The lie which the St.Petersburg Times exposed

[UShaditComing]

I see that Google has many references to the St Petersburg article...but no independant references to 'Soyuz Karta'. I'm asking you to provide a link to the Russian company. No need to get insulting and call me a denial monkey...that's against forum rules.

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

Do I know what a rhetorical question is??

---Homer Simpson

I'm not calling you a denial monkey Dog.... but I am calling the rest of the rabble that. That's how they want to play the game here. If you are a respectable person who doesn't want to engage in the personal attacks then I welcome you to my thread. I'm not sure though what kind of reference you want me to find though. I think it's rather ridiculous to go looking for it when in fact it may not be on the internet now as it was around 18 years ago. I think it would be more to the point to send off an email to the St. Petersburg Times and ask them for the details you seek.

But really Dog......, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time but I think you are more interested in denying and covering up the facts than you are in knowing the facts. Jus my gut feeling on that ya know. So tell me more on your impression of this story. Do you think it was all fabricated? By answering that question I will learn a lot more about you in a hurry and save a lot of small talk.

[UShaditComing]

"The largest mass grave ever known on the face of the earth?" Is this hyperbole, or do you have something to back this statement up?

Well Melanie, it's reported that the US plowed thousands of dead and dying Iraqis under the sand on that ocassion and I don't know of any other mass grave that large with so many bodies. All the mass graves the US tries to invent turn out to be non-existent. how's about you give me an instance of a bigger one with more bodies? Show us you can go toe to toe with the big kids on the block Melanie.

[guyser]

Well Melanie, it's reported that the US plowed thousands of dead and dying Iraqis under the sand on that ocassion and I don't know of any other mass grave that large with so many bodies. All the mass graves the US tries to invent turn out to be non-existent. how's about you give me an instance of a bigger one with more bodies? Show us you can go toe to toe with the big kids on the block Melanie.

Well, it is "reported" is it. But you could not provide any "report'? Too funny.

And Mel is to provide an "instance of a bigger one with more bodies" ? Bigger than what? You never found one, dont know a damn thing about one, cant provide a link to one , and SHE is to provide a bigger one? Wonderful logic there Einstein.

IOW, there is no link to your assertion, nothing nada zip.

And since you dont have a link you now turn it to a US bash since they cant find mass graves.

Melanie can go toe to toe with the big kids, but she traded in her Big Wheel and has better transportation.

Do Tin foil hats keep your head warm?

[UShaditComing]

Well, it is "reported" is it. But you could not provide any "report'? Too funny.

And Mel is to provide an "instance of a bigger one with more bodies" ? Bigger than what? You never found one, dont know a damn thing about one, cant provide a link to one , and SHE is to provide a bigger one? Wonderful logic there Einstein.

IOW, there is no link to your assertion, nothing nada zip.

And since you dont have a link you now turn it to a US bash since they cant find mass graves.

Melanie can go toe to toe with the big kids, but she traded in her Big Wheel and has better transportation.

Do Tin foil hats keep your head warm?

I've given you a dozen links. Don't be a denial monkey!

[guyser]

I've given you a dozen links. Don't be a denial monkey!

Back it up or shut up. You did not provide a link that showed the largest mass grave.

We will wait, or is this more of your dishonesty?

[August1991]

USHiC, if I understand properly, you believe that Bush Snr somehow induced Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait in 1990 so that the US would have an excuse to put its army in Saudi Arabia and then some 12 years later use it to invade Iraq and take its oil. Have I got this right?

Why didn't Bush Snr simply invade Iraq in the first place? Heck, why not invade Saudi Arabia instead? Even better, why not simply annex Alberta and take the tar sands?

BTW, do you know what the price of oil was in 1990? How about 1998? How about the share price of Halliburton? I suggest you pursue that angle.

----

We used to have a poster here who started numerous threads about 9/11. For awhile, other posters treated him like a pet for amusement and then everyone got bored and eventually he left. I have to say that your ideas are almost as convoluted as his. Close, but no cigar. As conspiracy whackjobs go, you're more the generic brand than the premium - more Alec Baldwin than Tom Cruise.

Edited March 13, 2008 by August1991

[AngusThermopyle]

Well, it is "reported" is it. But you could not provide any "report'? Too funny.

And Mel is to provide an "instance of a bigger one with more bodies" ? Bigger than what? You never found one, dont know a damn thing about one, cant provide a link to one , and SHE is to provide a bigger one? Wonderful logic there Einstein.

