on page 5 of the report (page 9 in
Acrobat).
The first two sentences read:
We judge that Iraq has continued its weapons of mass destruction (WMD)
program in defiance of the UN resolutions and restrictions. Baghdad has
chemical and biological weapons as well as missiles with ranges in
excess
Correct the header. :-)
Dan M.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
- Original Message -
From: Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 1:20 PM
Subject: RE: What are WMD?
Correct the header. :-)
Dan M.
Modernized now.
G
xponent
Header Follies Maru
rob
On 06/08/2006, at 7:13 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Modernized now.
G
Pop culture topicalised now...
Charlie
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Charlie Bell wrote:
On 06/08/2006, at 7:13 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
Modernized now.
G
Pop culture topicalised now...
It's always fun when pirates are in fashion.
Julia
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2005/11/9/164137/436
WP [i.e., white phosphorus rounds] proved to be an effective and
versatile munition. We used it for screening missions at two breeches
and, later in the fight, as a potent psychological weapon against the
insurgents in trench lines and spider
Convenient analysis of the alleged WMD artillery shell
found in Iraq.
http://www.lt-smash.us/archives/002919.html#002919
Damon.
=
Damon Agretto
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Qui desiderat pacem, praeparet bellum.
http://www.geocities.com
Orrin Hatch would be proud...
The actual article has a few links embedded in it that didn't cut n'paste
into here, so follow the link if you're interested.
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1759,1540370,00.asp
The Nuclear Weapon of Digital Rights Law
By Sebastian Rupley
February 27, 2004
Few
At 10:43 PM 10/30/03 -0600, Robert Seeberger wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: RE: U.S. now saying WMD went from Iraq to Syria
At 12:29 PM 10/30/03 +0530
On Thu, 30 Oct 2003, Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
At 12:29 PM 10/30/03 +0530, ritu wrote:
The Fool forwarded:
WASHINGTON, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- U.S. intelligence officials Wednesday
released an assessment that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
have been
transferred to neighboring Syria.
The Fool forwarded:
WASHINGTON, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- U.S. intelligence officials Wednesday
released an assessment that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
have been
transferred to neighboring Syria.
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria, they are
probably headed towards
Ritu wrote:
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria, they are
probably headed towards Iran. :)
Why not Pakistan? O:-)
Alberto Monteiro
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria, they are
probably headed towards Iran. :)
Why not Pakistan? O:-)
Because Mushy is a good ally of the US?
Or because we South Asians are lucky enough to not attract so much
attention from Wolfie, Rummy
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of ritu
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 05:41 AM
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion'
Subject: RE: U.S. now saying WMD went from Iraq to Syria
Alberto Monteiro wrote:
I think the Iraqi WMDs
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria, they are
probably headed towards Iran. :)
Cool t-shirt.
Tom Beck
www.prydonians.org
www.mercerjewishsingles.org
I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the
last. - Dr Jerry Pournelle
At 12:29 PM 10/30/03 +0530, ritu wrote:
The Fool forwarded:
WASHINGTON, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- U.S. intelligence officials Wednesday
released an assessment that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction
have been
transferred to neighboring Syria.
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria,
- Original Message -
From: Ronn!Blankenship [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: 'Killer Bs Discussion' [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, October 30, 2003 10:02 PM
Subject: RE: U.S. now saying WMD went from Iraq to Syria
At 12:29 PM 10/30/03 +0530, ritu wrote:
The Fool forwarded:
WASHINGTON
Robert Seeberger wrote:
Weapons Of Mass Destruction
World Tour 03 - 04
Iraq - Sold Out
*rofl*
Syria
Iran
Sudan
Pakistan
No! No! Pakistan is a horrible destination!
xponent
Tourbooks For Sale Maru
*chuckles*
This reminds me of an article on the BBC about how a travel agency in
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
I think the Iraqi WMDs are on a Mid-East tour. After Syria, they are
probably headed towards Iran. :)
Cool! Where can I get a T-shirt?
