The lie which the St.Petersburg Times exposed

[UShaditComing]

Well done. As well, comercial satelittes can take photos good enough to see tanks etc.....but if the photos are being taken where the tanks are not, or if the tanks are hidden, they aren't good enough to spot them.

Proof enough of a iraqi bulid up is the fact they were there in force whenthe coalition attacked, where they were deployed is irrelevant.

Good one dancer! You have said something relevant now and it qualifies for another excuse. But you err in not understanding that where they were is very relevant and it shows that you don't understand the issue. I'm sorry but I'm not going to go back and help you out on the latter. But the former I will comment on for you.

Tanks can be hidden but tracks in the sand can't be and troops can't be hidden from satellite photos. If you will read the full report and learn you will begin to understand that troops require much support and facilities when placed in the desert and the satellite resolution was way too good to not see any of it. No, that excuse is not valid and nobody ever claimed it was. The troops and the tanks were either there or they weren't there. Period! They weren't there on the dates the US claimed they were there. That is hardly in question now.

And the US has never relied on that excuse because it would have been futile. In fact the US is really not making excuses nearly as much as it's just attempting to bury the lie. It won't show it's own satellite photos which it claimed showed the troop and tanks buildup on the Saudi border with Kuwait and one of the reasons it has used is that it didn't want to show how sophisticated it's satellite imagery was. Well we all kinow now that a satellite can see individual people easily and even tell the coluour of their clothes. And that's on google earth's free version!

It's quite time consuming entertaining your wild ideas dancer and It would be appreciated if you do some of your own groundwork before you come to me with your ideas in the future. I like to help you be a part of this issue but I can't afford to entertain silliness.

Perhaps you people would find it useful to form sub-committees for a proving ground forum for your ideas before you take them to the top in the future?

Edited March 13, 2008 by UShaditComing

[Shady]

You denial monkeys need to put your heads together in private and choose which sort of denial story you want to go with. There are several choices now.

It didn't happen.

The Russians faked the photos.

The Times made it up.

It doesn't matter because it was after the invasion of Kuwait.

Lying is justified by the US.

None of it matters because the US is good.

--------------------------

Get back to me when you have decided.

I'm just posting statements from your reference. If that's problematic for you, then it says more about your argument then it does anyone elses. Edited March 13, 2008 by Shady

[UShaditComing]

I'm just posting statements from your reference. If that's problematic for you, then it says more about your argument then it does anyone elses.

Think about my idea of forming a sub-committee with some of your ilk here shady. That way only reasonable and valiid ideas will be elevated to my level. I'm sorry but I don't have time for all the riff-raff and it's nonsense. That's what pm's are for.

[DogOnPorch]

DOP: I'll point out again: no such satellite as 'Soyuz Karta'...so yes, it's all made up with no sources or references other than itself. You refuse to provide links and since you're not a source unto yourself...I'd say you've been hoodwinked by conspiracy theorists. I know you dislike the USA for many tin-foilish reasons...so I doubt you'll want to be bothered by little things like there being no evidence. So the ball is in your court....perhaps YOU should be sending emails to newspapers asking to provide sources.

So, until then....

---------------------------------------------------

I fart in your general direction...

---Monty Python and the Holy Grail

DOP: Hardly...this is about supporting the claims one makes.

To me, it sounds made up...like someone said: 'what's a Russian sounding satellite name?' Most of us have heard of Soyuz (Eng = Union)...which is Russia's space capsule since 1967. Карта is of course 'map'. So it's like someone just threw some Russian words together thinking that nobody would notice.

Russia's main satellites system for imagery are Kosmos, Resurs and Okean. These days, 2 meter resolution commercial images are available for purchace directly from the Russian Space Agency. When Russia was the Soviet Union...up until 1991...they weren't selling their spy satellite photos to the West...for reasons which should be obvious.

http://www.faqs.org/faqs/sci/Satellite-Ima.../section-6.html

----------------------------------------------

Scott Evil: [both are the Jerry Springer show] How could you do this to me? On national television!

Dr. Evil: Well throw me a freakin' bone here, Scott.

