« A New York Times Report Tomorrow will Say that Posted Iraq Nuke Documents May Have Helped Iran | Main | Somebody (Chris Matthews) Owes Dick Cheney An Apology (Big Time) »

Tony Snow... Here's Your Talking Point

Hey Tony,

Feel free to use this. The NYT reports....

Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990's and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein's scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away.

The talking point:

"Let's remember, if what the New York Times says is true, if President Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be power and have a nuclear weapon by now."

Simple. Concise. Deadly.


TrackBack

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Tony Snow... Here's Your Talking Point:

» Stop The ACLU linked with Saddam Closer To Bomb Than Anyone Thought

» Conservative Thinking linked with NYT Has No Place To Preach On Sensitive Information

» Alamo Nation linked with al QaQaa Part II

Comments (52)

Yep...I'm sure that's true.... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Yep...I'm sure that's true......and he even had a Hang Glider with which to deliver it......wow....scary.....

They wouldn't have to send ... (Below threshold)
Tony:

They wouldn't have to send it far to reach Iran or Israel. Then hell would break loose, and the U.S. would be there anyway. But then there'd have been a nuclear blast.

muirgeo: Remember all of th... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

muirgeo: Remember all of the up to date French fighter planes (saddam wasn't supposed to have) uncovered in the desert and the missiles that had been and were in the process of being modified to increase they're range? Fighter planes and missiles deliver nuc's. I was in a fighter outfit in Korea shortly after they captured our ship (Pueblo) and we kept a flight of F-4 fighters airborne 24-7 loaded with nuc's. They were on constant border guard between the North and South. There was a few B-52 bombers from one of my old outfits that joined in the coverage. Like the boys and girls in Iraq today, we may not be the brightest bulb in the pack (according to Hanoi John) by we sure could keep them things flying. Wanna see my job rating and the medal I didn't throw away? All for a job well done. They released the crew.
I knew we would eventually get to the point where education made you stupid. I'll use you as an example from now on.

the Eliza program set to po... (Below threshold)
Brett Buck:

the Eliza program set to post as muirgeo said


Yep...I'm sure that's true......and he even had a Hang Glider with which to deliver it......wow....scary.....

So, now that the "no WMD" and "Saddam was no threat" theories are blown, you have decided that a despotic dictator (with a documented history of gassing people for ethnic cleansing purposes) having nuclear weapons is really OK, because he only had IRBMs, not ICBMs? I guess that's the new DNC talking point for this week...

muirgeo: Remember all of th... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

muirgeo: Remember all of the up to date French fighter planes (saddam wasn't supposed to have) uncovered in the desert and the missiles that had been and were in the process of being modified to increase they're range?

Posted by: Scrapiron


Umm...uhhh...NO!?

muirgeo...do you remember B... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

muirgeo...do you remember BREAKFAST...TODAY?

Did you have eggs? Bacon??

Muirego, you are stupid eno... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Muirego, you are stupid enough that Saddam could have given you the nuke, and you would have delivered it. Only a fool like you would minimize the potential damage such weapons in the hands of a maniac like Saddam. What sort of damage must we endure before you fucking idiots are ready to fight? Or is there no amount of damage that will get you chicken shit anti-America traitors on our side. You scumbags do not deserve to live in this free country.

Actually this is too funny.... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Actually this is too funny. That evil genius Rove has slipped the NYT's a mickey, again. Hanoi John shot himself in the foot this week so the NYT's is going to shoot the rest of the dim's in the a**.

Republican congressmen and ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

Republican congressmen and women gave away secrets to Iran, and all you guys can do is help them think up talking points in response?

Line them up and shoot them. This go beyond politics, this is treasonous.

Why are the Republican members of Congress PRESSURING the White House in order to ASSIST IRAN in their nuclear efforts? It's an attempt to keep their SORRY ASSES employed in Congress, that's why.

Flush the damn toilet on these filthy anit-american pigs!

