Anathema Posted February 10, 2003 Posted February 10, 2003 I found this link at CNN.com.http://la.indymedia.org/news/2003/01/27595.php
IxianMace Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 Lol, if Bush is really concealing weapons of mass destruction that are illegal, it doesn't matter where they are. He's a madman just like Saddam Hussein.
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 sounds like a dutch authority problem to me.
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 "The Dutch authorities ruled that weapons inspectors coming within 5 meters of the military fence are to be arrested immediately"definately a dutch authority problem.
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 So Holland is going to be next on the US list of countries to attack, after NK of course (I don't want to rush things). Oh wait, these weapons are American ? Oh oh... Houston we do have a problem...LOL
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 hey not our problem if the Dutch government wants some of our technology. if you are unhappy with your leaders bargaining for US technology...well....I suggest you take care of your local issues first.
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 LOL, again you miss the concept. Nevermind, we're used to it. Here's a funny part for you to read:According to investigations of citizens groups similar WMD are deployed in NATO member states Belgium (AFB Kleine Brogel), Germany (AFB Büchel), Italy (AFB Aviano and AFB Ghedi Torre), UK (AFB Lakenheath) and Turkey (AFB Inçirlik). The use of double standards by the US is clearly illustrated in Turkey where US planes are today preparing to take off to bomb Iraq because of its possible production and possession of WMD. Magali Fontanel, a French inspector declared: "this situation is ludicrous. Of course we need inspectors to search for accurate information concerning WMD in Iraq. However it is unjust not to have the same transparency nor disarmament program when we talk about WMD in the democratic states. By use of such double standards the US and UK loses all credibility when it threatens Iraq with war and a change of regime. Will we now threaten the Netherlands with a massive bombing campaign?You must have missed it, otherwise you would have called the whole issue propaganda, so I therefor bring it here for you to read :)
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 i read it all. of course the US has WMD. So does France. So does the UK. And?If there are WMD belonging to the US on any European soil, it is with the open-arms conscent/requests of the respective country. Any WMD on Dutch soil is with the full consent and willing approval and/or request of the Dutch government. FYI: The Netherlands is supplying Turkey with patriot missles. Surely you know that the Netherlands did not invent that missle system...right? The Dutch government is in a mutual relationship with the US...a government you and your fellow citizens elected (right?). So here is your dilemma:You are unhappy with the Dutch having US weapons on its soil.You can either start blaming your leaders for it (rational)...or blame the US (the usual)"The Dutch authorities ruled that weapons inspectors coming within 5 meters of the military fence are to be arrested immediately"
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 i read it all. of course the US has WMD. So does France. So does the UK. And?If there are WMD belonging to the US on any European soil, it is with the open-arms conscent/requests of the respective country. Any WMD on Dutch soil is with the full consent and willing approval and/or request of the Dutch government. FYI: The Netherlands is supplying Turkey with patriot missles. Surely you know that the Netherlands did not invent that missle system...right? The Dutch government is in a mutual relationship with the US...a government you and your fellow citizens elected (right?). So here is your dilemma:You are unhappy with the Dutch having US weapons on its soil.You can either start blaming your leaders for it (rational)...or blame the US (the usual)"The Dutch authorities ruled that weapons inspectors coming within 5 meters of the military fence are to be arrested immediately"No no, stop twisting my words ! I've no where stated that I am unhappy with anything related to this thread. This is what you do in other threads as well, please refrain yourself from doing just that and come back with an original reply or don't mingle yourself into something you don't understand.. please.
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 ok, so you approve of your Dutch Authorities having US WMD on their soil and forbidding inspections? Ok. I stand corrected then.
nemafakei Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 "so you approve of your Dutch Authorities having US WMD on their soil and forbidding inspections?"Now, where did he say that? He may be, but *try* not to reinterpret his words so...
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 ok, so you approve of your Dutch Authorities having US WMD on their soil and forbidding inspections? Ok. I stand corrected then.I never stated that either. As a matter of fact, I haven't stated neither way. I just told you that I never said what you claimed I stated. Stop putting words into peoples mouths to twist a discussion your way. And please stop making me repeat myself. Like said, come back with something original or stay out of a discussion you can't understand or grasp.
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 well if you deny one, you by default accept the other. you cannot deny both.Proposition: Do you approve or disapprove of the possibility that the US has WMD on Dutch soil with the approval of the Dutch government?If you tell me "I am not against having US WMD on our soil" then you are either actively or passively approving of it. How is this logic bad?
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 "so you approve of your Dutch Authorities having US WMD on their soil and forbidding inspections?"Now, where did he say that? He may be, but *try* not to reinterpret his words so...well i suppose its the easy way out (i call it a cop-out) to refuse to state your position on something. So does he agree or disagree with the topic of the post: "Bush Concealing Illegal WMDs In Netherlands?"My point is that if there is indeed WMD being concealed in the Netherlands, it is the fault of the Dutch government, not Bush.Does you agree or disagree with this?
