WMD's Fuck-up.

Your final word on the subject is unadulterated bullshit; just like your claim that Saddam had no army or air force, it is bullshit. That assertion alone demonstrates your self-inflicted ignorance. The only person that needed to held accountable was hanged: Saddam Hussein. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

lets see documentation of the Iraqi air force

lets see documentation of the Iraqi air force Originally Posted by CJ7

What are you, CBJ7, too spastically ignorant to Google?

Interesting subject matter. If true, it confirms my suspicion all along. I have consistently stated ever since the spring of 2003 invasion that GW lost focus on the perpetrators of 9/11 when he authorized the invasion Iraq.

Hmmmm, could it be that I was correct all along?

I will get back to you on that question!

What are you, CBJ7, too spastically ignorant to Google? Originally Posted by I B Hankering

nah, heres the Saddam air force our soldiers uncovered, literally.


http://www.nationalufocenter.com/art...rcraftiraq.jpg

the airforce went to Iran when the pilots hauled ass with his planes and left him holding his dick ... not too long after the gulf war

First, it's not fake outrage. Many in America want to know if "Fast and Furious" was a bone headed fuck-up or if it was initiated for some ulterior reason. At present, that question remains unanswered. However, Holder committed perjury when he denied previous knowledge of "Fast and Furious" -- that is a crime. And now Odumbo has invoked Executive Privilege over documents purportedly not eligible for such protection; hence, giving rise to the question, "What did Odumbo know and when did he know it?"

BTW, check the 2008 election returns: dozens of Republican heads "rolled" that night, and Hussein was hanged -- he was the ultimate source of all of the lies about Iraq's possessing WMD.
Originally Posted by I B Hankering

lol...it sure as hell isnt fake! Sorry I should have said hypocritical outrage. The were no WMD's but nobody should be held accountable for telling the public this lie?this is a case of political outrage, not moral outrage.

nah, heres the Saddam air force our soldiers uncovered, literally.


http://www.nationalufocenter.com/art...rcraftiraq.jpg

the airforce went to Iran when the pilots hauled ass with his planes and left him holding his dick ... not too long after the gulf war Originally Posted by CJ7

See, CBJ7, you were dissembling the whole time. You knew Iraq had an air force all along.

lol...it sure as hell isnt fake! Sorry I should have said hypocritical outrage. The were no WMD's but nobody should be held accountable for telling the public this lie?this is a case of political outrage, not moral outrage. Originally Posted by WTF

Saddam Hussein was held accountable, and scores of Republicans were voted out of office for the mistake. What's worse, Odumbo was voted into office.

You have to pay attention. It's been asked and answered several times.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

It's pretty tough to keep up with people who are making it all up as they go along.

You understand.

See, CBJ7, you were dissembling the whole time. You knew Iraq had an air force all along. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

not when Schrub went in

Saddam Hussein was held accountable, and scores of Republicans were voted out of office for the mistake. What's worse, Odumbo was voted into office. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

lol...well come November will be the judge.

By all these responses from people like Jackie S and others, just goes to show you they live in an alternative reality..lmao

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

Andrew Sullivan makes the case today that one of the major American political parties is "unhinged."

Or, rather, it is living in an alternative reality. 63 percent of Republicans in a new poll believe that Saddam Hussein had WMDs when we invaded in 2003, despite even George W. Bush's acknowledgment that he didn't. 64 percent also believe that Barack Obama was born in a foreign country, even though we have the long-form birth certificate from Hawaii. This alternate reality is sustained by a 24 hour propaganda network, and hermetically sealed off from any external intervention.
We are reaching a democratic crisis of some sorts. One major political party refuses to accept empirical truths. It has become a hall of ideological mirrors.

Andrew's not exaggerating. His item references this Dan Froomkin piece, published today, on a YouGov poll conducted last month. To help drive home the point, I put together a chart based the YouGov results on the WMD question.

Remember, the poll was completed last month -- as in, May 2012, not May 2003.
About a year ago, I wrote that the scope of the nation's challenges is enormous, but the larger problem is that we lack a discourse equipped to even begin serious conversations about how to address those problems: "[A]ny policy discussion has to progress from a shared foundation of reality, and at this point, the right isn't even prepared to accept the basics."
I still believe that.


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


comments:


o at what point is the media going to start putting pressure on themselves to quit accepting the BS?
You get various reporters who knows they are going to interview someone. The decide what questions they are going to ask. Then the interviewee comes out with some blatant lie and the reporter just lets it slide.
Is this simply part of the equal time nonsense?
Journalism used to mean something in this country. Where are the John Andersons, Mike Roykos, etc. of the world?