It seems to me that there a... (Below threshold)
Darby:

It seems to me that there are 2 reasons for a regime like Saddam's to devolop nucUlear weapons.

1. To use them against their enemies, within and without.

2. To sell to those who are willing to use them against "The Great Satan".

So the atomic bomb capabilt... (Below threshold)
Justrand:

So the atomic bomb capabiltiy that Saddam DIDN'T HAVE, has been leaked to the PEACEFUL MULLAHS of Iran who only want to generate electricity to heat the shelters where abandoned puppies are cared for.

BUT...because the PEACEFUL MULLAHS of Iran might mis-use the ATOMIC SECRETS that Saddam DIDN'T HAVE...and the EVIL Bush administration made it possible then THEY (the evil Bush administration) are culpable in all this.

Pretty much it??

Wow. I need a drink!!

Let's not forget that many ... (Below threshold)
a:

Let's not forget that many other articles from the portal have documented Saddam's pre-2003 ties to terrorist organizations like Al Qaeda. And also let's not forget the fact that the Clinton administration and the ** Democrats ** in 1998 - 1999 were all claiming that Saddam was a threat! Heck we even bombed Iraq for five days in December 1998, I believe!! Can someone refresh my memory as to why we did that? Oh yeah, Saddam was a threat.

So now we learn he was only a ** year ** away from a nuke? And when Al Qaeda declared war on the US on September 2001, we were just supposed to look the other way and HOPE Saddam didn't try giving his WMD technology away to our enemies?!

Again, thank you, thank you NY Times!

and while you're at it Mr. ... (Below threshold)
Lee:

and while you're at it Mr. Snow, spin this for all of the evangelical hypocrites in the Republican party.

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - The leader of the 30 million-member National Association of Evangelicals, a vocal opponent of same-sex marriage, resigned Thursday after being accused of paying for sex with a man in monthly trysts over the past three years.

Oh, but it gets better (or should I say "butt it gets better"?)

Jones, whose allegations were first aired on KHOW-AM radio in Denver, claimed Haggard paid him to have sex nearly every month over three years. Jones also said Haggard snorted methamphetamine before their sexual encounters to heighten his experience.

Damn liberal media -- reporting the news again! Why can't they just stay quiet on issues like this -- like Fox News!

Captians quarter has a long... (Below threshold)
Scrapiron:

Captians quarter has a long list of documents that were just verified by the NYT and links to other sites that have been verfying these documents for months.

Congrat's 'a' you are right about the NYT's.

The only problem with this is that is also verifies the statements made by the anti-war democrats in the 90's when they wanted Slick to wipe out Iraq and Usama (because they knew there was WMD) and he was too cowardly and refused.

Add to the talking point, the pre-war intel was clearly almost 100% correct.

This is a real true life comedy show.

Geez, Lee, that's pitiful. ... (Below threshold)
Evan3457:

Geez, Lee, that's pitiful. Even for you.

Mow, uh, lemme get this straight. Info on how to build nukes that was not dangerous in Saddam's hands, presumably "because he had no program", even though he had all of this technical info for apparently no reason whatsoever, now crosses over the border through the magic of the Internet, and becomes treasonous information, but somehow cannot be used to justify the toppling of Hussein, even though the documents the Times now considers legit also verify Hussein's ties to terror groups, including, {ahem}, Al Qaeda.

What a howler! I'd post a LMAOROFL, but that's cliched.

Countries assemble the technical info to build a nuke first, then they try to manufacture the fissile material. You don't spend billions trying to acquire the material until you're reasonably certain you can build the damn thing.

Put it another way, does the name A.Q. Khan mean anything to you?

And, if James Risen is to be believed, the Clinton adminstration also contributed to the atomic knowhow of the Mad Mullahs of Iran.

But don't let any of this stop your imitation of Foghorn Leghorn.