Scott Evil: Why did you run out on me?

Dr. Evil: Because you're not quite evil enough.

[audience boos]

---Austin Powers

And now it's you being a denial monkey and I should have realized that was your agenda all along. To say that the event never took place and to be so lazy that you won't contact the Times on it or do any other research on the issue is just more US denial. Inevitably that's the route Americans go because they are not going to ever admit any wrongdoing even when they are caught redhanded. Think what you want because I know that any further proof I furnish is just going to be a waste of time.

It is up to you to back up your sources. Not me. My sources lay out the 3 main types of Russian imagery satellites...none of them named Soyuz Karta. As for providing proof...you've provided absolutely nothing except your opinion. Myself and others also pointed out that during the Cold War, the Soviets weren't in the business of providing spy satellite photos to US newspapers.

Fact is: You just hate the USA. Not sure why...but you remind me of the type who rail on about America without even setting foot on its soil. You should visit one day...if they'll let you.

---------------------------------------------------------

Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me.

---Pete Conrad: Apollo 12

[UShaditComing]

It is up to you to back up your sources. Not me. My sources lay out the 3 main types of Russian imagery satellites...none of them named Soyuz Karta. As for providing proof...you've provided absolutely nothing except your opinion. Myself and others also pointed out that during the Cold War, the Soviets weren't in the business of providing spy satellite photos to US newspapers.

Fact is: You just hate the USA. Not sure why...but you remind me of the type who rail on about America without even setting foot on its soil. You should visit one day...if they'll let you.

---------------------------------------------------------

Whoopie! Man, that may have been a small one for Neil, but that's a long one for me.

---Pete Conrad: Apollo 12

In the interest of maintaining a higher level of debate, please rehearse your ideas at sub-committee level before bringing them to my attention.

http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/jm...er/shafapsa.pdf

Thanks anyway!

[guyser]

You have been thoroughly pantsed on this, provided no evidence of what you assert, continue to mock others , and crazily, wallow in your own ignorance like a pig in mud.It is either that or stupidity.

And yet.....

That way only reasonable and valiid ideas will be elevated to my level. I'm sorry but I don't have time for all the riff-raff and it's nonsense. That's what pm's are for.

Not only are your assertions and allegations moronic, they are without merit, reason and without proof.

If we wanted to move to your level we would have to dig another basement.

Tin foil hats arent warm. Spring will be along soon. Hope you warm up.

[AngusThermopyle]

In the interest of maintaining a higher level of debate, please rehearse your ideas at sub-committee level before bringing them to my attention.

http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/jm...er/shafapsa.pdf

Thanks anyway!

Oh look! Another meaningless and feeble attempt to dodge the hole he dug for himself. Do I see a pattern here?

[UShaditComing]

The Times published the stinking photos you bozos say didn't exist. Read some of this which contains some stories of some other lies too.

http://www.new-enlightenment.com/like_son.htm

Exploiting the Crisis

The first President Bush, aided by Dick Cheney, Paul Wolfowitz, and Colin Powell, now jumped at the opportunity to justify a more militaristic foreign policy.

Bush proposed "a new world order--free from the threat of terror." The United States would lead a coalition against the aggressor.

Arab leaders suggested a compromise: allow Iraq to annex a small segment of Kuwait after withdrawal. The administration refused that offer and all others, not because the plans were unreasonable, but because the Bush administration had decided on a war designed to enhance American power in the oil-rich Mideast.

Fake Satellite Photos

In early January, Hussein’s troops began to withdraw from Kuwait, but the Pentagon claimed to have satellite photographs showing an enormous buildup of Iraqi forces and weapons, 250,000 Iraqi troops and 1500 tanks massing in the desert for their impending attack on Saudi Arabia. This announcement stunned the anti-war protesters, and world opinion gradually shifted, although no one saw the alleged photos, which were, of course, classified.

Jean Heller, an ace journalist from the St. Petersburg Times in Florida, persuaded her editors to buy two photos from the Russian commercial satellite, the Soyuz Karta, taken September 11 and September 13. The photos proved that the entire Iraqi airforce was parked in Riyadh and that Iraqi troops were nowhere to be found massing in the desert. The editors asked two former Defense Intelligence Agency analysts to examine the photos. They, too, were surprised that the pictures showed American jets arrayed on the Saudi Arabian border but no troops at all on the Kuwaiti border.

Peter Zimmerman, a satellite expert at George Washington University, said,

"We could see clearly the main road leading right through Kuwait, south to Saudi Arabia, but it was covered with sand banks from the wind and it was clear that no army had moved over it. We could see empty barracks where you would have expected these thousands of troops to be billeted, but they were deserted as well."

Then a strange thing happened. Major news organizations, including Newsweek, the Chicago Tribune, and ABC, perused the photos but decided not to publish a story that would contradict the government’s information. The Iraqi military buildup, which did not exist, was Bush’s justification for dispatching troops, yet the American media refused to expose the government’s lie. The only honest American journalists were in St. Petersburg, Florida.

After the war, the House Armed Services Committee concluded that at the beginning of the ground war in February, the Iraqi troops numbered 183,000, not the 250,000 "discovered" by the Pentagon satellite.

The alleged Pentagon satellite photos are still classified.

Then stop the silly denial and whining!

[Drea]

USHiC -- they don't want facts. They just want agreement of their skewed views.

[AngusThermopyle]

Actually Drea we do want facts, what do you think we've been asking for? Instead we get opinion pieces offered up as fact, and well, now some chicks home made website. Cast in stone no doubt.

As the Monkeys said, I'm a believer!

[Shady]

USHiC -- they don't want facts. They just want agreement of their skewed views.

I posted facts. Facts from HIS reference.

[UShaditComing]

USHiC -- they don't want facts. They just want agreement of their skewed views.

Yes, that's correct and they also have begun a concerted effort to have me banned from their forum. It's being led by American woman. I've even offered to change my name but that's not really the problem and it's not going to be enough.

Thanks for your support and thanks to the others who have offered support publicly and privately via PM's. The US is responsible for their actions and the least we can do is bring it back on a forum such as this to haunt them. Keep it civil with them and let them be the ones to hurl the abuse and personal insults and this forum can help us to accomplish at least that meager goal of exposing them. They need to know that the world is aware of their lies and aggression.

Thanks again for the encouragement! We good and decent people need to stick it out and stick together.

[AngusThermopyle]

Oops! Messed that up!

Yes, that's correct and they also have begun a concerted effort to have me banned from their forum. It's being led by American woman. I've even offered to change my name but that's not really the problem and it's not going to be enough.

Thanks for your support and thanks to the others who have offered support publicly and privately via PM's. The US is responsible for their actions and the least we can do is bring it back on a forum such as this to haunt them. Keep it civil with them and let them be the ones to hurl the abuse and personal insults and this forum can help us to accomplish at least that meager goal of exposing them. They need to know that the world is aware of their lies and aggression.

Thanks again for the encouragement! We good and decent people need to stick it out and stick together.

OFF TOPIC

P.S. In all honesty I am not at all aware of American Woman doing what you claim she is doing. I find it a bit doubtfull since I've never seen her display any signs of the behaviour you claim she is exhibiting.

We good and decent people need to stick it out and stick together.

There's that ego again. Newsflash for ya. Generally whether one is considered good and decent is determined by others, not by proclaiming ones self to be so. Would this also imply that all you disagree with are in fact not good and decent people?

Edited March 13, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

[DogOnPorch]

More and more it's like that SNL skit Celebrity Jeopardy...

Sean Connery: I'll take months that start with "Feb"...Trebek!

Alex Tebek: For how much?

Sean Connery: Surprise me you filthy bast***

Alex Tebek: OK...That's completely unnecessary. Months that start with Feb for $800...This is the only month that starts with "Feb."

...Mister Connery...

Sean Connery: Febtober.

See for yourself...

------------------------------------

You'll rue the day yea crossed me, Trebek!

