps you can enlighten us?

>> Does anyone believe that Mr. Hussein unilaterally destroyed the tens of
>> thousands of tons of WMD materials he himself acknowledged having in
>> 1993, but just forgot to tell anyone?
>No, the inspectors destroyed a lot of it, too. I predicted to several

Every head of the inspections who has commented, including Hans Blix,
David Kay, and Richard Spertzel, states that the inspections found
evidence of the productions of tons of materiel including, for example,
8500 litres of weaponized Anthrax (and much more than that of precursors
and related materials) which were never _found_ much less destroyed.

Likewise, the UN Security Council in November 2002 voted _unanimously_
(that includes France, Germany, China, Russia, and Syria, by the way)
that Mr. Hussein was in material breach of his obligations to destroy
his WMD.  But I suppose they're all in on the plot, eh?

>friends in advance of the war that no or almost no banned weapons
>would be found. Astonishingly, it turns out I was correct. But this is

No, completely _un_astonishingly, nine weeks since the first shots were
fired you are claiming to be correct, just as two weeks since the first
shots were fired (and a week before Baghdad fell) you were claiming that
US troops were `bogged down' in a `quagmire' which would go on for
`weeks or months' and cost `thousands or tens of thousands' of US lives
(I have the IrcLogs, if you don't remember saying this...).

>not the place for this discussion. This is a place to discuss getting
>beer. I can name numerous other lists where you can discuss why you
>believe things the government tells you.

Well, one place where I've cross-referenced a lot of the available
evidence is

so I'm more than willing to move the discussion there -- but objecting
_only_ to political statements you disagree with doesn't do much for
your credibility...

- -- 
				Jim Wise
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (NetBSD)