# WMD FOUND! Woooohooooooooo! **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 17, 2004, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616 "2004-05-17T15:42:29Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2004, 10:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/121 "2004-05-22T22:24:21Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > **SimonX** , quoting Ritter now, are we? You have really been scraping the bottom of the barrel lately. Notice how worthless your cite is: First, Scotty takes a break from chasing underage girls to say, “Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache.” But what evidence does he put forth? A nice blurb about dud rates, but he doesn’t know, he says he doesn’t know, yet he is still confident in saying that this shell was a dud/not from a cache? > > All we know for sure is that a shell containing Sarin went off. We don’t know if it was a dud, or snatched up from some cache somewhere. > > You’re getting downright **Reeder** esque. Ritter said that in order for this to be evidence of _the_ stockpiles, certain information has to be ascertained as to the shell’s condition. Mr. Ritter points out that this information hasn’t been supplied. He then says that without these particular bits of information that are indicative of the shell’s condition, one cannot conclude the shell is evidence of _the_ stockpiles. Can you can either 1) show where the information in question has been reported? or 2) show how the relevant conditions of the shell can be determined from the information that _has_ been made available? ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [May 22, 2004, 11:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/122 "2004-05-22T23:01:49Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > Ritter said that in order for this to be evidence of _the_ stockpiles, certain information has to be ascertained as to the shell’s condition. > Mr. Ritter points out that this information hasn’t been supplied. > He then says that without these particular bits of information that are indicative of the shell’s condition, one cannot conclude the shell is evidence of _the_ stockpiles. Sure. But without that evidence, he also can’t say that the shell _isn’t_ from potential stockpiles. Yet he does. > [@](#): > > Can you can either 1) show where the information in question has been reported? or 2) show how the relevant conditions of the shell can be determined from the information that _has_ been made available? [/quote] Nope. But I am not saying that it neccesarily was or was not from a stockpile. The burden of proof is on those who want to make a definitive statement on the matter, and Mssr. Ritter has no proof. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/123 "2004-05-23T02:03:14Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > The burden of proof is on those who want to make a definitive statement on the matter So you’re now willing to admit that the president failed his country when he led us into war based on definitive yet unproven claims? ---
**Author:** ![Typo\_Negative](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/typo_negative/32/484_2.png) [@Typo\_Negative](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Typo_Negative)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/124 "2004-05-23T02:08:57Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Nope. But I am not saying that it neccesarily was or was not from a stockpile. The burden of proof is on those who want to make a **definitive statement on the matter** , and Mssr. Ritter has no proof. But Ritter is not saying it was or wasn’t. He’s saying that the information needed to make that cdetermination has not been provided. > [@](#): > > Given what’s known about sarin shells, the US could be expected to offer a careful recital of the data with news of the shell. But facts that should have accompanied the story…were absent. _And that’s opened the door to irresponsible speculation that the shell was part of a live WMD stockpile_. The data - available to the ISG - would put this development in proper perspective - allowing responsible discussion of the event and its possible ramifications ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/125 "2004-05-23T02:45:26Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > So you’re now willing to admit that the president failed his country when he led us into war based on definitive yet unproven claims? Did LBJ failed his country when he declared the war on poverty? Ultimately, it’s not a validity of the cause that matters, but the goodness of intentions and perseverance in making them come true. I don’t believe I have to explain it to you. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/126 "2004-05-23T02:54:04Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > Did LBJ failed his country when he declared the war on poverty?.. This does for _non sequiter_ what Sophia Loren does for titties. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/127 "2004-05-23T03:14:34Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Sure. But without that evidence, he also can’t say that the shell _isn’t_ from potential stockpiles. Yet he does. Nope. But I am not saying that it neccesarily was or was not from a stockpile. The burden of proof is on those who want to make a definitive statement on the matter, and Mssr. Ritter has no proof. [/QUOTE] What assertion has Ritter made which requires proof? What “definitive statement” would you be referring to? This statement by you: > [@](#): > > First, Scotty takes a break from chasing underage girls to say, “Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache.” Is a fucking lie. Scott Ritter never made any such assertion, only that the elements which _would_ prove the shell came from a stockpile were not present. That is a true statement, is it not? Or do you contend that those elements _are_ present? Maybe you have some secret information? Frankly, only the most desperate wishful thinking would lead to any conclusion that this thing came from a stockpile and anyone who wants to assert that it _did_ has the burden of proof here. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/128 "2004-05-23T03:39:57Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Is a fucking lie. Scott Ritter never made any such assertion… I do not suppose that you **read the fucking title of Ritter’s article?** **Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache** A definitive statement. ---
**Author:** ![Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e99b99/32.png) [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/129 "2004-05-23T03:55:04Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > I do not suppose that you **read the fucking title of Ritter’s article?