<a href="http://tks.nationa... (Below threshold)
Jason:

Jim Geraghty has a great take on this: "I'm sorry, did the New York Times just put on the front page that IRAQ HAD A NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM AND WAS PLOTTING TO BUILD AN ATOMIC BOMB?"

Evan,Don't you know ... (Below threshold)
DoninFla:

Evan,
Don't you know Lee is a Turd Polisher of the highest order. He wears a giant fuzzy hat with horns...the Grand Phooba of Turd Polishers, as it were...He, Hugh, Murigeo, et al, are assigned to Wizbang, and live to be contrary...Makes them feel superior...We'll see who's doing the righteous dance next week.

muirgeo...do you remember B... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

muirgeo...do you remember BREAKFAST...TODAY?

Did you have eggs? Bacon??

Posted by: Justrand

Justrand,

Now again.... which scientific journals do you get your climate change information from?

"Geez, Lee, that's pitif... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Geez, Lee, that's pitiful. Even for you."

Oh, it'll get better. We'll probably be treated to three of four days of news reports showing video clips of the stinking hypocritical spew that has come out of Haggard's mouth over the years, in support of evangelical issues.

I hope the pews don't get damaged as Republican moderates flee from the Church of the Holy Hypocrisy (aka the GOP) -- and join hands with Real Americans (aka the Democrats) who are taking back our country from these pigs.

It's time to rebuld this country; rebuild it back to what it once was. We've had liars as leaders for too long now. It's time to make things right.

Or is there no amount of da... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

Or is there no amount of damage that will get you chicken shit anti-America traitors on our side. You scumbags do not deserve to live in this free country.

Posted by: Zelsdorf Ragshaft III

Multinational Corporations buying our democracy scares me far more then terrorist. Politicians selling off the vote to Diebold scares me far more then boogymen we created. Peak oil production, overpopulation and global warming...the weak dollar all scare me more then the terrorist.....our over-reaction to the terrorist has been far more deadly then the terrorist themselves.

Trust me Zelsdorf I hear the call to arms to defend this great country....I see the danger.....IT IS GREAT...and I got your back!!

Muirgo, here's the link to ... (Below threshold)
Moon6:

Muirgo, here's the link to the buried fighter aircraft.

http://www.snopes.com/photos/military/sandplanes.asp

They were actually Russian, not French, including MIG-25s. Some, but not all, were preserved to be ready to fly again.

My apologies, your name is ... (Below threshold)
Moon6:

My apologies, your name is muirgeo, not muirgo. It's very rude to misspell someone's name.

Nice try Paul.B... (Below threshold)
mantis:

Nice try Paul.

But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

We knew he was close to building a nuclear weapon after the Gulf War. You can read all about it in this article from 1998. Well, you can't read all about it, they don't give instructions on how to make nuclear weapons. You're talking point should go more like this:

"Let's remember, if we ignore much of and distort the rest of what New York Times says, then if President Bush hadn't invaded invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be power and have a nuclear weapon by now."

Simple. Concise. Idiotic.

I have a better talking point for you:

"Republicans put plans to build nuclear weapons on the internet for any terrorist to download. Do you trust them with security?"

I'm not saying the Democrats aren't just as dumb, but hey, you gotta admit it's a pretty good talking point.

Lee,Thank you for de... (Below threshold)
J-Ho:

Lee,
Thank you for demonstrating liberal tolerance to all of us intolerant conservatives who are so stupid we could only serve in the U.S. Military. Thank you so much for being the beacon of liberal kindness, compassion and understanding that we hear so much about. You amaze me.

BTW - How long have you known that your parents were brother and sister?

(notice Lee wants to change... (Below threshold)
Paul:

(notice Lee wants to change the topic huh?)

Remember Lee... if President Bush hadn't invaded Iraq, Saddam Hussein would still be power and have a nuclear weapon by now.

Help me out here, folks. Wa... (Below threshold)

Help me out here, folks. Was Lee among those shouting that we should be talking about Iraq when we were pointing out what an ass John Kerry was a day or two ago? And now that we're talking about Iraq, Lee wants us to discuss yet another televangelist scandal?

