Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Yahoo)   Hans Blix to serve on ski-ethics panel. Plans to spend first term searching for skis, blaming America when he can't find any   (news.yahoo.com) divider line
57
    More: Stupid  
•       •       •

160 clicks; posted to Politics » on 21 Nov 2006 at 4:28 PM (16 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



57 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
A7r3ides
2006-11-21 3:10:44 PM  
Yeah, remember all those WMDs we knew existed, yet he couldn't find them? What a jackass.
 
jasonmicron
2006-11-21 3:30:40 PM  
A7r3ides: Yeah, remember all those WMDs we knew existed, yet he couldn't find them?

Good times, good times.
 
RocketRod
2006-11-21 4:15:42 PM  
Hans Brix?
 
slayer199
2006-11-21 4:21:31 PM  
RocketRod:

Hans Brix?

[image from i2.photobucket.com too old to be available]

/obligatory
 
jarrett
2006-11-21 4:28:38 PM  
I read on Free Republic that tons of skis were actually found, but the main-stream media refuses to report on it.
 
swahnhennessy
2006-11-21 4:31:31 PM  
How far do you have to have your head up your ass to still be making jokes about Hans Blix?
 
fifthhorseman
2006-11-21 4:37:27 PM  
Hans: We have found no weapons

America: We KNOW they have weapons. You suck Hans!

America years later: We have found no weapons. You suck Hans!
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 4:45:28 PM  
jarrett

it's true

The only logical explanation this story has not recieved more coverage is that the MSM is trying to make the Bush Administration look inept.
 
KimJongSick
2006-11-21 4:55:47 PM  
RocketRod, slayer199, we are not amused.
 
Hyaku-Shiki
2006-11-21 5:13:49 PM  
SunOfSam: The only logical explanation this story has not recieved more coverage is that the MSM is trying to make the Bush Administration look inept.

BWHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
 
Howie_Feltersnatch
2006-11-21 5:17:07 PM  
SunOfSam: The only logical explanation this story has not recieved more coverage is that the MSM is trying to make the Bush Administration look inept.

It was on Fox News a while back. When Santorum and some other guy were screaming, "OMG LOOK WE FOUND THEM!" They're old chemical weapons. VERY old. Most of them were likely duds. They were left over from the Iran/Iraq war in the 80's. Those weren't the weapons we were looking for that were apparently an imminent threat to us.
 
davevodolazkiy
2006-11-21 5:22:29 PM  
Howie_Feltersnatch: Those weren't the weapons we were looking for that were apparently an imminent threat to us.

And on top of that, one can only wonder who gave Hussein those very weapons...
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 5:29:39 PM  
Howie_Feltersnatch

sarin and mustard gas have been found.
Insurgents are using sarin against the troops.

Face it, Saddam had WMDs. He could have armed Al Qaeda and attacked A U.S. city.
 
upright [TotalFark]
2006-11-21 5:32:40 PM  
Submitter's either subtly ironic (doesn't work on Fark, yo!) or is dumbly dumb. Pronounce the B in "dumbly."
 
ifarkthereforiam [OhFark]
2006-11-21 5:37:48 PM  
Remember how the more Hans Blix (not to mention David Kay and Scott Ritter) found no evidence of the WMDs, the louder Bush yapped about how we had to attack Iraq until al the weapons teams found so much nothing, that Bush had to start the war before his rational was exposed for the baloney it was?
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 5:40:18 PM  
ifarkthereforiam

No, but I hear the whining of countless libs who want Saddam back in power to this very day.
 
zerkalo
2006-11-21 5:45:50 PM  
Stupid Subby, the skis are under the couches in the Oval Office!

And the circle is complete
 
Fart_Machine
2006-11-21 5:47:53 PM  
SunOfSam
Face it, Saddam had WMDs. He could have armed Al Qaeda and attacked A U.S. city.


I bow to your Troll-Fu skills.
 
freidog
2006-11-21 5:51:11 PM  
Hans Blix to serve on ski-ethics panel. Plans to spend first term searching for skis, blaming America when he can't find any.

The skis have to be there, Rumsfeld was buddies with the resort director in the 80's, he helped them purchase the skis. We've even got the receipts for the skis we sold them. We must invade liberate the resort before those skis are sold to evil-doers and come back to reap a terrible vengeance on Aspen!
 
ifarkthereforiam [OhFark]
2006-11-21 5:52:22 PM  
SunOfSam

No, but I hear the whining of countless libs who want Saddam back in power to this very day.

