Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] to me: > === > So you agree with the > thinking part of the world > that GWB and his so- > called "advisors" are a > bunch of idiots... > == > I don't recall seeing your credentials for even belonging to that group, > let alone the memo that appointed you their spokesman. There'd be an obvious reason for these particular failings of yours then, wouldn't there... > == > Now, can we stop prolonging > this OT thread? > == > No. If I have to read YOUR crap, you have to read mine. > Of course, you are invited to filter me. > Presuming you know how to do that. Filtering is not the issue. We know how these threads go in this list and I was simply reminding the readers they are supposed to self-moderate contributions. Regards, Nick FitzGerald ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this.
Nick FitzGerald - === So you agree with the thinking part of the world that GWB and his so- called "advisors" are a bunch of idiots... == I don't recall seeing your credentials for even belonging to that group, let alone the memo that appointed you their spokesman. == Now, can we stop prolonging this OT thread? == No. If I have to read YOUR crap, you have to read mine. Of course, you are invited to filter me. Presuming you know how to do that. mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 BRAVO! Well done bkfsec!! It seems that most everybody knows the truth except those still blinkered by the Neocons and their media brainwashing campaign. BTW, quite a good related article by Manuel Valenzuela (for those interested) can be found at: - http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article14958.htm And lastly; wake up Paul!!! Luv, Ninja. On Thu, 14 Sep 2006 00:26:15 +1000 bkfsec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> >>It's not a joke Gary. >>If you are attempting to make the claim that Saddam NEVER had WMD >you are >>either Profoundly Misinformed, Astonishingly Ignorant of Late >20th Century >>History; or simply Lying. >> >> >Wow. How utterly intellectually dishonest of you... > >Saying that the Bush administration knowingly lied about Weapons >of Mass >Destruction is *NOT* saying that Saddam never had WMD. What >planet do >you live on? Are you really that fucking dense to believe that >people >claiming the administration lied believe Saddam never had WMDs? > >This is an old right-wing, dittohead radio talking point from 2003 >that >never was grounded in reality and shows exactly where you're >coming from. > > >> >>We never did find the stockpiles we were looking for. The closest >we came >>was a shitload of bunkers filled with nerve agents that were >still in their >>unmixed binary form; and some bio-warfare reference strains. >> >> >Disproven... you fell into a hoax yourself.. or really, you bought >the >rhetoric which took bits and pieces of a weapons inspection report >and >piecemealed it to death until it said "WMDs" when it didn't. > > >>So that means that either damn near every major intelligence >agency in the >>world was wrong at the SAME TIME, or Saddam did a better job of >hidin' 'em >>than we did of lookin' for 'em. >> >> >Bullshit. Not all intelligence agencies agreed on the existance >or >number of WMDs in his possession. In fact, there was significant >disagreement in our own governmental agencies regarding those >points. >In fact, our own former weapons inspecters made statements saying >that >there's no way he had the levels that we were claiming. The UN >weapons >inspection team disagreed with those figures and, golly gee, they >might >have a good reason to have disagreed. > >Yet again you dredge up another bullshit right-wing talking point >that >is not grounded in reality... > >I don't need to listen to you, all I need to do is turn on the >fucking >radio and switch to my local fascist propaganda channel. > > >> >>Now I realize that there are a lot of people who don't like GWB. >That's >>fine with me. Not my problem. What IS my problem is those same >people >>sacrificing LOGIC and COMMON SENSE on the alter of their rage at >Bush and >>as a result perpetuating a completely false history of the past 5- >6 years. >> >> >> >Bullshit. You know what's sacrificing logic and common sense? >Ignoring >the facts in front of you, which is precisely what you're doing. > >Common sense says that there's no way he could have still had WMDs >that >our own people destroyed. Common sense says you question the >validity >of sources used to provide proof. Common sense says you interpret >all >of the data, not piecemeal specific portions of it. > >You say you have a problem with people creating a conclusion and >picking >and choosing evidence to support it? How ironic that that's >precisely >what the Bush administration did. You'd have to be a moron not to >see >that at this point. And not only that, but at this point you're >not >just a moron, you're also a hypocrite for defending the Bush >administration for doing precisely what you're accusing the rest >of us >for doing. > >Hey buddy, you chose the wrong side. Don't take it out on us. > > -bkfsec > > >___ >Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. >Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html >Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Note: This signature can be verified at https://www.hushtools.com/verify Version: Hush 2.5 wkYEARECAAYFAkUIcYcACgkQtM6vtsm2y1sw1wCgrEGchQG4olPuMEN9XH9yuazF05IA mwfFKaKF7E10VNmS8pREobW9v5i+ =rUQz -END PGP SIGNATURE- Concerned about your privacy? Instantly send FREE secure email, no account required http://www.hushmail.com/send?l=480 Get the best prices on SSL certificates from Hushmail https://www.hushssl.com?l=485 ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It's