Poor Lee. Whenever things don't go his way, it's always a quick "hey, what's that over there!" to change the subject.

J.

Jay Tea,That's a p... (Below threshold)
Baggi:

Jay Tea,

That's a pretty funny observation! I think he got that talking point from John Kerry's rant. He went on and on about how this was just the administration trying to change the subject away from Iraq.

Now that the subject is Iraq again, the subject is going to be sex scandals. Until another Democrat gets caught up in a sex scandal, of course.

Jay 1, Lee 0... (Below threshold)
Paul:

Jay 1, Lee 0

You guys are bragging that ... (Below threshold)
muirgeo:

You guys are bragging that your leaders put dangerous secrets on the web and you're also assuming that Saddam would have had a Nuclear device in one year if we didn't attack. He had those capabilities in 1991 prior to our attacks and sanctions. It's a stretch that he would have had them in 2004. If he was a year a way from having them why didn't he get them one year after our inspectors left in 1998? Stop being simpletons and making crap up. IS THT ALL you can do??? Make crap up. Show me one weapons expert or report that says Saddam was one year away from a nuclear device in 2003. OR SHUT your fool pie holes.

Too funny.Anyone r... (Below threshold)
Wanderlust:

Too funny.

Anyone remember a man named Ion Mihai Pacepa?

Once you realize who Mr. - er, General - Pacepa is, and what he was doing with his life during most of the Cold War, you might want to listen to what he has to say in regards to WMD programs in Iraq under Saddam, and why only scant evidence was found by Coalition forces after the 2003 invasion.

(I won't bother poor little Lee, who is in such denial right now that he's consoling himself with the story of yet another televangelist who couldn't keep his penis out of trouble. There there, son, keep looking for proof that conservatives are hypocrites, and you are bound to find it. Meanwhile, let those of us who understand larger issues in the world talk for a while.)

General Pacepa laid out a solid case back in May 2003 of how another country, likely Syria, hid Saddam's WMD program documents and materials shortly before the invasion in March 2003.

It's quite a plausible case, points of which are as follows:

* Saddam knew that he was going to get invaded by the US at least four months in advance. He would have known things were serious this time because the son of his adversary GHWB was President (don't forget that Saddam tried to have GHWB assassinated), and because both political parties in the US were aligned to the idea of removing Saddam this time around.

* Saddam was being quietly helped by the Russians, even as they were just as quietly acquiescing to an invasion. The Russians lent logistical and tactical support to help Saddam orchestrate the defense of Baghdad, so they were "on the ground" up to the last moment. The Russians assisting Saddam would have had access to satellite intel that Saddam would not have, allowing Saddam to know when the US military was getting ready to knock on his door.

* According to Pacepa, there were groups of semi-trailer trucks headed towards the Syrian border shortly before the US military overran Baghdad.

Saddam wasn't the same kind of ideologue that Ahmadinejad is; he was more like a Kim Jong Il: hungry for power for power's sake (and don't forget all the perks of wealth that power brings). That being said, though, Saddam had access to oil wealth that Kim does not, and when he was fighting Iran, he enjoyed access to Western technology that Kim does not have.

Also, Saddam first came to power on the heels of Anwar Sadat's "pan-Arabism" star fading (after 1977, Sadat traded his lust for power for a more realistic $2bn/yr of American foreign aid and the security of knowing that Israel wouldn't open a can of whup-ass on Egypt anymore if Egypt pretended to be nice to Israel and accepted the $2bn annual good-boy allowance from Uncle Sam). Saddam wanted to be the leader of all 22 Arab League countries. After Israel bloodied Saddam's nose in 1981, Saddam reacted by going to war with Iran instead.

Saddam saw WMD programs, including nuclear ones, as they key to his pan-Arab leadership ambitions, and the key to guaranteed wealth and respect by the West. The Russians saw Saddam as a hedge on American political ambitions in the Middle East, just as the US once saw Iran as the same thing against the Russians.

Oh, and don't forget, they (Arab league nations) all want nukes because Israel keeps kicking their collective asses when they go to fight against Israel.

I know it's a complicated thread, but really, I haven't even scratched the surface. Complication, thy name is Politics.

(psst Lee, I'm done now...you can continue on ranting about your naughty evangelical again...)

Poor Lee. Whenever thing... (Below threshold)
Brian:

Poor Lee. Whenever things don't go his way, it's always a quick "hey, what's that over there!" to change the subject.

It's understandable, Jay. These days, the Republican scandals, hypocrisy, and royal foul-ups just keep coming too fast to keep up with.

But hey, I question the timing of the International Atomic Energy Agency privately pleading with the administration for these documents to be removed from the public web site! They probably knew about this for a long time, but just sat on it until two weeks before the election. Those elitist liberal commies are sewer garbage who want the terrorists to win!

Go run along with Lee now, ... (Below threshold)
Wanderlust:

Go run along with Lee now, Brian. Adults are discussing serious issues here.

Be a good boy and take your troll crap somewhere else.

Poor chickendoves just can't fathom that their daddy Clinton thought that Saddam had WMD and was a threat to the USA, so anytime another proof comes along that supports this assertion, and shows that leadership by a Republican administration was required for the US to honor the threat (just as it did back in 1981 with Iran and resolution of the embassy hostage situation), Democrats go all wiggy...sheesh.

It's time to rebuld this co... (Below threshold)
Darby:

It's time to rebuld this country; rebuild it back to what it once was. We've had liars as leaders for too long now. It's time to make things right. -Lee

Yes, because you know, Clinton got impeached for telling the truth.

Of course what Paul forgot ... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

Of course what Paul forgot to mention is that the real subject of the article was that Bush Incorporated posted online the directions of how to build the bomb. Way to go Alfred E. Bush!!!

Making us "safer" from terrorism. How? Give the terrorists the directions and the recipe to build the bomb!!!

And of course the wing loons went bonkers before reading it. One would imagine most have never read a word in the NY Times , never of course hesitating to call them traitors.

But here's the first 3 paragraphs anyway:


"U.S. Web Archive Is Said to Reveal a Nuclear Primer

*
Article Tools Sponsored By
By WILLIAM J. BROAD
Published: November 3, 2006

Last March, the federal government set up a Web site to make public a vast archive of Iraqi documents captured during the war. The Bush administration did so under pressure from Congressional Republicans who had said they hoped to "leverage the Internet" to find new evidence of the prewar dangers posed by Saddam Hussein.

But in recent weeks, the site has posted some documents that weapons experts say are a danger themselves: detailed accounts of Iraq's secret nuclear research before the 1991 Persian Gulf war. The documents, the experts say, constitute a basic guide to building an atom bomb.

Last night, the government shut down the Web site after The New York Times asked about complaints from weapons experts and arms-control officials. A spokesman for the director of national intelligence said access to the site had been suspended "pending a review to ensure its content is appropriate for public viewing."


Actually, if nuclear data t... (Below threshold)

Actually, if nuclear data that sensitive was posted on the web, it was a real screw up. I'm going to wait and see how this plays out. The NYT can't be trusted to tell the whole story on anything.

Wanderlust said:
"Saddam was being quietly helped by the Russians,..."

'Zactly. Remember the Russian "diplomatic delegation" [*cough*] that coalition troops shot at as they fled Baghdad right after Baghdad fell? What were they doing there? Russia's diplomats, along with those from other countries heeded the warnings about an imminent war and left days, if not weeks, in advance of the troops reaching Baghdad.

And I thought eveyone knew about the Russian MIGs in Iraq. I guess if you're sure that Saddam was just a big ol' cuddly Teddy bear why read about evidence to the contrary? It might upset one's world view. But then, the - "Saddam was only killing his own people so it's none of our business" - mantra always did disgust me.