** > > **Iraq sarin shell is not part of a secret cache** > A definitive statement. Maybe you don’t know much about the print media but the writers of articles like this generally do not write the headlines. Ritter made no such categorical assertion in the body of the piece and it’s unlikely that he wrote the headline. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 4:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/130 "2004-05-23T04:24:12Z")
Here’s an example of a definitive statement **Brutus** : > [@](#): > > The dictator who **is** assembling the world’s most dangerous weapons… There’s no doubt about tenses. There’s no doubt what it means. There’s no doubt who said it. It’s not found in some headline. It’s in the body of the text. It also turned out to be unsubstantiable bullshit. [Full text here.](http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html) Are you outraged? ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 4:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/131 "2004-05-23T04:49:44Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > This does for _non sequiter_ what Sophia Loren does for titties. Not _sequiter_, but sequitur (pres ind pass 3rd sg of [sequor](http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/lexindex?lookup=sequor&type=begin&lang=la&searchText=&options=Sort+Results+Alphabetically&formentry=0)), you ignoramus you. And stop fantasizing. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/132 "2004-05-23T05:18:33Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#): > > Maybe you don’t know much about the print media but the writers of articles like this generally do not write the headlines. Ritter made no such categorical assertion in the body of the piece and it’s unlikely that he wrote the headline. As usual, you are blabbering. The title is definitive. It is on his article. Whether he wrote it himself, or someone else did, is irrelevant. It gets attributed to him. You fools just can’t back down when you are wrong, can you? ---
**Author:** ![World\_Eater](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f04885/32.png) [@World\_Eater](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/World_Eater)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/133 "2004-05-23T14:08:14Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > Ultimately, it’s not a validity of the cause that matters, but the goodness of intentions and perseverance in making them come true. I don’t believe that the ends justify the means, especially when the means include some serious lying to the public, and there isn’t any tangible end to achieve. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/134 "2004-05-23T15:36:38Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > … You fools just can’t back down when you are wrong, can you? Yeah, that’s us all right. Blindly stubborn, entirely incapable of divorcing ourselves from a failed policy, clinging desperately to floating debris and proclaiming it a flagship. Sinking inch by inch in a boiling pot of raw sewage and swearing its chocolate sauce. Yeah, you got us good that time, **Brutus**. The planet you’re from, any carbon-based life forms there? ---
**Author:** ![Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/qadgop_the_mercotan/32/83_2.png) [@Qadgop\_the\_Mercotan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qadgop_the_Mercotan)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/135 "2004-05-23T15:53:32Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > The title is definitive. It is on his article. Whether he wrote it himself, or someone else did, is irrelevant. It gets attributed to him. Now, **Brutus** , that’s just silly. I learned decades ago from reading the papers that the headline to the article was often wildly inaccurate, and not infrequently completely contradicted the contents of the article. This phenomenon has made many a jaded newsgatherer weep. So to ascertain what the author thought, we need to read what he wrote, not what title some anonymous editor pasted above his work. Capisce? ---
**Author:** ![PatriotX](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/c4cdca/32.png) [@PatriotX](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PatriotX)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 11:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/136 "2004-05-23T23:44:59Z")
> [@New Iskander](#): > > Ultimately, it’s not a validity of the cause that matters, but the goodness of intentions and perseverance in making them come true. > I don’t believe I have to explain it to you. Better explain it to me. AFAICT, the validity of a cause is critical. Take this example that has good intentions and perseverance in making them come true: If I use my shotgun to engage in an attempt to purge the world of aliens disguised as humans, and I engage in this attempt whole heartedly with the absolute apex of a great intentions, and I persevere magnifigantly to make this purge come true, it is still a horrendous idea, plan and course of action. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/137 "2004-05-24T00:05:27Z")
They adopt many cunning disguises, friend **Simon** , but none of them look like hippies. None whatsoever. Trust me on this. ---
**Author:** ![Revtim](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/revtim/32/1042_2.png) [@Revtim](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Revtim)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/138 "2004-05-24T00:53:42Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > They adopt many cunning disguises, friend **Simon** , but none of them look like hippies. None whatsoever. Trust me on this. Are you sure? [http://www.clipsahoy.com/webgraphics2/aw4483.htm](http://www.clipsahoy.com/webgraphics2/aw4483.htm) ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 6:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/139 "2004-05-24T06:09:25Z")
> [@World Eater](#): > > …there isn’t any tangible end to achieve. If you seriously believe that, we are talking at cross-purposes. ---
**Author:** ![New\_Iskander](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/db5fbb/32.png) [@New\_Iskander](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/New_Iskander)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 6:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616/140 "2004-05-24T06:13:48Z")
> [@SimonX](#): > > If I use my shotgun to engage in an attempt to purge the world of aliens disguised as humans, and I engage in this attempt whole heartedly with the absolute apex of a great intentions, and I persevere magnifigantly to make this purge come true, it is still a horrendous idea, plan and course of action. Don’t be ridiculous. There is a whole world of difference between dusting off your neighbours on conviction that they are space aliens and blowing away Saddam on suspicion that he was playing dirty tricks. It’s not like Bush went after Vaclav Havel all of a sudden… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/wmd-found-woooohooooooooo/245616.md?page=8)