IOW, there is no link to your assertion, nothing nada zip.

And since you dont have a link you now turn it to a US bash since they cant find mass graves.

Melanie can go toe to toe with the big kids, but she traded in her Big Wheel and has better transportation.

Do Tin foil hats keep your head warm?

LMFAO OWNED!

We lost ChauChee but at least USspankmegoodboys (sp?) has stepped up to the plate to provide endless hours of fun.

Edited March 13, 2008 by AngusThermopyle

[UShaditComing]

USHiC, if I understand properly, you believe that Bush Snr somehow induced Saddam Hussein to invade Kuwait in 1990 so that the US would have an excuse to put its army in Saudi Arabia and then some 12 years later use it to invade Iraq and take its oil. Have I got this right?

No, no, no. Try to pay attention.

Why didn't Bush Snr simply invade Iraq in the first place? Heck, why not invade Saudi Arabia instead? Even better, why not simply annex Alberta and take the tar sands?

Now you're just being silly.

BTW, do you know what the price of oil was in 1990? How about 1998? How about the share price of Halliburton? I suggest you pursue that angle.

The US manipulated the price of oil down to $14/barrel and I already told you that. Yes, I know everything else too.

----

We used to have a poster here who started numerous threads about 9/11. For awhile, other posters treated him like a pet for amusement and then everyone got bored and eventually he left. I have to say that your ideas are almost as convoluted as his. Close, but no cigar. As conspiracy whackjobs go, you're more the generic brand than the premium - more Alec Baldwin than Tom Cruise.

Personal insults will get you nowhere but in trouble for violating the rules. Please try to be nice and have some fun at the Americans' expense.

[AngusThermopyle]

Personal insults will get you nowhere but in trouble for violating the rules.

Pot calling the kettle black.

[Shady]

This is my favourite part of UShaditComing's posted reference:

"We have to take on faith that the image is what the Soviets say it is," Zimmerman said. "I think that is reasonable assumption, because they would not have a motive to misrepresent it.

Yes, the Soviets wouldn't lie. They'd have absolutely no motive whatsoever to undermine American foreign policy.

[UShaditComing]

The part I like about you is that you are now a desperate denial monkey. Ask an american newspaper about the story and ask to see the pictures.

Phtttt! Denial monkies!

[DogOnPorch]

I'm not calling you a denial monkey Dog.... but I am calling the rest of the rabble that. That's how they want to play the game here. If you are a respectable person who doesn't want to engage in the personal attacks then I welcome you to my thread. I'm not sure though what kind of reference you want me to find though. I think it's rather ridiculous to go looking for it when in fact it may not be on the internet now as it was around 18 years ago. I think it would be more to the point to send off an email to the St. Petersburg Times and ask them for the details you seek.

But really Dog......, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt this time but I think you are more interested in denying and covering up the facts than you are in knowing the facts. Jus my gut feeling on that ya know. So tell me more on your impression of this story. Do you think it was all fabricated? By answering that question I will learn a lot more about you in a hurry and save a lot of small talk.

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

[runningdog]

USHitC, you must understand that with this batch of cult like Harper/conservative supporters, the more logic, facts, links you throw at them, the stronger their "faith" becomes, meaning that debating anything with them becomes an exercise in futility. You've hit the nail on the head with this thread, just don't expect people here to have enough maturity to see it as anything other than a right vs left issue.

[AngusThermopyle]

USHitC, you must understand that with this batch of cult like Harper/conservative supporters, the more logic, facts, links you throw at them, the stronger their "faith" becomes, meaning that debating anything with them becomes an exercise in futility. You've hit the nail on the head with this thread, just don't expect people here to have enough maturity to see it as anything other than a right vs left issue.

Actually we're all waiting for the "facts" you speak of. So far all we've seen is unsubstantiated claims about a satellite that apparently doesn't exist. When asked for solid links (not mere opinion) the silence is deafening. Just because one hates the US does not cause immaterial objects to become material and gain legitimacy from nothing.

Either that or the Russians have come up with astounding stealth technology. That satellite is so stealthy that its existence never even occurred, apparently.

[Shady]

I'd also be nice if a reference was used from a country that actually had a free press.

[August1991]

No, no, no. Try to pay attention.

I'm trying to.

Your OP gives a link with the following quote:

There was virtual unanimous acceptance by the media of the allegedly enormous manpower behind Saddam's territorial ambition. Only the St. Petersburg Times, a well-respected Florida daily under independent ownership, challenged the government line.