I believe you are merely misinterpreting your own flatulence.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 6:05:51 PM  
No, my flatulence does not sound anything like appeasement.
 
coma
2006-11-21 6:11:05 PM  
SunOfSam

Thats funny because your arguements sound a lot like a kid with his hands cupped over his ears screaming 'LALALALALA I'm not listening to you... LALALALALA I'm not listening to you! ...' while shiatting in his diapers at the scary man dear leader bush told him about.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 6:20:08 PM  
coma

Seeing as I am the only person backing my arguments up with sources, I fail to see how I am not listening to anyone.

If you want to bring something to the discussion besides a deep burning hatred for all things are even marginally related to George W. Bush and his policies, by all means do so. Don't let your hatred of Bush cloud your mind and cripple your soul, or you're going to look stupid and petty.
 
rppp01a
2006-11-21 6:27:34 PM  
SunOfSam: Face it, Saddam had WMDs. He could have armed Al Qaeda and attacked A U.S. city.

Do you really believe this?
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 6:34:31 PM  
rppp01a
Why would George Tenet lie? All it takes is one terrorist to launch a NBC attack.
 
rppp01a
2006-11-21 6:40:21 PM  
SunOfSam: Why would George Tenet lie? All it takes is one terrorist to launch a NBC attack.

:)

You win.
 
Random Reality Check
2006-11-21 6:45:48 PM  
SunOfSam asks,

"Why would George Tenet lie?"

Pick a card, any card.

[image from psu.edu too old to be available]
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 6:48:55 PM  
If there weren't WMDs in Iraq why would Bush invade? It's great that some Saddam forgot to transport into Syria were found, otherwise Bush and the U.S. by proxy would have looked thirty shades of retarded.
 
TofuTheAlmighty [BareFark]
2006-11-21 6:56:35 PM  
[image from artsci.wustl.edu too old to be available]
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 8:04:47 PM  
Had we let Hans blix and the UN inspectors do their job we wouldn't have been able to invade iraq because the lie of a reason that bush pushed would have been proven false to begin with. Its been proven Saddam had not WMDs. Clinton destroyed what was left of the Stockpile in 1998. Saddam let the inspectors back in before the war but bush didn't care anymore, he just wanted a war and he didn't care what lie he had to say to get it.

Now we are in a quagmire where we can't win and where the american troops are terrorizing the iraqi people. I hope the insurgents prevail.
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 8:08:01 PM  
There were no WMDS anymore because clinton destroyed them with that 1998 attack.

Yet another thing the repugs won't admit because they are jelious because clinton was 100% better than any repug.
 
Bugs_Bunny_Practiced_Psychological_Warfare
2006-11-21 8:46:15 PM  
I guess GW Bush will do a clever sketch where he can't find any skies either after he sends troops to go find them. Haha! Jokes on the troops. That is so teh funny!
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 8:54:09 PM  
PatMcCroch
I hope the insurgents prevail.

Which insurgents? Prevail how? Please explain yourself, because at face value that's a very repugnent statement.
 
Highroller48
2006-11-21 9:26:28 PM  
SunOfSam: The only logical explanation this story has not recieved more coverage is that the MSM is trying to make the Bush Administration look inept.

Oh, really? From TFA:

"a senior Defense Department official pointed out that the chemical weapons were not in useable conditions."

Farking freepers. Even when their own side says they're full of shiat, they won't admit it.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 9:45:20 PM  
Highroller48
What about the sarin I mentioned earlier? Besides, he moved his weapons to Syria before the war.

I find it very telling and laughable that you think I'm a freeper; I would never join that board because those people are farking crazy. You should really check your own prejudices lest they get the best of you someday.
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 9:49:12 PM  
>>SunOfSam

Keep trying. You con-tards are really reaching, a NYsun article
 
omg_gay
2006-11-21 10:10:25 PM  
Ah, the old "500 inoperable pre-1991 weapons" argument. I thought this was taken care of a year ago? You know, back when the librul pentagon came out and said were not the weapons that they were looking for.

Really, the biggest evidence that there weren't any WMDs is the silence about the whole thing from the administration. If there was actually evidence there was WMDs, wouldn't you want everyone to know it?

