#COVID19 | Page 1040 | Vital Football

#COVID19

in_the_top_one said:
Just adding to the mix that SH not only had, but had used, chemical WMD in the past. And I seem to recall he was bragging about having similar at the time. Nobody at the time could be sure he didn't have a well-hidden stash. It certainly wasn't beyond the realms of possibility, nor solely the opinions of Blair and Bush, which is why the UN sent weapons inspectors to have a look.
One of the principal arguments was to let Blix have more time for a thorough search before going to war. Blair convinced the House against giving more time using the threat that an imminent attack was possible, which came from the sexed up dossier and turned out to be false.
There is a lot of rewriting of history about how everyone on the march and indeed in the whole country/world knew the WMD story was a complete lie. I sometimes wonder how people would look back on that period if a few cylinders of chemical weapons had been found. It would still, probably, have been about oil but the flimsy pretext would have had more solid foundations.
Click to expand...

The way I see it, the only ones believing that they had nukes, that were a threat, were the ones telling us the information and the ones that take daily mail headlines as facts. But no evidence was ever produced, inspectors went in and found nothing but still they went in and of course another assination took place, adding to the chaos in that region. The whole act was clearly illegal and a war crime. It was like hanging a man because a neighbour said he killed somebody but the missing person was found alive.
 
Last edited:
Basha73 said:
Is the tea boy feeling starved of attention? You really are a sad little fantasist…

😴
Click to expand...
Altho he rants a lot, I dont see whats fantasist about much of it.

I don't care what any governemnt spokesman says, or any chart produced by scientists said or anything debunker news channels state; any rational person with an IQ over 50 can tell instantly that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Irrespective of the reasons or the perpetrators, that is as black and white as things come.
 
da fuq said:
Stop being a fanny you believed the lie there was no reason to go to war with Iraq
There is no theory you lobotomised bottom feeder, 9/11 was the excuse the west needed to get its hands on oil and destabilise the region so they could also go after Syria, Libya, etc etc

There are only reasons

Or in your child like world view what you were fed and told to believe

Gullible is not a strong enough word for you
Click to expand...
There was of course a reason to go to war with Iraq- you have just made one up. Countries do not go to war without a reason

What you mean it course is that there was no legal reason to go to war. That is absolutely the case Insofar as there actually is such a thing as international legality.

I remember weapons inspectors being stonewalled and denied access at the time, strongly suggesting that Saddam had something he didn't went them to see.

https://www.ft.com/content/07fb478c-3fc9-3a0a-a250-e73ed8351b0e

Hans Blix believed there might be something; not WMDs, but possibly some anthrax remnants. The Australian weapons inspector I remember believed there was stuff there.

I don't think anyone believed there were nukes or anything advanced in quality or quality; but while hardly anyone believed the claims, most people I know were genuinely surprised that absolutely nothing was found; as, it seems, was Blix

It's interesting that you think it was the oil. So did they get the oil then? Do they have it now?

18 years on, have they got Syria? Or Libya? Why not, if that was what the war was really about?

George Bush should be flattered by the credit you give him
 
paz1967 said:
The way I see it, the only ones believing that they had nukes, that were a threat, were the ones telling us the information and the ones that take daily mail headlines as facts. But no evidence was ever produced, inspectors went in and found nothing but still they went in and of course another assination took place, adding to the chaos in that region. The whole act was clearly illegal and a war crime. It was like hanging a man because a neighbour said he killed somebody but the missing person was found alive.
Click to expand...
Nobody was talking about nuclear weapons. Although there are a few on here and we don't need Hans Blix to identify them, lol.
 
paz1967 said:
Altho he rants a lot, I dont see whats fantasist about much of it.

I don't care what any governemnt spokesman says, or any chart produced by scientists said or anything debunker news channels state; any rational person with an IQ over 50 can tell instantly that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Irrespective of the reasons or the perpetrators, that is as black and white as things come.
Click to expand...
No, it isn't.
 
paz1967 said:
Altho he rants a lot, I dont see whats fantasist about much of it.

I don't care what any governemnt spokesman says, or any chart produced by scientists said or anything debunker news channels state; any rational person with an IQ over 50 can tell instantly that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Irrespective of the reasons or the perpetrators, that is as black and white as things come.
Click to expand...

Dude
 
paz1967 said:
Altho he rants a lot, I dont see whats fantasist about much of it.

I don't care what any governemnt spokesman says, or any chart produced by scientists said or anything debunker news channels state; any rational person with an IQ over 50 can tell instantly that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Irrespective of the reasons or the perpetrators, that is as black and white as things come.
Click to expand...

I disagree - but I do find it strange that Mohamed Atta's passport allegedly survived the inferno after he crashed a plane into the WTC and floated down to the ground unscathed. I could believe that people in the intelligence community knew something very serious was planned, knew the likely perpetrators, and did nothing to stop it.
 
paz1967 said:
Altho he rants a lot, I dont see whats fantasist about much of it.

I don't care what any governemnt spokesman says, or any chart produced by scientists said or anything debunker news channels state; any rational person with an IQ over 50 can tell instantly that the towers were brought down by controlled demolition. Irrespective of the reasons or the perpetrators, that is as black and white as things come.
Click to expand...
Yes a special CIA demolition team trained to perfection in the art. Must have been fucking special in the art of being invisable as well.
 
Even if you don't believe the twin towers were brought down in controlled demolitions you've surely got to question WTC7?????
 
jbacsta said:
Cgi is coming on a treat as well. The images of those airliners going straight into the towers but not coming out the other side were really convincing.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's actually many people who think that planes didn't hit them. We all know that none hit WTC7 though
 
'it looks like a controlled demolition' doesn't really do it for me given that there's very little footage of skyscrapers being brought down by an aeroplane to compare it to.
Wouldn't be surprised if it was a false flag, but the evidence is sketchy and given the footage of aircraft hitting it I think its fairly safe to say that this is what caused it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.