Lee: Republican congres... (Below threshold)

Lee: Republican congressmen and women gave away secrets to Iran, and all you guys can do is help them think up talking points in response?

Gemme proof, please. I'd rather have proof than propaganda.

Also, stay on topic, I know that's asking a lot, but gay marriage has nothing to do with Iraq unless you're watching South park.

Plus, it's not as if the Re... (Below threshold)

Plus, it's not as if the Republicans were telling the government to post How To Make A Bomb instructions. This isn't a Republican screw up, per se. Why would we hold, say, Hoekstra responsible for this just because someone else screwed up disseminating information?

And the moment documents began to appear, Democrats either ignored them entirely or set about debunking them in any way they could as "unimportant", "planted by Republican operatives" or "forged". The way I see it is that many Democrats are always shouting Freedom of Information! But only if it helps the their stance on the war.

"Let's remember, if what th... (Below threshold)
Kristian:

"Let's remember, if what the New York Times says is true, ..."

Ah, but from mathematics, we know that in a statement like 'If p, then q' and 'p is F' then you can prove anything. So the Bushies are off the hook yet.

Oh, wait, did I just admit the NYT times lies?

God! I'm sick of hearing ab... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

God! I'm sick of hearing about WMD's. I don't care whether he had them of not, cause IT DOESN'T MATTER. We are in Iraq and need to finish the job, or get ready for more airplanes into buildings, and all the security in the world isn't going to save you. Banks are protected to the extreme, and 67 year old grandmothers still rob them. It doesn't matter whether OBL comes out of his cave or not, some other rat will just step up and take over. We are dealing with religious extremeist and the only victory will come when they are made to feel that it just isn't worth the pain. You have to convince people like these that if you screw with me I'm not only going to kill you, I'm going to kill your brother, sister, mother & father, aunts and uncles, and everyone else that knows you. This isn't a game where you play by the rules. If you play poker and follow the rules and the opponents don't, your going to loose all of your money, and in this game it's not your money it's your life. As far as I'm concerned, at Gitmo they can hook that EE8 phone to his balls and crank away. (Trust me, I've seen it done and they will tell you anything you want to know, and NO they don't make things up, because they know that if they lie, you'll be back.)

"and now that we're talk... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"and now that we're talking about Iraq, Lee wants us to discuss yet another televangelist scandal?"

We don't need to discuss it. I thought the gross hypocrisy of the whole mess might be fun to debate, but its not problem sticking with the story about asshat Republican congressmen posting bomb-making instructions on the internet so that conservative bloggers like Wizbang can help them get re-elected.

Uhm, wait a minute -- that means the root reason the terrorist of the world have had access to the most sophisticated bomb-making instruction available on the internet is for the benefit of conservative blogs?

And they put them there in ARABIC no less. This way terrroists don't have to go to the trouble of translating - and possibly losing something in the process.

Giving the enemy instructions in Arabic on how to create a briefcase nuke. Way to go you morons...

I have a suggested alternat... (Below threshold)
Hugh:

I have a suggested alternative talking point for Me. Snow.

"Good morning ladies and gentlemen. I know you folks all all aware how reviled the NY Times is, mostly of course from those folks who have never read a word of it. Today, we want to thank the Times for its article reporting that the Republican Congress insisted that we set up a web site to publish documents from Iraq. Interestingly some of those documents demonstrate how to build a nuclear bomb. For that reason the president has chosen to bestow the Medal of Freedom on each and every republican congressman or woman. No questions please."

Lee:I think it's s... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:

Lee:

I think it's safe to say that the scientist in Iran are just a bit past getting their information off of the internet, and how do you know that the documents wheren't modified just enough to cause the bomb to blow up in their faces. Sounds like something Karl Rove might come up with to me.

Exactly USMC Pilot. It's n... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

Exactly USMC Pilot. It's not like they haven't been working on a bomb project for years now.