Rummy even came out and said "it looks like the intelligence was incorrect" or something to that effect regarding the WMDs. If we had actually found anything of substance or anything that would point to where these fictitious weapons were right now we would have heard about it.

I suppose you guys think Saddam was connected to 9/11 too?
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 10:11:26 PM  
PatMcCroch
Educate yourself so that do not look stupid again:argumentum ad hominem. Besides in this instance publication is a moot point because the claims are being made by Georges Sada. But just to make you happy here's another source.
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 10:13:54 PM  
>>SunOfSam

yeah CNS news that brent Bozzell run rag. That guys who scream liberal media.

There is no evidance that there were any weapons much less moved.

Clinton blew them up in 98 case closed. Give me 1 mainstream link about weapons being moved not contard conspiracy theroies.

You guys lost.

Nobody supports your war anymore and Iran is moving in to take over. I can't wait till the US is booted out. That will be so funny. I hope we see some more flagged draped coffins too
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 10:16:55 PM  
P.S.

Georges Sada has no credibility.
This is just a right-wing conspiracy theory and it really doesn't matter anymore the libs won the war of minds and now we will pull out and i'll be happy when we do.

You lost now get over it. We write the history books, control the school, media ect. You will lose even if you win we own you don't forget that.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 10:19:18 PM  
omg_gay
I suppose you guys think Saddam was connected to 9/11 too?

What "guys" are you grouping me into? Of course I don't think he was invovled in 9/11, I'm not farking stupid.

"it looks like the intelligence was incorrect"

Obviously it looks like it was incorrect; he moved the weapons to Syria. But we still found some old ones which means he was sloppy (read:dishonest) with the UN mandated destruction of his WMDs.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 10:22:46 PM  
PatMcCroch

Georges Sada has no credibility.
Why?

We write the history books...
Who is "we"? Are you in a special club?
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 10:38:51 PM  
The pro-iraq crowd are INSANE by the very defenition. Look up the word.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 10:44:14 PM  
PatMcCroch

Rather than offer generalizations, how about you own up to this:
I hope the insurgents prevail.

Explain yourself.
 
PatMcCroch
2006-11-21 10:53:08 PM  
>>SunOfSam

They are fighting to rid their country of the occupiers aka the Us army.

I hope they win.

They cause is just ours is not, thats why we are losing so bad.
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-21 11:00:38 PM  
PatMcCroch

There is vastly more sectarian violence than violence against U.S. troops. The place is tearing itself apart and the U.S. presence is required to keep the violence from spirialing out of control.

If the wrong insurgents win, you have another Saddam or ever worse a Islamic theocracy. When you say you want "the insurgents to win" you display some frightening ignorance.
 
Graeme Garden
2006-11-21 11:59:14 PM  
SunOfSam have you looked at the data pertaining to the number of weapons found and destoyed by the UN weapons inspection team?

It's a real eye-opener, and one of the reasons I was so mystified as to why people would still believe that Saddam Hussein had large quantities of WMDs in 2003.

The UNSCOM team was not ineffective, they did a hell of a lot, but for some reason this was never reported.

Reading some of the posts and media pieces on this site and others you'd think UNSCOM wasn't even there. They were. They were effective, and no doubt the US knew, since they had people like Scott Ritter high up in the organisation (there were also reports of UNSCOM being under intense US surveillance). Putting the pre-war claims by the Bush admin into that context, the case for the war came off as a bunch of outright lies.

See if you can find it (I found it years ago)...
 
farkalingus
2006-11-22 12:20:09 AM  
Wow, Smitty, great representation of GOP accountability!

Here's how it goes:
1) We make up some shiat
2) You can't find anything to validate the shiat we made up
3) It's your fault
 
SunOfSam
2006-11-22 12:35:17 AM  
Graeme Garden

http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/issues/iraq/weapindex.htm

You can probably find what you want in here.
 
rush22
2006-11-22 1:26:31 AM  
SunOfSam

Face it, Saddam had WMDs. He could have armed Al Qaeda and attacked A U.S. city.

I bet the government would be interested in your evidence.
 
Displayed 50 of 57 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all



Redisplay/refresh comments
This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking

If you like these links, you'll love

TotalFark

Come for the Total, stay for the Farking.

learn more | sign up
On Twitter

  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.