I just had the words. No t-shirts, no place to print them. :)
Ritu, who'd like at least one 'print your own t-shirt' place in
http://interestalert.com/brand/siteia.shtml?Story=st/sn/1029aaa030d6
upiSys=rmmillerFid=NATIONALType=NewsFilter=National%20News
U.S. says WMD went from Iraq to Syria
WASHINGTON, Oct. 29 (UPI) -- U.S. intelligence officials Wednesday
released an assessment that Iraqi weapons of mass
John D. Giorgis wrote:
That's o.k., I participate on a Catholic discussion List where I
am considered a flaming liberal. oh yes, and after discussing
certain economic policies with my officemates, one of them printed
off a picture of the Kremlin for me to hang on my cube, because he
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The election was 2 1/2 years ago. Circumstances and
the list have
changed. I would guess that between 80-90% of the
list were in favor of
the invasion, and that at least half have a
favorable opinion of Bush
right now, though I'm guessing his
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A simple breakdown. The country as a whole split
essentially 50/50 Bush/Gore. What do you think
the
list split? I'd bet something like 25/75
Bush/Gore,
and that's being generous.
So? There's something wrong with that?
Tom Beck
It suggests that
It suggests that the Americans on the list are not
representative of the American public, which was my
point.
So? We're supposed to be?
Tom Beck
www.prydonians.org
www.mercerjewishsingles.org
I always knew I'd see the first man on the Moon. I never dreamed I'd see the
last. - Dr
On Sun, Jun 15, 2003 at 02:59:17PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It suggests that the Americans on the list are not representative of
the American public, which was my point.
So? We're supposed to be?
Tom, are you having a bad day? Or are you really a conservative in
disguise, trying to
At 02:59 PM 6/15/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It suggests that the Americans on the list are not
representative of the American public, which was my
point.
So? We're supposed to be?
Tom, a brief chronology for you:
1) Gautam stated that he considered Brin-L to be weighted heavily
Wow, we must either be on different lists, or one of us isn't very
perceptive. Of the politically vocal Americans on the list*, I count
yourself, Georgis, Tarr, Cofey, Agretto and Cooper as well right of center.
Heh heh. Would it surprise you then to know I am a registered Democrat and
voted
--- Damon [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Heh heh. Would it surprise you then to know I am a
registered Democrat and
voted for Gore?
Damon.
Well statistically it shocks the hell out of me,
Damon. Army officers are what, 90% Republican?
Something in that range.
=
Gautam Mukunda
[EMAIL
From: Julia Thompson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where I am considered a right wing kook. :-)
Dan M.
But, as you yourself would say, by the standards of
American politics, you're pretty far to the left.
A simple
Democrat
and voted for Gore?
I'm glad to know that you are so enlightened. 8^)
/serious
No, not at all. I've observed you are hawkish on matters of national
defense, and based my assessment on those observations - especially as
this was a discussion on WMD.
Would it surprise any of you that I
Would it surprise any of you that I was once a registered Republican and
that, having participated in all the elections starting in 1972, I have
never voted for a presidential candidate that lost the popular vote?
Huh. So far every presidential candidate I've voted for lost! :(
Damon.
Damon wrote:
Would it surprise any of you that I was once a registered Republican
and that, having participated in all the elections starting in 1972, I
have never voted for a presidential candidate that lost the popular vote?
Huh. So far every presidential candidate I've voted for lost! :(
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Of the politically vocal Americans on
the list*, I count
yourself, Georgis, Tarr, Cofey, Agretto and Cooper
as well right of
center. Several others such as Blankenship, Horn,
and Minete, are
middle right, IMO. Erik is tough to gage
Deborah Harrell wrote:
grin
I'm vocally left in certain areas, but I don't think
too many liberals own guns or support (at least
theoretically) the death penalty...