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 well if you deny one, you by default accept the other. you cannot deny both.Proposition: Do you approve or disapprove of the possibility that the US has WMD on Dutch soil with the approval of the Dutch government?If you tell me "I am not against having US WMD on our soil" then you are either actively or passively approving of it. How is this logic bad?No no, I just corrected what you stated I supposingly said, which I obviously did not. You may suceed with others by putting words in their mouth, unfortunately, not with me. Again you want to twist a discussion to your view. Now please come back with an original reply or stay out of the discussion you can't understand, other then twisting peoples words/views/opinions/discussions. It really isn't that difficult. Honest...
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 No no, I just corrected what you stated I supposingly said, which I obviously did not. *yawn* more of this?You can make this into a discussion. The power is in your hands. Here is how you do it:State your opinion on the matter.Or if you choose, you can withold stating your opinion so that you can always fall back on the statement:"I just corrected what you stated I supposingly said, which I obviously did not. You may suceed with others by putting words in their mouth, unfortunately, not with me" So, I will ask you here and now: Proposition: Do you approve or disapprove of the possibility that the US has WMD on Dutch soil with the approval of the Dutch government?
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 *sigh*What I think about this issue is not the discussion here, neither does it matter. You start to twist (again) the discussion to something completely different. Now if you'd be a man you'd stop blaming others that they go off topic, while you need to take a good look in the mirror.You obviously seem only capable of setting up a discussion when you twist peoples words and topics. Again, please stop doing that and for once try to conduct a proper discussion, with your own words and view. Not by twisting other peoples words and views. Man, is it that hard to understand ??
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 *sigh*What I think about this issue is not the discussion here, neither does it matter. You start to twist (again) the discussion to something completely different. Now if you'd be a man you'd stop blaming others that they go off topic, while you need to take a good look in the mirror.You obviously seem only capable of setting up a discussion when you twist peoples words and topics. Again, please stop doing that and for once try to conduct a proper discussion, with your own words and view. Not by twisting other peoples words and views. Man, is it that hard to understand ??i am trying to have a discussion about this topic:"Bush Concealing Illegal WMDs In Netherlands?"In reference to the possibility that there are US WMD on Dutch soil that the Dutch government is not permitting to be inspected.This is what I wish to talk about.What you think about it is the issue because that is what this forum is- a place where people share what they think about things- (the topics of the threads specifically).So, what do you think about the possibility that there are US WMD on Dutch soil that the Dutch government is not permitting to be inspected? Please state your opinion now, so that discussion will be possible.
Dunenewt Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 Who says Bush is concealing them - he just hasnt stated that they are there. I hardly see that as *hiding* them
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 What you think about it is the issue because that is what this forum is- a place where people share what they think about things- (the topics of the threads specifically).Indeed it is.. and not about twisting other peoples words the way you see fit, which is what you do. However, no where did I state my opinion to this matter, which you said I did.As for my opinion, I actually have mixed feelings about this whole matter. I do feel that double standards are being used. However, I do see a difference between Iraq and the Netherlands or Belgium or any other European country for that matter who has those weapons on it's soil. As I said in another thread, nukes scare the hell out of me, no matter who has them. It only takes one moron to give the order, or push a button to have those them things launched.
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 "Bush Concealing Illegal WMDs In Netherlands"Assuming the article is true, for one we are given the fact that "The Dutch authorities ruled that weapons inspectors coming within 5 meters of the military fence are to be arrested immediately."Now, if this is true, then I see no basis how the blame of weapons concealment can be on Bush. If the Dutch authorities are protecting the aleged site of WMD, then it is a Dutch concealment, and a Dutch problem. I see blaming Bush as just another baseless "blame it on Bush" scapegoat that foreign countries like to do (to appease their own guilt?- not sure)
DukeLeto Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 Lol, if bush is really concealing weapons of mass destruction that are illegal, it doesn't matter where they are.The United States is allowed to have nuclear weapons...I fail to see the problem here.
Nyarlathotep Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 "Bush Concealing Illegal WMDs In Netherlands"Assuming the article is true, for one we are given the fact that "The Dutch authorities ruled that weapons inspectors coming within 5 meters of the military fence are to be arrested immediately."Now, if this is true, then I see no basis how the blame of weapons concealment can be on Bush. If the Dutch authorities are protecting the aleged site of WMD, then it is a Dutch concealment, and a Dutch problem. I see blaming Bush as just another baseless "blame it on Bush" scapegoat that foreign countries like to do (to appease their own guilt?- not sure)I'm going to pray that wasn't a response to what I said...
emprworm Posted February 11, 2003 Posted February 11, 2003 I'm going to pray that wasn't a response to what I said...uhh, sure you may pray about it.And it is correct, that was not a response to YOU, that was me commenting on the topic.
Recommended Posts