All this demonstrates the incredible cognitive dissonance of the Left. The little cockroaches were for the war in 2003, when it was popular, but now they feign that they were "duped" by some unseen, unheard, unknown conspiracy.

It's a bit nutty when you really think about it.

So Bush was right about WMD... (Below threshold)
steak111111:

So Bush was right about WMD's all along....

There's about 3,493,000 Liberals that need to apologize....

"...asshat Republican co... (Below threshold)

"...asshat Republican congressmen posting bomb-making instructions on the internet...

Lee, this is the second or third time you've used a variation of the same statement. Republican congressmen did NOT post bomb-making instructions on the internet.

This is why people laugh at you. You still don't get it, do you?

Oyster, Lee, Hugh,... (Below threshold)
Tony:

Oyster,

Lee, Hugh, and Muirego all get it: if they say negative things enough, some idiot is going to believe them. They're the political equivalent of the guy who hits on every girl at a bar, because one of them's eventually going to respond.

The thing is, there are no ... (Below threshold)
Mitchell:

The thing is, there are no idiots here on the Right, only those on the Left in the Lee/Mungo/Mantis crowd, so they are realllllly wasting their time here. Good, keeps 'em off the street and away from voters who might actually care what they say.

a:The CIA and Coli... (Below threshold)
Robert:

a:

The CIA and Colin Powell both said Saddam was not a threat to the US in 2000/2001.

If Saddam was such a bad man, why was Cheney's company doing business with him AFTER Gulf War I?
(But Kerry's the real traitor, LOL).

The documents referred to in the NYT article are from prior to Gulf War I.

Bush did lie.
But the biggest lie is that the Iraq War is not about oil.

Let's try again, with the h... (Below threshold)
Herman:

Let's try again, with the highlighting of the key words in this passage:

"Among the dozens of documents in English were Iraqi reports written in the 1990's and in 2002 for United Nations inspectors in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs after the Persian Gulf war. Experts say that at the time, Mr. Hussein's scientists were on the verge of building an atom bomb, as little as a year away."

So the people "in charge of making sure Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs" knew about what was going on, and presumably, acted in a manner dictated by their prescribed duty, that is, they endeavored to ensure that Iraq abandoned its unconventional arms programs.

On the other hand, right around the time (Autumn 2002) that Saddam was accepting UN weapons inspectors into his country knowing that these individuals would strive to eliminate any WMD programs, Kim Jong-Il was throwing out the UN weapons inspectors from his country!!!!

SO WHICH COUNTRY DID BUSH CHOOSE TO ATTACK???? Which country had something to hide????

Hope all of you conservatives liked that recent explosion that took place in North Korea.

One other thing:Yo... (Below threshold)
Herman:

One other thing:

You conservatives might want to actually read the entire New York Times article. You'll learn that, to the dismay of those in the international community trying to keep such things secret, Bush & Company posted Iraq's scientific progress in its nuclear program on a website for everyone to see.

Everyone, including scientists from Iran.

Somehow I don't feel quite as safe as before, how about you, conservatives?

Robert,Of course t... (Below threshold)
w:

Robert,

Of course the Iraq War is about oil. No one ever denied that.

It's just not about oil in the way I believe you think it means, Robert.

I'm tired of having to educate dolts who ignore the facts of an oil-based economy and geography when they blather about "no war for oil!" and such sh*t.

Unless, of course, those who b*tch about "no war for oil!" are willing to allow new drilling off US coastal waters and ANWR. If so, at least they will finally be offering a reasonable alternative in the short term - something I haven't seen coming out of that crowd.

/sigh

"Simple. Concise. Deadly... (Below threshold)
Lee:

"Simple. Concise. Deadly."

and Wrong.




Advertisements









rightads.gif

beltwaybloggers.gif

insiderslogo.jpg

mba_blue.gif

Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile

Contact

Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links

Credits

Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login



Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy