Freethought & Rationalism Archive

sir drinks-a-lot · 04-27-2003, 11:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by S2Focus
Also, concrete proof that sir drinks-a-lot and Al Qaida have nothing to do with each other would come in handy right now.

I never claimed to have a proof that sir drinks-a-lot and Al-Qaida have nothing to do with each other.

Quote:

Originally posted by S2Focus
If such proof is not immediately forthcoming, authorities should arrest sir drinks-a-lot and ship him off to camp X-ray.

If we took that approach, we would have to arrest just about everyone. Except Saddam Hussein, of course, after Koy presents his proof.

matthias j. · 04-27-2003, 12:35 PM

So when we're talking about Saddam Hussein, the burden of poof is no longer on the accuser? What makes him so special?

leonarde · 04-27-2003, 03:52 PM

Quote:

So when we're talking about Saddam Hussein, the burden of poof is no longer on the accuser? What makes him so special?

Let's see: documents found at the destroyed Iraqi military intelligence headquarters which say that Iraq and al Qaeda were arranging meetings to plan joint action. And this back in 1998. What "burden of proof" are you looking for??? And, assuming that Saddam is dead, why should we be any more considerate of
Saddam's "innocence" than we were for Hitler's back in May of 1945????

Cheers!

TealVeal · 04-27-2003, 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by leonarde
Let's see: documents found at the destroyed Iraqi military intelligence headquarters which say that Iraq and al Qaeda were arranging meetings to plan joint action. And this back in 1998. What "burden of proof" are you looking for??? And, assuming that Saddam is dead, why should we be any more considerate of
Saddam's "innocence" than we were for Hitler's back in May of 1945????

Cheers!

"Documents found"? Just like all the other forgeries, lies, and plagerisms the administrations have put forth as "evidence"? If this were truly the smoking gun you believe it to be it would be all over the news.

hinduwoman · 04-27-2003, 07:47 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by matthias j.
So when we're talking about Saddam Hussein, the burden of poof is no longer on the accuser? What makes him so special?

He is like God --- prove that God does not exist.

so let us have the full document with unbaised Arabic experts lokking at it.
Then let us see whether the meeting actually lead to any cooperation.

S2Focus · 04-28-2003, 08:39 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by TealVeal
"Documents found"? Just like all the other forgeries, lies, and plagerisms the administrations have put forth as "evidence"? If this were truly the smoking gun you believe it to be it would be all over the news.

Here's an interesting followup article:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/alqaida/st...944752,00.html

leonarde · 04-28-2003, 08:42 AM

Quote:

"Documents found"? Just like all the other forgeries, lies, and plagerisms the administrations have put forth as "evidence"? If this were truly the smoking gun you believe it to be it would be all over the news.

Nice try but the documents in question were found by journalists NOT by any "administration".
Unless you want to claim that EVERY document indicative of complicity between Iraq and al Qaeda is ipso facto a "forgery". In which case, get me out of here: the paranoia is so thick even Mulder can't buy it........

Cheers!

Happy Wonderer · 04-28-2003, 10:29 AM

So far being sceptical regarding Iraq evidence has been the winning position. May not always be, but it helps to remember that a lot of people are looking for the big 'scoop' and many poor Iraqis happy to make a quick buck or two. Sometimes a journalistic scoop is real information, much of the time it just describes the implement used to shovel it...

Come on, white out??!! Are there no shredders in Iraq? Also note that the envoy -- the person supposedly that they actually met with -- was unnamed...

hw

Happy Wonderer · 04-28-2003, 11:14 AM

Exercise -- how would you respond to the following story:

Quote:

Journalists investigating the ruins of the Houston Superior Court building (destroyed in the devastating 2004 earthquake) have discovered documents proving that George W. Bush was investigated for cocaine use and soliciting a prostitute in 1995. The document -- marked "Top Secret" was found amid the rubble of the state's central record keeping system. The document describes a meeting between state officials and an unnamed informant who claimed to be the president's pimp and cocaine supplier. The President's name had been covered over with 'white out', but was clearly visible when journalists scraped the 'white out' off with a razor blade.

hw

johngalt · 04-28-2003, 11:19 AM

I am very skeptical on this issue, and i think Bush has to find a way to justify the war, now that he has used up the Weapons of Mass Destruction excuse.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

04-27-2003, 12:35 PM	#12
matthias j. Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Belgium/Ghent Posts: 191	So when we're talking about Saddam Hussein, the burden of poof is no longer on the accuser? What makes him so special?

04-28-2003, 10:29 AM	#18
Happy Wonderer Veteran Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Washington, the least religious state Posts: 5,334	So far being sceptical regarding Iraq evidence has been the winning position. May not always be, but it helps to remember that a lot of people are looking for the big 'scoop' and many poor Iraqis happy to make a quick buck or two. Sometimes a journalistic scoop is real information, much of the time it just describes the implement used to shovel it... Come on, white out??!! Are there no shredders in Iraq? Also note that the envoy -- the person supposedly that they actually met with -- was unnamed... hw

04-28-2003, 11:19 AM	#20
johngalt Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Chicago, IL Posts: 204	I am very skeptical on this issue, and i think Bush has to find a way to justify the war, now that he has used up the Weapons of Mass Destruction excuse.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.