Bush Concealing Illegal WMDs In Netherlands?

[Nyarlathotep]

"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 for one won't blame neither side, as I do not know what kind of agreement was made between them. Try not to generalize people into countries. Besides, it's not a Dutch group who posted it. It's origin is in Brussles, Belgium. As far as I can see, apart from the police, no Dutch person has been involved in this whole issue. The woman that was arrested is from French origin, but her residence is in Gent, Belgium.

[emprworm]

Why cant you 2 get along... ::)

lol. he doesn't like me. that is quite obvious. i have no issue with him.

[emprworm]

I for one won't blame neither side, as I do not know what kind of agreement was made between them.

i'm from the opinion that there is nothing to blame, really. If the dutch government agrees to the weapons (which apparantly they do) and the US also agrees (obvious), then what is the problem? IF the citizens of the Netherlands do not agree, then in this case, they can blame their government.

If other European countries dont like it, then ...well that is their own problem. Is not the netherlands sovereign? Maybe it is not, I'm not sure. But if it is, it doesn't need permission from Belguim to conduct itself...does it?

[Nyarlathotep]

lol. he doesn't like me. that is quite obvious. i have no issue with him.

Nevermind, I don't want to be accused of taking a thread of topic again.

[gryphon]

@ now clue .. whoever in this thread I suppose.

Don't have any experiance with the US base from the article. Have been to a devision named "afzend" as a child a few times, and now on a regular base are near the "US suport base at Schinnen".

The base itself isn't Dutch property nor on Dutch soil. Anything that whould happen there is totally under the juristriction of the US government. So we as Dutchmen not our government have weapons of mass destruction of the Americans on our soil. If they are there, they are on US grounds. . as they should be.

Not allowing weapon inspectors near that location isn't that strange taken the fact that the inspectors pass to the US from the Netherlands, with all that is going on .. US soil located within Dutch borders has been extra garded the last couple of weeks. Take the embassy in Amsterdam for example that now has active Military Police gards of the Netherlands standing in front of it just to prevent any "accidents". weapon inspectors "bothering" a US base from Ducth soil can therefor be escorted away or arrested. They are bothering [ mayby without reason or justification ] another country from inside the Netherlands.

That is ofcousre if the persone who made the claim is a non-US inspector and there has been no warrent ot law that allowed here to inspect those weapons.

[Nyarlathotep]

I for one won't blame neither side, as I do not know what kind of agreement was made between them.

i'm from the opinion that there is nothing to blame, really. If the dutch government agrees to the weapons (which apparantly they do) and the US also agrees (obvious), then what is the problem? IF the citizens of the Netherlands do not agree, then in this case, they can blame their government.

If other European countries dont like it, then ...well that is their own problem. Is not the netherlands sovereign? Maybe it is not, I'm not sure. But if it is, it doesn't need permission from Belguim to conduct itself...does it?

Like said, I do not know what has been agreed, so I can't judge on that matter. As Gryphon stated, that base is American soil, so I don't know if they inform the Dutch government what they have there (maybe they do, maybe they don't). As far as the Dutch people go, I haven't heard anything about this on the news, so it's probably not a big issue here in the Netherlands. And no, we do not need permission from Belgium. All I said was that that group came from Belgium (they also are/wanting to visit those other sites in the countries I mentioned earlier).

[emprworm]

@ now clue .. whoever in this thread I suppose.

Don't have any experiance with the US base from the article. Have been to a devision named "afzend" as a child a few times, and now on a regular base are near the "US suport base at Schinnen".

The base itself isn't Dutch property nor on Dutch soil. Anything that whould happen there is totally under the juristriction of the US government. So we as Dutchmen not our government have weapons of mass destruction of the Americans on our soil. If they are there, they are on US grounds. . as they should be.

Not allowing weapon inspectors near that location isn't that strange taken the fact that the inspectors pass to the US from the Netherlands, with all that is going on .. US soil located within Dutch borders has been extra garded the last couple of weeks. Take the embassy in Amsterdam for example that now has active Military Police gards of the Netherlands standing in front of it just to prevent any "accidents". weapon inspectors "bothering" a US base from Ducth soil can therefor be escorted away or arrested. They are bothering [ mayby without reason or justification ] another country from inside the Netherlands.