not a joke Gary. If you are attempting to make the claim that Saddam NEVER had WMD you are either Profoundly Misinformed, Astonishingly Ignorant of Late 20th Century History; or simply Lying. Wow. How utterly intellectually dishonest of you... Saying that the Bush administration knowingly lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction is *NOT* saying that Saddam never had WMD. What planet do you live on? Are you really that fucking dense to believe that people claiming the administration lied believe Saddam never had WMDs? This is an old right-wing, dittohead radio talking point from 2003 that never was grounded in reality and shows exactly where you're coming from. We never did find the stockpiles we were looking for. The closest we came was a shitload of bunkers filled with nerve agents that were still in their unmixed binary form; and some bio-warfare reference strains. Disproven... you fell into a hoax yourself.. or really, you bought the rhetoric which took bits and pieces of a weapons inspection report and piecemealed it to death until it said "WMDs" when it didn't. So that means that either damn near every major intelligence agency in the world was wrong at the SAME TIME, or Saddam did a better job of hidin' 'em than we did of lookin' for 'em. Bullshit. Not all intelligence agencies agreed on the existance or number of WMDs in his possession. In fact, there was significant disagreement in our own governmental agencies regarding those points. In fact, our own former weapons inspecters made statements saying that there's no way he had the levels that we were claiming. The UN weapons inspection team disagreed with those figures and, golly gee, they might have a good reason to have disagreed. Yet again you dredge up another bullshit right-wing talking point that is not grounded in reality... I don't need to listen to you, all I need to do is turn on the fucking radio and switch to my local fascist propaganda channel. Now I realize that there are a lot of people who don't like GWB. That's fine with me. Not my problem. What IS my problem is those same people sacrificing LOGIC and COMMON SENSE on the alter of their rage at Bush and as a result perpetuating a completely false history of the past 5-6 years. Bullshit. You know what's sacrificing logic and common sense? Ignoring the facts in front of you, which is precisely what you're doing. Common sense says that there's no way he could have still had WMDs that our own people destroyed. Common sense says you question the validity of sources used to provide proof. Common sense says you interpret all of the data, not piecemeal specific portions of it. You say you have a problem with people creating a conclusion and picking and choosing evidence to support it? How ironic that that's precisely what the Bush administration did. You'd have to be a moron not to see that at this point. And not only that, but at this point you're not just a moron, you're also a hypocrite for defending the Bush administration for doing precisely what you're accusing the rest of us for doing. Hey buddy, you chose the wrong side. Don't take it out on us. -bkfsec ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <> > But anyone who FIRST decides what they want to believe and THEN tries to > find supporting evidence for it is an IDIOT. People who are NOT idiots do > it the other way around: Evidence First, Conclusion Second. So you agree with the thinking part of the world that GWB and his so- called "advisors" are a bunch of idiots... Excellent. Now, can we stop prolonging this OT thread? Regards, Nick FitzGerald ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
= Message: 7 Date: Mon, 11 Sep 2006 19:37:01 -0700 (PDT) From: "Gary E. Miller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" Very funny, but humor belongs on alt.rec.humor, not here. RGDS GARY = It's not a joke Gary. If you are attempting to make the claim that Saddam NEVER had WMD you are either Profoundly Misinformed, Astonishingly Ignorant of Late 20th Century History; or simply Lying. In 2002, the United Nations said to Saddam: "Hey, Saddam... Buddy... You know those WMD you had in December of 1998 when you kicked our inspectors out? Yeah, uh... What happened to those?" Saddam replied: "Oh those? Yeah, uh... I destroyed them. Yeah, that's the ticket! I destroyed them." We never did find the stockpiles we were looking for. The closest we came was a shitload of bunkers filled with nerve agents that were still in their unmixed binary form; and some bio-warfare reference strains. Oh yeah... And a whole fuckload of OTHER banned weapons that were not of an N.B.C. nature. But no Bioweapon or Final-Stage Chemical weapon stockpiles. Didn't find 'em. Maybe never will. So that means that either damn near every major intelligence agency in the world was wrong at the SAME TIME, or Saddam did a better job of hidin' 'em than we did of lookin' for 'em. Now I realize that there are a lot of people who don't like GWB. That's fine with me. Not my problem. What IS my problem is those same people sacrificing LOGIC and COMMON SENSE on the alter of their rage at Bush and as a result perpetuating a completely false history of the past 5-6 years. As a result, we end up idiocy like the fake Ranger that c0ntex was trumpeting all over the list because he simply didn't know any better; or morons who go around whining about a 9/11 plot allegedly committed in complete secrecy by some cabal within a government that hasn't managed to keep a single goddamned secret for over 200 years. Anyone in the info-security business that actually buys into that kind of nonsense should be ashamed of themselves and furthermore; probably shouldn't be IN this business. I don't have a problem with people attacking GWB. He's made plenty of mistakes on a wide variety of issues and he SHOULD be criticized for them. But anyone who FIRST decides what they want to believe and THEN tries to find supporting evidence for it is an IDIOT. People who are NOT idiots do it the other way around: Evidence First, Conclusion Second. mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