---"Sean Connery" SNL

Edited March 13, 2008 by DogOnPorch

[sharkman]

Thanks for your support and thanks to the others who have offered support publicly and privately via PM's. The US is responsible for their actions and the least we can do is bring it back on a forum such as this to haunt them. Keep it civil with them and let them be the ones to hurl the abuse and personal insults and this forum can help us to accomplish at least that meager goal of exposing them. They need to know that the world is aware of their lies and aggression.

Thanks again for the encouragement! We good and decent people need to stick it out and stick together.

This poster repeatedly insulted people and used many techniques to purposely annoy others and yet he has the gall to advise to keep it civil. Whatever.

[DogOnPorch]

Anyways...over...for now.

I've never heard of it (Soyuz-Karta), personally...and I spend a lot of time on the subject of space flight in other forums. A simple link to something else Soyuz-Karta did would back-up at least part of the claim...some other online photos...a website where one could order the product, etc. But nothing...and I looked pretty hard. Google images did turn up some lovely photos of everything except a photo from space.......

----------------------------------------------------------------

Here comes da judge....here comes da judge...

---Flip Wilson

[White Doors]

"Don't be a pansy and let the people see my work!"

hahaha..

classic.

[DogOnPorch]

That's 'An Album Cover', Mr Connery.

--------------------------------------------

Yer sittin' on a goldmine, Trebek!

[Guest American Woman]

QUOTE: ...they also have begun a concerted effort to have me banned from their forum. It's being led by American woman.

OFF TOPIC

P.S. In all honesty I am not at all aware of American Woman doing what you claim she is doing. I find it a bit doubtfull since I've never seen her display any signs of the behaviour you claim she is exhibiting.

Thank you for pointing that out, AT. Even though it is off topic, since the accusation is on the board and in this thread, I wanted to make it clear that it is a complete fabrication.

[AngusThermopyle]

More and more it's like that SNL skit Celebrity Jeopardy...

QUOTE

Sean Connery: I'll take months that start with "Feb"...Trebek!

Alex Tebek: For how much?

Sean Connery: Surprise me you filthy bast***

Alex Tebek: OK...That's completely unnecessary. Months that start with Feb for $800...This is the only month that starts with "Feb."

...Mister Connery...

Sean Connery: Febtober.

See for yourself...

Thanks for posting that DOP, its been so long since I've seen that I'd forgotten about it. Very appropriate to this thread, and totally hilarious.

[August1991]

Thank you for pointing that out, AT. Even though it is off topic, since the accusation is on the board and in this thread, I wanted to make it clear that it is a complete fabrication.

AW, I don't think there was any doubt of your involvement in ousting USHiC. IMHO, I found your post elegant and restrained. You were right.

IMV, USHiC was a troll - in the classical definition of the term. He arrived and posted with the sole purpose of provoking controversy and creating mayhem. He wanted to make a name for himself; in this micro world, he wanted to be a celebrity, the centre of attention.

Mark Twain's style is simple and it strikes at humanity in a way that Shakespeare or Dickens never could. I think Twain understood the ordinary desire of celebrity better than Shakespeare or Dickens. I love Zola but Twain is a good read.

Edited March 15, 2008 by August1991

[Charles Anthony]

As mods, we tend to avoid going into any details about a member's banning but it would a duty to clarify this issue too because UShadit publicly made a false accusation against American Woman in the forums.

There should be no shadow of a doubt over this matter: American Woman did nothing to provoke UsHaditComing's banning from the forums. His banning is a result of his own actions.

---------

and they also have begun a concerted effort to have me banned from their forum.

In fact, the nature of that accusation is inherently absurd because members are not banned as a result of any popularity contest. There can not be "a concerted effort" to have a person banned -- apart from that person's own actions. It does not matter how many other members hate you or love you.

If you violate the forum rules repeatedly and show no interest in participating in civilized discussion, you will be banned.

[Guest American Woman]

Straying of topic one more time:

I would like to add my thanks to Aug91. Your words of support are very much appreciated. And C.A., thank your for making it clear that the accusation was pure fabrication. Again, I appreciate it very much.