I am sorry, but I can't stop laughing at the couple of idiot Liberals who compared George W. Bush's supporters to lemmings who jump off of cliffs.
All educated people know that lemmings don't jump off of cliffs to commit suicide. That story was faked for a Walt Disney children's movie titled WHITE WILDERNESS that was filmed in the 1950s. The "lemmings" were actually rats placed on an old-style turntable and spun off into a fake sea.
It is no wonder that Liberals have stupid opinions. That is because they believe everything they see on TV or in a movie. Liberals lack the critical judgement to separate fact from fiction. They think that Disney children's movies and Michael Moore's movie "Farenheight 911" are literally true. Liberals never do any independent research to determine if what they see on leftwing TV or in a Michael Moore propaganda movie is true.
Lemmings must be smarter than Liberals because no lemming would ever believe that Liberals jump off cliffs to commit mass suicide, though some might wish they would.
Here is the story about the Disney's movie WHITE WILDNERNESS that has confused liberals for decades
Origins: Lemming suicide is fiction. Contrary to popular belief, lemmings do not periodically hurl themselves off of cliffs and into the sea.
Disney's WHITE WILDERNESS was filmed in Alberta, Canada, which is not a native habitat for lemmings and has no outlet to the sea. Lemmings were imported for use in the film, purchased from Inuit children by the filmmakers.
The Arctic rodents were placed on a snow-covered turntable and filmed from various angles to produce a "migration" sequence; afterwards, the helpless creatures were transported to a cliff overlooking a river and herded into the water.
WHITE WILDERNESS does not depict an actual lemming migration � at no time are more than a few dozen lemmings ever shown on the screen at once. The entire sequence was faked using a handful of lemmings deceptively photographed to create the illusion of a large herd of migrating creatures.
For nothing more than spin I can easily fend you off and let others judge who looks stupid.
It isnt spin, by the way, the key fact is that THE WEAPONS INSPECTORS MISSED STUFF, BIG STUFF. This is a fact and nothing is going to change this no matter how many little paragraphs you can find on the web.
Get your money back from the Registrar of the University you attended. Typing into google isnt thinking. Education is supposed to teach you to think.
I am definitely interested in your picking up on factual errors of physics that I have made. I'm sure your catching me on physics will make hilarious reading for the board community. Please bring factual errors of physics forward to embarass me.
What I am saying is that there is definitive proof that they would have a bomb in the near future. The Key technical hurdle had been overcome. The US educated Physics phd who lead the centrifuge program, until March 2003, has written his book. "the bomb in my Garden" by Obeida.
We are presently having concerns that Iran can enrich Uranium. Iraq had this capability already.
In the CIA report on WMD it is reported that Saddam had recently increased the wages of his Nuclear bomb team by 10x. This is speculated to be in anticipation of reactivating the enrichment program.
The Bush administration is derided for their concern that the finely machined aluminum was for Nuclear centrifuges. It turns out it was for Rockets which also broke the rules, but they did find a working centrifuge design and prototype buried in the Garden of Dr Obeida.
Please recognise, as you may already, that most of the 3rd world tries to build U235 bombs because a very simple gunpowder trigger can work. A plutonium bomb allows easy development of a large number of bombs because although Plutonium is tricky to handle the separation is chemical. However, the plutonium bomb requires a trigger which must be extremely precise and well designed in 3 dimensions and it is hence a harder route to a starter bomb.
Kamal alleged that despite what the insectors claimed, which was that there was no bio weapons program at all, there was in fact a large and sophisticated one. The documents which proved the existence of this program as well as the names of the scientists involved were found.
The inspectors were wrong, badly wrong, and this is very much a matter of public record.
enough bioweapons to kill a couple million people could easily fit in the bed of a pickup truck. Such weapons are also easy to regenerate if one has the science down as has been widely reported. Hans Blix is one of those who was telling us that there was NO evidence of a bioweapons program. He was wrong then on categorical statements, why is his opinion in any way definitive on a matter of opinion much later.
The inspectors were wrong. It isnt unusual. It simply isnt hard to hide things in a large country that are relatively secret and not very large. Why is this a surprise to you?