On 12/09/06, Paul Schmehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: This is stupid. There's tons of documentation in the public domain that refutes your assertions. Go read the International Chemical Weapons agreements, which clearly state that white phosphorus is *not* defined as a chemical weapon. Given that, nothing else needs to be explained. No one has to prove anything to you. Furthermore, you wouldn't believe it if someone did prove it. You've already asserted that no matter what anyone says about Jesse Macbeth, you'll just excuse it away as manipulation by the evil people of the world. Even his own discharge papers, posted on his own website, showed that he was washed out of boot camp. Why are you putting words in to my mouth? I never said I would not believe about Jessy being in error, if you follow the thread, I merely shared a video witha comment stating that it was disgusting - then some soldier got on his horse and went to war with me, a bit like Bush did. I actually updated my blog more than 3 hours ago with information statign Jessy was a hoax, I never knew and I accept that - Then I merely presented information to show that it COULD have been a cover up, nothing more. If you are going to make a claim, provide evidence to back it up, that is why I asked for proof. That is why most of the Globe ate up Bush & Blairs fairytale in the first place, talk is cheap and evidence is invisible. -- regards c0ntex ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
--On Tuesday, September 12, 2006 09:12:14 +0100 c0ntex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Good sir, if what you say be true, show me your proof. Also, using your medical training, explain the injuries to the bodies in Falluja. This is stupid. There's tons of documentation in the public domain that refutes your assertions. Go read the International Chemical Weapons agreements, which clearly state that white phosphorus is *not* defined as a chemical weapon. Given that, nothing else needs to be explained. No one has to prove anything to you. Furthermore, you wouldn't believe it if someone did prove it. You've already asserted that no matter what anyone says about Jesse Macbeth, you'll just excuse it away as manipulation by the evil people of the world. Even his own discharge papers, posted on his own website, showed that he was washed out of boot camp. Stop wasting our time with this crap. Paul Schmehl ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Adjunct Information Security Officer The University of Texas at Dallas http://www.utdallas.edu/ir/security/ p7sK93ax6xUlv.p7s Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
On 12/09/06, bkfsec <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: I think you two are using different definitions for Chemical Weapons, perhaps. I think so, though chemical weapons have been used. There are hundereds / thousands of bodies that have been melted almost to the bone, while their clothes are in flawless tact, some have other horrific injuries yet they same outcome, either skin has peeled away from the flesh of their bodies, while parts of their face, or limbs have melted away completly - others who are alive have abnormalities appearing, strange bulges in their limbs, one childs head has expanded (one who survived) yet the victims clothes are still undamaged, pretty neat bullets and pretty neat smoke. -- regards c0ntex ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If you consider that America are able to lie about the weapons of mass destruction and then admit it, "America" never lied about WMD. America is not in a position to prove that any WMD stockpiles existed past December of 1998, when Saddam kicked out the UN; but at worst that makes them wrong, not liars. You're right, America never lied about WMD. Our neo-fascist administration did. Argue against that to your own peril. It's pretty well documented at this point and others of a more recognized and respected ilk have made the case better than I ever could... = use chemical weapons in Iraq and lie about it and then admit it = America did not use Nerve Agents or Blister Agents in Iraq. Nerve Agents and Blister Agents are "Chemical Waepons". Smoke Generators and tear gas are not. Unless of course you are seeking to redefine the word to fit a political agenda. Technicality: perhaps not in the military, but many doctors and chemists consider tear gas to be a nerve agent as it does have some of the effects of nerve agents, just not the extreme effects we think about when we think about chemical weapon WMDs. But there are many cases where exposure to tear gas has caused long-lasting, sometimes lifelong, effects on the nervous system. I think you two are using different definitions for Chemical Weapons, perhaps. -bkfsec ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] Re: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
On Mon, 11 Sep 2006 21:32:52 -0400 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > "America" never lied about WMD. Of course it did not, a country cannot lie. The US and UK gouvernments did. It is rather unfortunate that mostly those country's clueless citizens do have to pay for their administrations aberrations. -- Denis Jedig syneticon networks GbR http://syneticon.net/service/ ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