Just to be persnickety and try to defy labeling. ;)
Oh, I only mean left and right in a very general sense. Jan, for
instance
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WMD
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 02:01:12 -0700 (PDT)
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Of the politically vocal Americans on
the list*, I
From: Jon Gabriel [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: WMD
Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2003 09:10:48 -0400
From: Deborah Harrell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED
At 09:53 AM 6/14/2003 -0500, you wrote:
- Original Message -
From: Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, June 14, 2003 5:09 AM
Subject: Re: WMD
Deborah Harrell wrote:
grin
I'm vocally left in certain areas, but I don't think
On 13 Jun 2003 at 21:59, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Additionally, the non US members on the list are, I think, actually
very moderate, the exception being Illana (sp?), who is probably among
the most conservative on the list.
It can be pretty hard to use left/right for Israel. I mean, some of
my
At 09:59 PM 6/13/2003 -0700 Doug Pensinger wrote:
I take comfort in the fact that politics on this list
are, to a large extent, politics inside the liberal
echo chamber.
Wow, we must either be on different lists, or one of us isn't very
perceptive.
I must be on Gautam's List. I've
At 09:53 AM 6/14/2003 -0500 Dan Minette wrote:
It has also got me wondering if Gautam thinks this list is liberal, what
he would think of the Culture list...
Where I am considered a right wing kook. :-)
That's o.k., I participate on a Catholic discussion List where I am
considered a flaming
At 10:38 PM 5/31/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2) What is wrong with that strategy? It seems to me we are finally doing
what
is necessary to make the world a better place to live in, even if,
especially
if, you are a middle eastern Muslim. War is never the best way to solve
anything. I
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where I am considered a right wing kook. :-)
Dan M.
But, as you yourself would say, by the standards of
American politics, you're pretty far to the left.
A simple breakdown. The country as a whole split
essentially 50/50 Bush/Gore. What do you think
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where I am considered a right wing kook. :-)
Dan M.
But, as you yourself would say, by the standards of
American politics, you're pretty far to the left.
A simple breakdown. The country as a whole split
essentially 50/50
At 09:59 PM 6/13/03 -0700, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Wow, we must either be on different lists, or one of us isn't very
perceptive. Of the politically vocal Americans on the list*, I count
yourself, Georgis, Tarr, Cofey, Agretto and Cooper as well right of
center. Several others such as
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
_
¹Or is that right wing-nut?
Righteous wing-nut, maybe?
Doug
Just kidding, just kidding, don't start whistling.
8^)
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
At 08:20 PM 6/14/2003 -0700, you wrote:
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Where I am considered a right wing kook. :-)
Dan M.
But, as you yourself would say, by the standards of
American politics, you're pretty far to the left.
A simple breakdown. The country as a
Doug Pensinger wrote:
Deborah Harrell wrote:
grin
I'm vocally left in certain areas, but I don't
think
too many liberals own guns or support (at least
theoretically) the death penalty...
Just to be persnickety and try to defy labeling.
;)
Oh, I only mean left and right in a
At 09:03 PM 6/14/03 -0700, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Ronn!Blankenship wrote:
_
¹Or is that right wing-nut?
Righteous wing-nut, maybe?
Doug
Just kidding, just kidding, don't start whistling.
8^)
I can't whistle and laugh at the same time . . .
;-)
-- Ronn! :)
God bless America,
Land that
Doug Pensinger wrote:
It has also got me wondering if Gautam thinks this list is
liberal, what
he would think of the Culture list...
So far to the left as to be practically invisible :)
Ritu
GCU Speculations
___
--- Kevin Tarr [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snipped most
This page was generated in 1999. Anyone know what
it's about?
http://www.vavatch.co.uk/essays/iamvery.htm
Oh, it's Adrian Hon. I've heard of him.
LOL
Thanks for posting that!