That is ofcousre if the persone who made the claim is a non-US inspector and there has been no warrent ot law that allowed here to inspect those weapons.

ahhhh...i see. thanks, gryphon for that post, I didn't know that.

[gryphon]

As a coinsidence I've been to the US base in Schinnen. No special conditions where there today. They where installing a new thingy at the gate, nothing more. As about a months ago the base was in full allert [ almost but full allert sounds more exiting ;) ]. With a group of armed gards inspecting every car instead of just one guy and a "feelable" miletary precents aroudn the base . . .that state of allert was conceld 2 days later. .

[IxianMace]

The United States is allowed to have nuclear weapons...I fail to see the problem here.

Oh, and who is it that judges what countries are, and aren't allowed to have nuclear weapons? I think the point I'm trying to make is that it really doesn't matter who is hiding illegal weapons of mass destruction or where they are hiding them. If they are hiding weapons of mass destruction that are illegal, then we have as much cause to be concerned about them as we do about Saddam Hussein. Evil can take many forms. Need I explain further?

[emprworm]

the concern of the civilized world is not so much as a nation posessing WMD, as a Dictator possessing them. Take France. They have many Nukes. Yet no single person can say "Launch nuke"...their government is structured in such a way as to prevent that from happening.

Take French president Jacques Chirac. he says "Launch Nuke".

He gets laughed out of office and publicly humiliated.

Take a dictator. He says "Launch Nuke". Nuke launched.

[Nyarlathotep]

the concern of the civilized world is not so much as a nation posessing WMD, as a Dictator possessing them. Take France. They have many Nukes. Yet no single person can say "Launch nuke"...their government is structured in such a way as to prevent that from happening.

Take French president Jacques Chirac. he says "Launch Nuke".

He gets laughed out of office and publicly humiliated.

Take a dictator. He says "Launch Nuke". Nuke launched.

Uhm, to be honest, Bush having control over nukes scares the hell out of me as well. No matter if he can or can't launch them on his own.

[emprworm]

the concern of the civilized world is not so much as a nation posessing WMD, as a Dictator possessing them. Take France. They have many Nukes. Yet no single person can say "Launch nuke"...their government is structured in such a way as to prevent that from happening.

Take French president Jacques Chirac. he says "Launch Nuke".

He gets laughed out of office and publicly humiliated.

Take a dictator. He says "Launch Nuke". Nuke launched.

Uhm, to be honest, Bush having control over nukes scares the hell out of me as well. No matter if he can or can't launch them on his own.

#1) Bush has no control over nukes. Bush cannot launch a nuke of his own accord.

#2) You being scared of Bush is the result of propoganda. Bush has been president 2 years and in that time has done basically one thing only: topple AFghanistan- a moral necessity. All this crap about Bush being an imperialist conqueror is utter nonsense.

[Dunenewt]

Saddam : Launch the Nukes!

Soldier:But Sir, remember, we don't have any Nukes.

Saddam:The UN have gone you can stop pretending now

Soldier:uh...sir Hans Blix is right behind you

[emprworm]

Saddam : Launch the Nukes!

Soldier:But Sir, remember, we don't have any Nukes.

Saddam:The UN have gone you can stop pretending now

Soldier:uh...sir Hans Blix is right behind you

Saddam: He is behind me, yes, but he is nothing more than a corpse. We gassed him. You didn't actually believe all that crap about us not having chemical weapons did you? Now launch nuke at Israel.

[Dunenewt]

lol

Poor Hans

[Anathema]

More like

Soldier: sir, they're invading Iraq!

Sadam: what? Why'd they do that? We have nukes!

Soldier: Sir, we don't have any nukes.

Sadam: don't tell me any crap! Bush says we have them, and all the American newspapers.

Soldier: he's exaggerating. we never got any decent nuclear program running.

Sadam: well, what do we have?

