Baghdad airport safe to fly ??

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , Jarg
writes
Easy for you to say, your family wasn't being fed into meat grinders
under
Saddam.

Did anyone ever actually find that shredder? It was "alleged" by a
"defector" who "heard it from other dissidents" - turns out nobody ever
actually saw it, nobody ever found it, nobody can name anyone fed
through it.


http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog...shredde_2.html


Jarg

In message , Jarg
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
Did anyone ever actually find that shredder? It was "alleged" by a
"defector" who "heard it from other dissidents" - turns out nobody ever
actually saw it, nobody ever found it, nobody can name anyone fed
through it.

http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog...shredde_2.html

In other words, the claims remain anonymous, uncorroborated and unproven
(and you confirm that nobody ever found the shredder, despite supposedly
being told which prison to check) - there's an anonymous untraceable
anecdote with not a hint of physical evidence.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , Jarg
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
Did anyone ever actually find that shredder? It was "alleged" by a
"defector" who "heard it from other dissidents" - turns out nobody ever
actually saw it, nobody ever found it, nobody can name anyone fed
through it.

http://normblog.typepad.com/normblog...shredde_2.html

In other words, the claims remain anonymous, uncorroborated and unproven
(and you confirm that nobody ever found the shredder, despite supposedly
being told which prison to check) - there's an anonymous untraceable
anecdote with not a hint of physical evidence.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

That's not what I got out of the article at all. At this point, the more
obvious conclusion is that the shredder did exist and was used. Of course
that doesn't fit you agenda so I doubt you will accept the evidence.

Jarg

In message , Jarg
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In other words, the claims remain anonymous, uncorroborated and unproven
(and you confirm that nobody ever found the shredder, despite supposedly
being told which prison to check) - there's an anonymous untraceable
anecdote with not a hint of physical evidence.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

That's not what I got out of the article at all.

So where's the shredder?

At this point, the more
obvious conclusion is that the shredder did exist and was used.

So where is it? Saddam Hussein and his sons couldn't get _themselves_
out of Iraq undetected yet they managed to completely and totally hide a
large piece of industrial machinery?

If you were Saddam Hussein, would you really think "Damn, those Yankee
infidels are closing in on me! I can get one shipment out of the
country... I'd better get my people-shredder away, while I live in a
miserable hole in the ground until the infidel Yankees catch me!"

Of course
that doesn't fit you agenda so I doubt you will accept the evidence.

If it existed and the evidence is that strong, where is the hardware?

It's getting on for a year since the prison was captured: where's the
shredder?

Show me some evidence. Not hearsay, not "some bloke said so but refused
to let us use his name". The shredder was named and shamed with an exact
location: yet it wasn't actually there.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

"Paul J. Adam" wrote

So where is it? Saddam Hussein and his sons couldn't get _themselves_
out of Iraq undetected yet they managed to completely and totally hide a
large piece of industrial machinery?

If they can hide a MiG in the sand, what else did they hide out there?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3116259.stm

Pete

"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In message , Jarg
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
In other words, the claims remain anonymous, uncorroborated and
unproven
(and you confirm that nobody ever found the shredder, despite
supposedly
being told which prison to check) - there's an anonymous untraceable
anecdote with not a hint of physical evidence.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

That's not what I got out of the article at all.

So where's the shredder?

At this point, the more
obvious conclusion is that the shredder did exist and was used.

So where is it? Saddam Hussein and his sons couldn't get _themselves_
out of Iraq undetected yet they managed to completely and totally hide a
large piece of industrial machinery?

If you were Saddam Hussein, would you really think "Damn, those Yankee
infidels are closing in on me! I can get one shipment out of the
country... I'd better get my people-shredder away, while I live in a
miserable hole in the ground until the infidel Yankees catch me!"

Of course
that doesn't fit you agenda so I doubt you will accept the evidence.

If it existed and the evidence is that strong, where is the hardware?

It's getting on for a year since the prison was captured: where's the
shredder?

Show me some evidence. Not hearsay, not "some bloke said so but refused
to let us use his name". The shredder was named and shamed with an exact
location: yet it wasn't actually there.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

http://www.indict.org.uk/about.php

We do have evidence, mainly credible witnesses, you just don't want to
accept it. There is no reason to believe Indict is fabricating the story,
nor can I imagine why their witness would. It also seems likely that the
shredder would have been destroyed when the coalition began it's advance
into Iraq, certainly that's what I would have done were I in Saddams place.
Of course there is a possibility the shredder didn't exist, but at this
point I think a fair person would acknowlege that is more likely than not
that it did. But as I already said, that doesn't mesh with your agenda so
you will continue to demand unreasonably high standards of proof.

Jarg

In message , Jarg
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in message
...
If it existed and the evidence is that strong, where is the hardware?

It's getting on for a year since the prison was captured: where's the
shredder?

Show me some evidence. Not hearsay, not "some bloke said so but refused
to let us use his name". The shredder was named and shamed with an exact
location: yet it wasn't actually there.

We do have evidence, mainly credible witnesses, you just don't want to
accept it.

Who are these "credible witnesses"?

There is no reason to believe Indict is fabricating the story,
nor can I imagine why their witness would.

Because atrocity stories are good for publicity.

It also seems likely that the
shredder would have been destroyed when the coalition began it's advance
into Iraq, certainly that's what I would have done were I in Saddams place.

So where's the wreckage, or by "destroyed" do you mean "disintegrated"?
Again, with US tanks closing in, these Iraqis are notionally more
interested in destroying evidence than in escaping?

Of course there is a possibility the shredder didn't exist, but at this
point I think a fair person would acknowlege that is more likely than not
that it did.

A "fair person" would ask to see it, or at least for more than nameless
hearsay.

But as I already said, that doesn't mesh with your agenda so
you will continue to demand unreasonably high standards of proof.

I've got some prime farmland for sale and "credible witnesses" who are
sure there's oil, gold *and* diamonds to be had under it: want to buy?

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk