11 dual purpose chem/bio labs found underground in Karbala, 1000 lbs of documents seized.

[Krugger]

Yea, that's what i was wondering. If not Fox, or CNN, what? probably not al-jaz. i would assume. msnbc? prolly not if no to cnn or foxnews. then the AP probably just picks up the story from there and runs with it, so nothing in any AP story. foreign sources? english papers are probably tied to the US in some people's minds, and i'd assume not france or germany, cause they were against the war to begin with...
to the people that think the media is controlled, and in turn controlling us, name some credible sources so we can check there for the story.
-Krugger
(this isn't just to the one member, it's to a lot of ppl i've seen recently)

 

[dahunan]

Maybe they were buried to keep them out of the sun.. that's it.. that's the ticket 😉

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Link up.

Got a link to a real news source?

wow, for once I agree with you. Seems like everytime foxnews reports something, I have to check CNN or the BBC to confirm it. Sad, but true.

WOW, for once i agree with you. Seems like everytime CNN or BBC report something, I have to check FOX news or MSNBC to confirm it. Sad, but true.

Did you hear that CNN story about nerve gas being used by the U.S. in Cambodia? Oh, wait, CNN fabricated the whole thing...sorry.

 

[bjc112]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: bjc112

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Link up.

Got a link to a real news source?

wow, for once I agree with you. Seems like everytime foxnews reports something, I have to check CNN or the BBC to confirm it. Sad, but true.

WOW, for once i agree with you. Seems like everytime CNN or BBC report something, I have to check FOX news or MSNBC to confirm it. Sad, but true.

Did you hear that CNN story about nerve gas being used by the U.S. in Cambodia? Oh, wait, CNN fabricated the whole thing...sorry.

:brokenheart:

 

[Gaard]

Any word on this yet?

 

[Alistar7]

Nothing other than 11 chem/bio labs were found buried in the desert near an artillery plant, the documents themselves after being translated will probably be the best source of information.

The fact that these chem/bio labs were BURIED says alot all by itself, even if WMD are not found in them their purpose was quite clear and substantiated by the fact they went to such extensive lengths to hide them.

 

[Rilescat]

Seems that the documents point some BIG fingers at the Russians. Illegal weapons supplied by the Russians as late as May of last year.

 

[Alistar7]

France was still dealing Mirage parts until about 3 weeks before the war, yes, in blatant violation of the UN resolutions they signed....

Thanks for the updated info though, missed that while I was out today.

 

[Nitemare]

Maybe they thought that digging a hole somewhere in the desert and burying it was considered disposing of them...😀

Might be why Saddam refused when we said that we were going to dispose of him...😉

 

[CaptnKirk]

Hmmm, maybe they are the legendary "Potato-Trucks" of Sinbad the Sailor, he was from that area.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Link up.

Got a link to a real news source?

I would also like to know who Marty thinks is a "real news source".

I know liberals think FOX has a conservative bias and conservatives think CNN has a liberal bias.
Though IMHO, FOX has a lot of liberals on, while CNN almost never has any conservatives on.
Although Colmes does pretty much gets his ass kicked by Hannity every time.

Didn't Peter Arnett get fired from CNN years ago for putting together that fabricated nerve gas story?
Knowing MSNBC hired him pretty much shows where their bias is.

So name an unbiased news source.

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Link up.

Got a link to a real news source?

I would also like to know who Marty thinks is a "real news source".

I know liberals think FOX has a conservative bias and conservatives think CNN has a liberal bias.
Though IMHO, FOX has a lot of liberals on, while CNN almost never has any conservatives on.
Although Colmes does pretty much gets his ass kicked by Hannity every time.

Didn't Peter Arnett get fired from CNN years ago for putting together that fabricated nerve gas story?
Knowing MSNBC hired him pretty much shows where their bias is.

So name an unbiased news source.

 

[DT4K]

What's up with the double posts?
I noticed quite a few earlier then I just did it because my post didnt show up the first time. Must be an AT server issue.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Any word on this yet?

Yep, according to a new article on CNN, tests have shown that it is yet another false alarm. We're what, about 0 for 50 now?

 

[phillyTIM]

I like BBC News, they've been pretty neutral all along.

Thank God the Internet provides us with external news sources, to help decide for ourselves who really is biased or not.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I like BBC News, they've been pretty neutral all along.

Thank God the Internet provides us with external news sources, to help decide for ourselves who really is biased or not.

So you missed the article a little while back by a former BBC news reporter who recounted how his colleagues at the BBC were rabidly anti-military?

Every news source is biased in some way. It's up to the reader to gleam the information despite the slant and check multiple sources to see what continuity is present.

