You're right on that article, i misread, my fault.
Although the 'no knowledge' thing is kinda funny.
BTW UT while the guardian may not suit your tastes it is one of the most respected pieces of international journalism and is synicated into newspapers all over the world.
Ok.
Here.(CNS)
Here.(Sunday Herald)
This one in the NY Observer is an extension of the Sunday Times one.
Try Those for size, to quote the Sunday Times:
Quote:
|
Reports by the US Senate's committee on banking, housing and urban affairs -- which oversees American exports policy -- reveal that the US, under the successive administrations of Ronald Reagan and George Bush Snr, sold materials including anthrax, VX nerve gas, West Nile fever germs and botulism to Iraq right up until March 1992, as well as germs similar to tuberculosis and pneumonia. Other bacteria sold included brucella melitensis, which damages major organs, and clostridium perfringens, which causes gas gangrene.
|
It's also worth noting that article debunks claims about the production of WMDs.
Quote:
|
Jaguar, I think you should change your signature. Something along the lines of "I'm a very busy college student and don't really have time to properly devote my superior intelligence and comprehension of all things social and political to a silly website like this. Therefore please understand that all postings here are simply the tip of the iceberg when compared to what knowledge and brilliance I could bring here if I were so inclined."
|
Well pardon me. Oddly enough i *don't* have all the time in the world to make posts on here, so i thought i'd cover the quickest stuff before i left, and the rest when i returned which is what i'm doing now. In short, bite me.
Could you please find an example where i've posted either of the two lines you when qoute below please?
Quote:
|
Where did I say we weren't hypocrites? Read my above post -- "the U.S. isn't squeaky-clean". I'm only saying that if we perceive a very real threat to our nation, we can and should act on that threat. With the support of the world if possible, but without it if necessary.
|
Well i've yet to hear you explain the the fuck attacking Iraq makes the world a safer place for anyone. Yea pushing a madman with bio/chem weapons into a corner (just before elections are coming up), without any firm evidence he's done anything recently, had any role with Al Queda or has done anything Isreal has not done in realtion to UN resolutions sure sounds good to me. Not to mention that if Isreal things which section of the UN charter those resolutions are made under makes the slightest bit of difference to their validity they have another thing coming.