Good sir, if what you say be true, show me your proof. Also, using your medical training, explain the injuries to the bodies in Falluja. Thanks :-) On 12/09/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Contex - >If you consider that America are >able to lie about the weapons of mass >destruction and then admit it, "America" never lied about WMD. America is not in a position to prove that any WMD stockpiles existed past December of 1998, when Saddam kicked out the UN; but at worst that makes them wrong, not liars. = >use chemical weapons in Iraq and lie >about it and then admit it = America did not use Nerve Agents or Blister Agents in Iraq. Nerve Agents and Blister Agents are "Chemical Waepons". Smoke Generators and tear gas are not. Unless of course you are seeking to redefine the word to fit a political agenda. >On Wikipedia they also discuss the >mans "criminal history", what has >that got to do with anything other >than making the man seem unreliable. He IS unrealiable. He is also a fake. His criminal history is part of his backstory. On a personal note, speaking as someone who HAS served with the 3/75 Ranger Regiment, it is my opinion that after what he did to besmirch the honor of a Regiment that he never belonged to in the first place, he deserves to have his name dragged through the mud. HE brought it upon HIMSELF. == >There are numerous other people >who talk about the terror that has >gone on in Iraq, including the use >white phosphorous == White Phosphorous rounds are used to generate what is known as "Quick Smoke". It's called "Quick Smoke" because WP rapidly generates thick white clouds of dense smoke and as such is useful for situations where you want to obscure the movement of friendly troops. For the record, I did not look that up on Wikipedia, it was part of my military Training as a Forward Observer. I am an expert of what is known as Indirect Fire Support and the ammunition used therein. So when I tell you that WP is a SMOKE GENERATOR and is neither a "Chemical Weapon" within the meaning of "WMD", nor is it even remotely related to Napalm. You do your cause no favor when you join the "Tinfoil Hat" brigade. mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/ -- regards c0ntex ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
Re: [Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Yo Throwaway1! On Mon, 11 Sep 2006, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >If you consider that America are > >able to lie about the weapons of mass > >destruction and then admit it, > > "America" never lied about WMD. > America is not in a position to prove that any WMD stockpiles > existed past December of 1998, when Saddam kicked out the UN; but > at worst that makes them wrong, not liars. Very funny, but humor belongs on alt.rec.humor, not here. RGDS GARY - --- Gary E. Miller Rellim 20340 Empire Blvd, Suite E-3, Bend, OR 97701 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tel:+1(541)382-8588 -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFFBh1R8KZibdeR3qURAmaOAKCs4EuGqfQcOa5qSbBM5dGzCWtQYQCg4x/t SSFIaMyszfa3PXFNGfchciA= =bvUj -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] RE: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
Contex - >If you consider that America are >able to lie about the weapons of mass >destruction and then admit it, "America" never lied about WMD. America is not in a position to prove that any WMD stockpiles existed past December of 1998, when Saddam kicked out the UN; but at worst that makes them wrong, not liars. = >use chemical weapons in Iraq and lie >about it and then admit it = America did not use Nerve Agents or Blister Agents in Iraq. Nerve Agents and Blister Agents are "Chemical Waepons". Smoke Generators and tear gas are not. Unless of course you are seeking to redefine the word to fit a political agenda. >On Wikipedia they also discuss the >mans "criminal history", what has >that got to do with anything other >than making the man seem unreliable. He IS unrealiable. He is also a fake. His criminal history is part of his backstory. On a personal note, speaking as someone who HAS served with the 3/75 Ranger Regiment, it is my opinion that after what he did to besmirch the honor of a Regiment that he never belonged to in the first place, he deserves to have his name dragged through the mud. HE brought it upon HIMSELF. == >There are numerous other people >who talk about the terror that has >gone on in Iraq, including the use >white phosphorous == White Phosphorous rounds are used to generate what is known as "Quick Smoke". It's called "Quick Smoke" because WP rapidly generates thick white clouds of dense smoke and as such is useful for situations where you want to obscure the movement of friendly troops. For the record, I did not look that up on Wikipedia, it was part of my military Training as a Forward Observer. I am an expert of what is known as Indirect Fire Support and the ammunition used therein. So when I tell you that WP is a SMOKE GENERATOR and is neither a "Chemical Weapon" within the meaning of "WMD", nor is it even remotely related to Napalm. You do your cause no favor when you join the "Tinfoil Hat" brigade. mail2web - Check your email from the web at http://mail2web.com/ . ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
[Full-disclosure] Re: OT - Check this out - Full disclosure is apt for this
Another: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-5702006622816922747 Makes me sick. On 10/09/06, c0ntex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-5587990522549547050 -- regards c0ntex -- regards c0ntex ___ Full-Disclosure - We believe in it. Charter: http://lists.grok.org.uk/full-disclosure-charter.html Hosted and sponsored by Secunia - http://secunia.com/
