question

[starvingeyes]

it is the argument of the war hawk crowd that saddam hussein has chemical weapons and intends to use them.

i would just like to know what evidence you have been supplied with to prove this assertion. i'm only asking because i keep hearing that you've got some but i cannot seem to find any. so far, the best you've managed to come up with is:

a fox news report stating that saddam's troops are armed with chemical weapons
a quote from a french minister saying that the WMD programs are frozen. [ which would actually mean that saddam does not have chemical weapons, but whatever. ]

just curious as to see what the rest of it is.

[Corey]

Though there are an undeniably number of resources we do not have access to, here is just a sample of some we do:

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0, ... 57,00.html

http://www.rferl.org/nca/features/2003/ ... 175407.asp

http://pubs.acs.org/cen/topstory/8105/8105notw4.html

[starvingeyes]

so basically you have one piece of hard evidence [ the unmanned plane, which is not, i might add, a weapon of mass destruction, or even capable of delivering a WMD across the ocean. ] and 3 or 4 counts of hearsay, especially that limp dicked attempt from fox.

would you setance a murder suspect to death based on that?

[Ignignokt]

[mosaik]

[Ignignokt]

[mosaik]

[Ignignokt]

yes, we kill them , but we give them this thing called a trial first. you see, there they get a chance to defend themselves in a legal sense instead of being gunned down in a street.


you're starting a witch hunt , thats exactly what you're doing.

[mosaik]

yeah but has anybody accused of treason ever won?

and if the iraqi government gave his dissenters a trial, would you accept that?

[happening fish]

[Corey]

[starvingeyes]