In a top-of-front-page story published on Sunday, January 6, Washington bureau reporter Jean Heller reported that satellite photos of the border between southern Kuwait and Saudi Arabia taken on September 11 and 13, 1990, by a Soviet company revealed "no evidence of a massive Iraqi presence in Kuwait in September. . . ." "A number" of American news organizations had bought the same pictures (see article below) and shown them to various experts, [satellite imagery expert Peter] Zimmerman said, and "all of us agreed that we couldn't see anything in the way of military activity in the pictures."

The massing of Iraqi troops (whether true or not) along the Kuwait-Saudi border in September 1990 would have been after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and prior to Bush Snr's to Gulf War I.

So, I'm confused. What exactly is your conspiracy theory? Your thread title isn't too helpful.

Edited March 13, 2008 by August1991

[guyser]

USHitC, you must understand that with this batch of cult like Harper/conservative supporters,

That aint me. Strike one.

the more logic, facts, links you throw at them, the stronger their "faith" becomes, meaning that debating anything with them becomes an exercise in futility.

No logic facts links have been thrown...unless they are as obvious as the Emporers clothes.

Strike two.

You've hit the nail on the head with this thread, just don't expect people here to have enough maturity to see it as anything other than a right vs left issue.

More like hit his own finger. The lack of maturity is all his, from his moniker to his info, or lack thereof.

Strike three.

[DogOnPorch]

USHitC, you must understand that with this batch of cult like Harper/conservative supporters, the more logic, facts, links you throw at them, the stronger their "faith" becomes, meaning that debating anything with them becomes an exercise in futility. You've hit the nail on the head with this thread, just don't expect people here to have enough maturity to see it as anything other than a right vs left issue.

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

[Shady]

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

Exactly. If we're to believe these claims, then we must believe the following:

During the cold war, the Soviet Union decided to sell some satellite photos to an American newspaper.

During the cold war, an American newspaper decided that information gathered from the Soviet Union would hold up to usual journalistic standards.

Also, according to USHIC (regarding the first gulf war in 1991):

US needed a war to break Saddam's hold on oil and the inevitable selling oil in Euros

Even though the European Union didn't come into existence until 1993, and a common currency (the euro) wasn't introduced until 1999.

That theory is even less believable then the magic bullet theory. Come on UShaditComing, let's try and stay focused on reality. Don't be a denial monkey.

Edited March 13, 2008 by Shady

[UShaditComing]

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

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.

[UShaditComing]

I'm trying to.

Your OP gives a link with the following quote:

The massing of Iraqi troops (whether true or not) along the Kuwait-Saudi border in September 1990 would have been after Saddam's invasion of Kuwait and prior to Bush Snr's to Gulf War I.

So, I'm confused. What exactly is your conspiracy theory? Your thread title isn't too helpful.

Oh Angus, go back and start from the beginning and follow along with your finger this time.

[UShaditComing]

The interesting thing now is that some of the denial monkeys are admitting the facts of the matter as stated but now want to say that the matter has no significance. That's good because the issue I was interested in was just to prove the US lies. Mission accomplished!

Now if anyone wants to start to argue whether or not the lie had any significance we can do that too. Actually it was covered earlier anyway and people don't want to read carefully.

denial monkeys!

[Shady]

Oh Angus, go back and start from the beginning and follow along with your finger this time.

In other words, you're ducking the question.

Anyways, I found a link to the actual St. Petersburg article other then the propaganda website that USHIC linked to.

Link

Here are a few things left out by our resident propagandist:

Soviet satellite photos of Kuwait taken five weeks after the Iraqi invasion

That there was an Iraqi invasion of Kuwait early in August and that some Iraqi troops remained in the small nation in mid-September is not in doubt, of course. Kuwait City was occupied and heavily damaged, atrocities were committed by Iraqi troops, and Westerners fleeing Kuwait for Saudi Arabia reported encountering Iraqi soldiers in the Kuwaiti desert

The photos are not conclusive proof that the administration overestimated Iraq's buildup along the Saudi border

Another possibility is that the Soviets deliberately or accidentally produced a photo taken before the Iraqi invasion.

That's good because the issue I was interested in was just to prove the US lies. Mission accomplished!

My goal was to prove that you lie. Mission accomplished!

[UShaditComing]

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.

[M.Dancer]

My goal was to prove that you lie. Mission accomplished!

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.