Let me give you another example of a weapons issue which was missed until after the war. US Forces found that there were 4 laboratories working on the Aeosolization of Ricin. Ricin, a damned potent poison which Zarqarwi was training people in the use of and which a group was busted just before they tried to use a large quantity of on the London subway, people who were tied to Zarqawi. Aerosolization of Ricin is a WMD. Hans Blix and company missed this this one too. This activity amounts to a joint WMD project between Al Queda and Saddam. This is in the CIA WMD report.
Get your money back from the Registrar of the University you attended. Point stands.
""One of the problems with you is that you like to extrapolate to infinity from one data point.""
That gives "Z", at least, one more point than the bush administration uses for setting on policy.
I know why this guy is a republican. It is much easier than THINKING for oneself. As the former, you can just follow the priest.
Brownie, you have done a fine job.
Rummy, you have done an excellent job.
It amazes me how liberals such as Ellen Goodman, Paul Krugman and dawnofreality mock Bush's colloquial comments to his friends:
"Brownie, you have done a fine job."
"Rummy, you have done an excellent job."
Or, "In a few years, Scott and I will kick back and rehash the good ol' times."
Personally I appreciate and relate to Bush's chumminess in talking to his colleagues.
I don't think Democrats are chummy. (Now the implication is that they are "effete, intellectual snobs", but that isn't my quote.)
I think the Democrats will continue to lose because they are whiny and not chummy.
Even the left-wing San Jose Mercury praised Bush's performance buzz at Cisco this week.
OK, here's a contest: Name the "chummiest" Democrat. The winner has a chance in 2008.
Ok ZZZ, you want me to point out the flaw here it is:
Ritter is confident in 1998 that he has gotten it nearly all. He did not have access to all the files that were in Iraq at that time. Here are two examples of things that the Weapons inspectors missed:
1. In 1995 the Inspectors categorically stated that there was no biological weapons program. This is after 4 years of inspections. Saddam's son in law Kamal Hussein then defects to Jordan and then reveals a large bio weapons program. They missed it, big time.
2. Ritter is saying that they have gotten all the most dangerous stuff. Nothing really scarry left. Problem with this is that in 2003 they found Working U235 Centrifuges. Just an Atomic bomb, nothing too scary.
The point of reading books by the inspectors and by the Iraqi scientists is that these guys were there and they can tell you whether the inspectors missed anything. Both Hamza and Obeidi leave me with the feeling that the inspectors miss stuff. This is not to say they are totally ineffective, but from what these guys say the inspectors came a long way from getting everything. This viewpoint is supported by the two Items I list above.
This is not to ding Ritter, I'm sure he was doing his job as best he could. Reading the books by Butler and Ritter does give you both a good feeling for the inspection process as well as the games of the Iraqi regime. The games the Iraqis play are likely to be similar to the games played by Iran or North Korea, if we get into an inspection regime with them.
As always the single paragraph you pull from somewhere ain't near the story, pulling up convenient paragraphs which you have little feeling for the context or background of will result in you looking Stupid. Again, get your money back from the registrar of the University you attended. Google or Wikipedia cannot replace an education. I look forward to making you look stupid on endless occassions.
the idea that this summarizes the book in any is ludicrous. To you a paragraph is always enough to be an expert. The problem is that this is not true and the result is that you look stupid. Again, get your money back from the Registrar of your university. The ability to find a paragraph at Wikipedia does not substitute for understanding.
So what that the book doesnt tell you how to make a bomb. The man was in the Iraqi Nuclear program, indeed he headed the design of the vessel and triggers. He has plenty of discussion of what the internal workings of the Regime were like, what it was like to deal with Saddam and his son in laws and as he was there during a number of years of the inspection regime he can speak very well to the effectiveness of Western intelligence. He points out some very obvious things that Western intelligence missed, which frankly surprised him. He was also an insider with much specific knowledge of how countries like Iraq and Iran gain access to classified western information. These together make this a useful book especially since you are under the illusion that the inspectors catch everything. He was there on the other side, he knows what they missed, he discusses it.