Soldier: a couple of scuds with chemical weapons.

Sadam: well, since obviously I'm not going anywhere and the US is going to bust my balls anyway, let's take revenge by launching them at Israel.

[Dunenewt]

Saddam:and whilst we are at that we can get Turkey as our allies the Germans have stopped the US + UK reinforcements

[Nyarlathotep]

#1) Bush has no control over nukes. Bush cannot launch a nuke of his own accord.

#2) You being scared of Bush is the result of propoganda. Bush has been president 2 years and in that time has done basically one thing only: topple AFghanistan- a moral necessity. All this crap about Bush being an imperialist conqueror is utter nonsense.

1) Like I said, even if he has or hasn't control over the nukes, it still scares me.

2) Me being scared of Bush as your president has nothing to do with propaganda. I do not know where you base that upon. I can't recall that I stated somewhere that I was afraid of Bush, due to propaganda.

[Anathema]

Bush has been president 2 years and in that time has done basically one thing only: topple AFghanistan.

This is going in my sig :D

[emprworm]

1) Like I said, even if he has or hasn't control over the nukes, it still scares me.

lol! English word for that is paranoia. Your fear is baseless.

2) Me being scared of Bush as your president has nothing to do with propaganda.

Do you know Bush personally? Have you ever met him? Do you know his family? Ever visit his home? There is What reason do you have to be scared of him? The UN (not Bush) in currently engaged in a war on terror. Does this scare you? If not, what is the basis for your fear?

I can't recall that I stated somewhere that I was afraid of Bush, due to propaganda.

No, but I recall that I said that.

[emprworm]

Bush has been president 2 years and in that time has done basically one thing only: topple AFghanistan.

This is going in my sig :D

yea, thats pretty much all he has actually done on an international front. nothing to Hussein...yet, but that will be coming shortly.

[Nyarlathotep]

LOL

lol! English word for that is paranoia. Your fear is baseless.

But what about my opinion ? Who are you to judge my fear is baseless ?

Do you know Bush personally? Have you ever met him? Do you know his family? Ever visit his home? There is What reason do you have to be scared of him? The UN (not Bush) in currently engaged in a war on terror. Does this scare you? If not, what is the basis for your fear?

Before you make something up again, no I haven't met Bush personally. But if I need to meet someone personally in order to have my opinion about that person, what have you been doing here all along with your views of others ? I remember you stating

all civilliants are ignorant

=> Did you meet every civilian personally ? Visited their homes ? ::)

Then you state something about the UN and that I would be scared of Bush due to his war on terror. I'm sorry, but I may have missed me saying that. Would you be so kind to point me as to where I've stated that ? Again, you fall in your trap you set for others. Stop twisting peoples words/putting words in their mouths to set the discussion to your hand.

No, but I recall that I said that.

Another thing Throw in more so that your opponent debater looks even more stupid. It had nothing to do with the discussion, yet you think by throwing in other stuff you can set things to your hand. News flash, you can't. Before you start to judge other peoples debating skills (yes, you questioned my debating skills, proof can be posted on your request if you'd wish), have a look at your own and reply to the discussion at hand. Stop twisting peoples words and reply with words they never used. And like I said before, if you can't hold a normal discussion, without the above errors, please refrain from entering a discussion.

[emprworm]

I'm going to make this post easy for you. I know you often struggle with trying to figure out whether I am speaking for myself, or am speaking for you. It will take out the guess work out, making it nice and easy. (that previous sentence were my words from my mouth, merely my own opinion and in no way claim to be yours)

But what about my opinion ? Who are you to judge my fear is baseless ?

EMPRWORM SAYS: who are you to judge Bush? Have your opinion. I have mine.

Before you make something up again, no I haven't met Bush personally. But if I need to meet someone personally in order to have my opinion about that person, what have you been doing here all along with your views of others ? I remember you stating

all civilliants are ignorant

=> Did you meet every civilian personally ? Visited their homes ? ::)

EMPRWORM SAYS: The comment about civillian igorance was intended and stated in the context of evidence for Hussein having WMD. Military intelligence knows this situation much more so than civillians. Civillians who profess that there is no evidence really don't have any clue but from what they see on the news. Of course, certain teenagers grabbed this quote and felt necessary to poke fun of me like some kind of playground bully. But I just laugh it off.

Then you state something about the UN and that I would be scared of Bush due to his war on terror. I'm sorry, but I may have missed me saying that. Would you be so kind to point me as to where I've stated that ?

EMPRWORM SAYS: I don't recall you saying that. I recall me asking that. When someone asks a question, they are not making a statement that you said such. Duh! To me this is fourth grade grammar, yet very well, here is a lesson. When someone approaches you and asks "Sir, do you believe in God?" They are not putting words in your mouth, they are simply asking you, allowing you to put the words instead of them. My exact quote (before you put words in MY mouth) was: "The UN (not Bush) in currently engaged in a war on terror. Does this scare you? " Now, I posed the question to simply ask if you were scared of Bush due to the war on terror. If you conclude that equates to you making it a statement, then we have a lot of work to do in English 101. OF course, this is all my opinion.

The preceding paragraph were the words...and soley the words....of Emprworm.

Again, you fall in your trap you set for others. Stop twisting peoples words/putting words in their mouths to set the discussion to your hand.

EMPRWORM SAYS: My best response to this is to fall back on my previous post, the one that you dodged. What basis do you have to fear Bush? Why do you fear him? Is it due to the UN's (not Bush's) war on terror?

Disclaimer: The questions asked above were not intended to make statements, nor were they intended to speak for someone else. They are questions aimed at drawing out of the individual a response, as to make their opinions known.

Secondary Disclaimer (for extra insurance): The preceding paragraph (above the first disclaimer) were the words...and soley the words....of Emprworm

Another thing Throw in more so that your opponent debater looks even more stupid.

It had nothing to do with the discussion, yet you think by throwing in other stuff you can set things to your hand. News flash, you can't. Before you start to judge other peoples debating skills (yes, you questioned my debating skills, proof can be posted on your request if you'd wish), have a look at your own and reply to the discussion at hand. Stop twisting peoples words and reply with words they never used. And like I said before, if you can't hold a normal discussion, without the above errors, please refrain from entering a discussion.

EMPRWORM SAYS: Yes I do judge your debate skills. Because it takes about 10 posts and dozens of attempts just to draw out of you one simple opinion. In this latest debating debacle, I requested that you share with the community your reasons for fearing Bush. Now, 1316 words later, that question is still unanswered. You have an agenda. Your agenda is to make every post of mine into another monotonous "quit putting words in my mouth" post. I perceive this as you having no motive to debate, only to maintain this "tactic" of yours...running around in circles avoiding the issues while trying to accuse me with every post of stating your opinions for you....while you state very little.

DISCLAIMER: The preceding paragraph were the words...and soley the words....of Emprworm.

FURTHER DISCLAIMER: The preceding paragraph prior to the first Disclaimer had opinions that made statements about someone...those opinions were the opinions of Emprworm, which may be wrong. I make no attempt whatsoever and do not claim to be speaking for the individual. The individual has his opinions which may be completely different from mine.

[Nyarlathotep]

LOL, you know it takes 10 posts to draw out one simple opinion is only because you twist words, like you are doing again. As it seems, it's okay for you to judge others, but oh my, if someone else judges someone you like, one better hide cause you want to know if people actually meet face to face (not forgetting the fact that you rather generalize then actually calling people by their names) LMAO

And because I am afraid of Bush, or fear him as you state, I need to share my opinion ? Why. You never seem to back up what you state towards, me, apart from the fact "I say so, so it is so". Yeah, jolly good one. And my debating skills ? Like said, you, just you are twisting conversations to how you see fit. You, just you are putting words in peoples mouth and the try to defend your lies in some weird way. That's why things take so long. Please stop blaming your mistakes on others.

As long as you can't seem to grasp the concept of any discussion we've had, I'll have to repeat myself over and over (which I might add, I do not mind, I'm happy to explain you the simple basics over and over again, no problem). Don't mignle in a discussion that you can't understand. Stop twisting people's words, stop putting words in peoples mouth. Please, do come back when you've understand what I've written down.

[emprworm]

LOL, you know it takes 10 posts to draw out one simple opinion is only because you twist words, like you are doing again. As it seems, it's okay for you to judge others, but oh my, if someone else judges someone you like, one better hide cause you want to know if people actually meet face to face (not forgetting the fact that you rather generalize then actually calling people by their names) LMAO

EMPRWORM SAYS: You can judge anyone you like. It wont phase me any. I dont judge you, I only judge your motives for talking to me. I believe you have no motive to debate me. I believe you only motive is to continue using this "don't put words in my mouth" tactic in an attempt to....? I'm not sure. At any rate, it is in my opinion that you have no real desire for dialogue with me.

DISCLAIMER: The preceding paragraph represents the words and opinions soley of Emprworm, which may be wrong. The individual they refer to may have completely different opinions. Additionally, the preceding paragraph makes no attempt to speak for, or put words in the mouth of said individual. They are the words of...and soley of...emprworm.

And because I am afraid of Bush, or fear him as you state, I need to share my opinion ? Why.

Nyar Says: "Like I said, even if he has or hasn't control over the nukes, it still scares me. "

EMPRWORM SAYS: Uhhh...so we can have a discussion. Bush scares you with nukes even though he has no power to launch them....why is that? What is the basis for this?

You never seem to back up what you state towards, me, apart from the fact "I say so, so it is so".

EMPRWORM SAYS: I usually will back up/clarify what I say when asked. What claim did I make that you want me to back up?

Yeah, jolly good one. And my debating skills ? Like said, you, just you are twisting conversations to how you see fit. You, just you are putting words in peoples mouth and the try to defend your lies in some weird way. That's why things take so long. Please stop blaming your mistakes on others.

EMPRWORM SAYS: LOL! I knew it was coming. ha ha. The ole' "You putting words in my mouth" thing again? How could you not make a post in response to me without this inserted into it? Rofl!

DISCLAIMER: The preceding paragraph represents the words and opinions soley of Emprworm, which may be wrong. The individual they refer to may have completely different opinions. Additionally, the preceding paragraph makes no attempt to speak for, or put words in the mouth of said individual. They are the words of...and soley of...emprworm.

As long as you can't seem to grasp the concept of any discussion we've had, I'll have to repeat myself over and over (which I might add, I do not mind, I'm happy to explain you the simple basics over and over again, no problem). Don't mignle in a discussion that you can't understand. Stop twisting people's words, stop putting words in peoples mouth. Please, do come back when you've understand what I've written down.

EMPRWORM SAYS: Total Word Count since emprworm asked Nyar why Bush scares him without an answer: 2,212

Now, I would enjoy getting back on the subject without this irrelelvant red-herring side stuff. Why does Bush scare you even though he has no ability to launch nuclear weapons?

DISCLAIMER: The preceding paragraph represents the words and opinions soley of Emprworm, which may be wrong. The questions asked are not attempts to make statements about the individual, they are merely questions allowing the individual to present his opinion on his own unfettered. Additionally, the preceding paragraph makes no attempt to speak for, or put words in the mouth of said individual. They are the words of...and soley of...emprworm.

PREDICTION:

I, emprworm, predict that in Nyars next response to me (and he will respond)...there will be a 'clause' in it that says something to the effect of "Stop putting words in my mouth". I predict this with 75% accuracy. I predict Nyar will respond with 98% accuracy. I predict Nyar will not answer my question "why does Bush scare you" with 60% accuracy. ;)

POST DISCLAIMER : This is a general disclaimer for the entire post. ANy and all statements in this post, except for the ones where Nyar is directly quoted, are the sole words and opinions of emprworm. I make no attempt to speak for, or put words in Nyar's mouth. Any interpretation of me doing so is a misrepresentation. My opinions and words are soley my own and may be wrong. Nyar's opinions may be different then mine. I speak for myself only.