But as I wasn't here then, I have no idea what it was
At 10:50 PM 6/14/2003 -0500, you wrote:
At 09:59 PM 6/13/03 -0700, Doug Pensinger wrote:
Wow, we must either be on different lists, or one of us isn't very
perceptive. Of the politically vocal Americans on the list*, I count
yourself, Georgis, Tarr, Cofey, Agretto and Cooper as well right of
Tom, not to be rude, but are you even capable of
discussing these things, or do you just start frothing
at the mouth as soon as someone mentions George Bush?
I mean, you seem like a bright and reasonable guy -
right up until someone mentions a Republican and then
I swear to God someone else
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And God forbid that anyone should ever suggest that
Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney/etc.
are anything less than the very living incarnations
of Jesus Christ
himself...
Tom Beck
Tom, not to be rude, but are you even capable of
discussing these things,
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I would say almost the same thing about you when
someone is critical
of Bush or the U.S.
Doug
But, Doug, if you read my posts with any degree of
attention, you'd be wrong. I have variously
criticized Bush Administration policies on a fair
Gautam Mukunda wrote:
--- Doug Pensinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I would say almost the same thing about you when
someone is critical
of Bush or the U.S.
Doug
But, Doug, if you read my posts with any degree of
attention, you'd be wrong. I have variously
criticized Bush Administration
[older messages, April 9, 2003]
Jeffrey Miller wrote:
Yes, its ok, except that we disagree on both the amount and nature of
those WMD. :)
Gautam wrote:
Well, one of us is going to be proved right in a few months, and I'm
feeling pretty confident. You?
Almost two months later
--- Erik Reuter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[older messages, April 9, 2003]
Jeffrey Miller wrote:
Yes, its ok, except that we disagree on both the
amount and nature of
those WMD. :)
Gautam wrote:
Well, one of us is going to be proved right in a
few months, and I'm
feeling pretty
Although, admittedly, having asked people who know
something about this sort of thing, and read some
stuff on how hard it is to find these items, I was
probably overoptimistic. But God forbid that a little
knowledge or expertise would be injected into this
loop.
And God forbid that
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And God forbid that anyone should ever suggest that
Bush/Rumsfeld/Cheney/etc.
are anything less than the very living incarnations
of Jesus Christ
himself...
Tom Beck
Tom, not to be rude, but are you even capable of
discussing these things, or do you just
20,000 soldiers is a hell of a lot, and the US has
more urgent/important things to do ...
The message was that the Iraqi government had some weaponised anthrax
and radio-active materials, both of which would cause a great deal of
trouble if released in Washington, DC or London, England.
At 05:58 PM 5/30/2003 EDT [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
A) What could possibly be more important than finding the weapons
of mass destruction that were the entire justification for the
invasion in the first place?
John D. Giorgis [EMAIL PROTECTED] responded
Off the top of my head:
On Sat, May 31, 2003 at 08:55:23PM +, Robert J. Chassell wrote:
saying the US could not do both. I think the US is strong enough to
have both protected Americans against a threat the US president stated
he saw and restored civic order in Bagdad in a military occupation.
Of course it is
2) What is wrong with that strategy? It seems to me we are finally doing
what
is necessary to make the world a better place to live in, even if,
especially
if, you are a middle eastern Muslim. War is never the best way to solve
anything. I do not believe I am mistaken when I say that I
Dan Minette asked
I remember you making a virtual bet that we'd find a smoking gun
for WMD in Iraq by about now. Any guesses as to why we didn't?
One very distressing reason is that the US did not put enough
resources on the job. Before the war, the US government said that
Iraq
--- Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please suggest another alternative, bearing in mind
that the US
government either did not put 2 soldiers on the
search 6 weeks
ago, or if it did, did not talk about the action.