 

[Martin]

Originally posted by: AndrewR

Originally posted by: phillyTIM
I like BBC News, they've been pretty neutral all along.

Thank God the Internet provides us with external news sources, to help decide for ourselves who really is biased or not.

So you missed the article a little while back by a former BBC news reporter who recounted how his colleagues at the BBC were rabidly anti-military?

Every news source is biased in some way. It's up to the reader to gleam the information despite the slant and check multiple sources to see what continuity is present.

You are quite correct. No source is completely objective or unbiased, but some sources are A LOT less biased than others. There is a world of difference between the bbc and foxnews. I dunno why anybody would want to watch foxnews when there are better things out there.

and fyi sources that I like: BBC, CBC, Globe and Mail.

 

[yoyofatjo]

Instead of neffing to increase post count, I think some members have found it *slightly* less degrading to post about every new "possible" discovery of WMD.

I think US media is giving the Iraqi Minister of Information a run for his money.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Bowfinger

Originally posted by: Gaard
Any word on this yet?

Yep, according to a new article on CNN, tests have shown that it is yet another false alarm. We're what, about 0 for 50 now?

So there were no WMD in the labs, why were they buried anyway?

Asfar as the US media, if anyone thinks they know ANYTHING about this war that has not been published in the US, tell me, I will find you a half dozen links...

 

[tbrooks40]

Originally posted by: Shanti

Originally posted by: MartyTheManiak

Originally posted by: Alistar7
Link up.

Got a link to a real news source?

I would also like to know who Marty thinks is a "real news source".

I know liberals think FOX has a conservative bias and conservatives think CNN has a liberal bias.
Though IMHO, FOX has a lot of liberals on, while CNN almost never has any conservatives on.
Although Colmes does pretty much gets his ass kicked by Hannity every time.

Didn't Peter Arnett get fired from CNN years ago for putting together that fabricated nerve gas story?
Knowing MSNBC hired him pretty much shows where their bias is.

So name an unbiased news source.

YEAH, they could have done better than the liberal guy on that show... he's loses me everytime i give him a chance

 

[Ornery]

I dunno why anybody would want to watch foxnews when there are better things out there.

and fyi sources that I like: BBC, CBC, Globe and Mail.

Did your "real news source" ever get around to reporting on this at all? If so, What took them so long?

 

[zer0burn]

tried searching didnt see so its been confirmed that these WERENT dual purpose labs???

And that itd be impossible for them to produce chem/bio weapons I heard this report but just looking for confirmation

 

[BaliBabyDoc]

I believe the near Baghdad lab is considered a poor candidate for chem/bio and far more likely to be utilized for conventional weapons production. A plausible explanation for the subterfuge is Saddam did not want inspectors to be fully aware of Iraq's conventional weapon capabilities. Any legitimate inspection regime would demand access to all facilities which would reveal sensitive information to potential (and real) enemies. Saddam's prudent measure was all for naught with the exception of providing ANOTHER opportunity for FOX to cry 'wolf'.

 

[Bowfinger]

Originally posted by: zer0burn
tried searching didnt see so its been confirmed that these WERENT dual purpose labs???

And that itd be impossible for them to produce chem/bio weapons I heard this report but just looking for confirmation

The military expert interviewed said that they appeared to be labs to make conventional weapons. He also indicated that either all the labs weren't buried, or that some of the labs were only partly buried - not clear which he meant. Finally, he acknowledged that there was always a chance they could be used to produce chemical weapons, but that he was comfortable that this wasn't the case, i.e., they found none of the signature elements they expect to find for WMD production.

I posted a link to the CNN article a few messages up. Not sure if they offer a video of this interview or not.

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: BaliBabyDoc
I believe the near Baghdad lab is considered a poor candidate for chem/bio and far more likely to be utilized for conventional weapons production. A plausible explanation for the subterfuge is Saddam did not want inspectors to be fully aware of Iraq's conventional weapon capabilities. Any legitimate inspection regime would demand access to all facilities which would reveal sensitive information to potential (and real) enemies. Saddam's prudent measure was all for naught with the exception of providing ANOTHER opportunity for FOX to cry 'wolf'.

So he hid 20 trailers close to an ARTILLERY plant? He used artillery to launch chemical weapons before.

They were probably thoroughly scrubbed and tested to ensure they were free of traces, possibly modified so that they could not be used to make WMD anymore. When talking about any conventional weapon that could be produced in such a small environment it would seem impossible to be able to adequately produce enough, hence the need for artillery PLANTS, etc.. And why bury them? From the way they are described they seem entirely portable and easily hid without having any sinister appearance that would even draw attention. The documents themselves will probably give us more usefull information than the labs eventually, 1000 pounds of documents is quite alot to translate.