--
Robert J. Chassell
20,000
-Original Message-
From: Gautam Mukunda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, May 30, 2003 1:47 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: WMD
--- Robert J. Chassell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please suggest another alternative, bearing in mind
that the US
government either
for their beloved lord and master. Screwing up the aftermath does not detract
from what was a successful military operation. But the point of the operation
was not just to be able to declare victory. It was to find Saddam's WMD - which
they swore up and down to the entire world existed
From http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=410730
or
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P121212C4
Excerpt:
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz
By David Usborne
30 May 2003
The Bush administration focused on alleged weapons of mass destruction as
the primary
I wrote:
From
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/story.jsp?story=410730
or
http://makeashorterlink.com/?P121212C4
Excerpt:
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz
By David Usborne
30 May 2003
My shorter link didn't work. Here's one that does:
http
--- Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz
By David Usborne
30 May 2003
The extraordinary admission comes in an interview with Paul Wolfowitz, the
Deputy Defence Secretary, in the July issue of the magazine Vanity Fair.
Mr
--- Reggie Bautista [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
WMD just a convenient excuse for war, admits Wolfowitz
By David Usborne
30 May 2003
The extraordinary admission comes in an interview with Paul Wolfowitz, the
Deputy Defence Secretary, in the July issue of the magazine Vanity Fair.
Mr
--- Dan Minette [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wanted to ask you a question before Teri and I
leave for a cruise to
celebrate our 25th anniversary. (in other words, I
won't be on line for
almost 10 days). I remember you making a virtual
bet that we'd find a
smoking gun for WMD in Iraq
find a
smoking gun for WMD in Iraq by about now. Any
guesses as to why we didn't?
Dan M.
Was it about now? If so, I was overoptimistic when I
made it - 6-9 months seems like a better time scale.
I don't really expect to find that much, though. It
depends on what you mean by a virtual smoking gun
won't be on line for
almost 10 days). I remember you making a virtual bet that we'd find a
smoking gun for WMD in Iraq by about now. Any guesses as to why we didn't?
Dan M.
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Published on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 by the Guardian/UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
US Finds Evidence of WMD At Last - Buried in a Field Near Maryland
by Julian Borger in Washington
The good news for the Pentagon yesterday was that its investigators had finally
unearthed evidence of weapons
--- Miller, Jeffrey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Published on Wednesday, May 28, 2003 by the
Guardian/UK
http://www.guardian.co.uk/
US Finds Evidence of WMD At Last - Buried in a Field
Near Maryland
The good news for the Pentagon yesterday was that
its investigators had finally unearthed
WMD: US Restarts Nuclear Program
by: Wire Services
http://www.republicons.org/view_article.asp?RP_ARTICLE_ID=920
4/24/2003
The Los Angeles Times reported Wednesday
in its article After 'Decline,' U.S. Again Capable
of Making Nuclear Arms, that the United States
has restarted production
death, a high-ranking defector said Iraq had not abandoned
its WMD ambitions
Hussein Kamel, the highest-ranking Iraqi official ever to defect from Saddam
Hussein's inner circle, told CIA and British intelligence officers and U.N.
inspectors in the summer of 1995 that after the gulf war, Iraq
http://www.newsmax.com/showinsidecover.shtml?a=2003/1/25/03638
A former U.N. weapons inspector charged Friday that in the late 1990s French
members of the UNSCOM inspection team actually tried to help Iraq conceal
evidence of its weapons of mass destruction program.
They gave them forewarning of
PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of J.D. Giorgis
Sent: Saturday, October 12, 2002 5:27 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: +++ US National Security Policy on WMD and MAD
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
I thought that I remembered it changing - but I went and looked at the
Administrivia Page on the Brin-L home page at mccmedia.com, and it still
lists +++.
JDG
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
Dr. Brin recently suggested that MAD remained an
appropriate logic for confronting the WMD threat posed
by rogue states and terrorists. By happy coincidence
I was finally getting around to reading the US
National Security Policy today, and it had a very
detailed rebuttal to Dr. Brin's arguments
82 matches
Mail list logo