------------------
Well now since the main stream media already told us there were no WMDs and since they have shown the long form birth certificate I must assume that you are refering to right wing media. To expect FOX or Rush or any right winged propagandist to correct their own lies seems a little foolish. This is war and truth,justice and the American way of life are mere collateral damage.
These are the same people who think that creationism is a theory rather than a mere belief and the Earth is ten thousand years old. These are the gun nuts who want to carry guns to prtect themselves from the government and other evil things like a skittles totting kid.
The rub is that these kooks not only exist but they exist in numbers that astound. So buy your cotraceptives while you still can, buy mylar by the yard, vote every chance you can before you lose the right and by all means-point and accuse while sipping your water tainted with mercury from clean coal ash.Frack 'em and crack 'em.


------------------------
Why do you believe this distinction to be relevant? Of course we know that Iraq gassed Iranians. Factually true, but completely beside the point. WMDs are a whole other thing, and we were sold on going to war based on Iraq having the ability to strike at the US itself, if I remember that whole tubes on trucks presentation that Powell gave to the UN correctly, and I believe that I do. There were cases in the 80s of Iraq using Mustard gas and Tabun on Iranians, but only in air to surface rockets, artillery and bombs dropped from aircraft. And then there was evidence that Sadaam gassed his own people in the 80s and 90s. There however has never been any evidence that Iraq possessed the capability to deploy Weapons of Mass Destruction, or even the chemical weapons it was never confirmed to have engineered independently, on targets at a great distance. There were no ICBMs, which are also mistaken to be exclusively nuclear.
It may be time to admit that the story that was clearly sold to the public was a sham, based on faulty intelligence. This is an instance where admitting the mistake a long time ago would have been less damaging to those on the right than pretending that they didn't understand and then being forced to admit it later.


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


You guys can read the rest of the readers comments if you feel up to it. There are about 100 comments I believe and still growing.


Link to site on News Report

"The Iraqi regime possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. It is seeking nuclear weapons.... If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?" - President George W. Bush, Cincinnati, Oct. 7, 2002


a complete lie without any consequence ... a war based on a lie without any consequence, spending billions and billions of taxpayer dollars for a war based on a lie wiithout any consequence, 4000 dead soldiers without any consequence .. not one iota of accountability was even mentioned much less asked for by the republican congress who had both the house and the senate ...

based on principle alone, and until the past administration is held responsible for their (any/all) actions regarding Iraq not one republican has any right whatsoever to ask anyone of any cloth to be held accountable for anything.

The End

Yes Bush lied and he knew it was all a lie. When the husband of a CIA agent uncovered the truth Bush and Chaney exposed the agent and did a great deal of damage of agents we had in the field and with contacts of other countries we were working with. Go ask the CIA how they liked that little stunt.

There is no maybe about it. Originally Posted by BigLouie

Your ingnorance of the facts is breathtaking. Joe Wilson's fact finding trip to Niger didn't prove that Bush had lied. Wilson's whole purpose in going to Niger was to prove that Saddam Hussein had not attempted to buy yellow cake. The belief that Iraq had attempted to purchase yellow cake was British intelligence, that Bush had quoted in his address to the joint session. Even if it had turned out to be false, that would not make Bush a liar.

Wilson found nothing of any substance in his trip to Niger because he had no contacts to interview. Wilson was completely unqualified to make the fact finding trip. That's why people were puzzled as to why the CIA would choose Wilson for a job he wasn't qualified to do. After his trip, Wilson didn't even deliver a formal written report to the CIA.

Valerie Plame wasn't "exposed" by Bush and Cheny. Bob Novak mentioned, in his column, that Joe Wilson probably got the assignment to go to Niger for the CIA because his wife, a CIA employee, must have recommended him. We know now that Collin Powell's assistant at the State Department, Richard Armitage, was the source for Bob Novak's "outing" of Valerie Plame, certainly not Bush or Cheney. Armitage knew that Valerie Plame was a State Department employee because it was widely known in DC. Joe Wilson used to tell people she worked for the CIA when introduced her.

As far as exposing Valerie Plame, and causing damage to other agents in the field, that's complete bull shit. Valerie Plame had not worked overseas for the CIA within the prior five years and was, by definition, not a covert agent. She wasn't even covered by the statute that was supposedly violated. The co-writer of the statute, Victoria Toensing has publicly stated that the statute, prohibiting the public disclosure of the names of covert CIA agents, was not violated because Valerie Plame was not covered by the law.

Victoria Toensing: Well, if I had evidence that she was covert I certainly would respect that, but she did not have a foreign assignment within five years of publication. Wilson stated that in his book -- he states that they returned to the United States sometime in 1997, so six years. The definition of "covert agent," a person whose identity is to be protected, is someone who has been overseas in the past five years. The five years were added to protect sources the person would have worked with.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...021601472.html

http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/...1/221829.shtml

http://www.wnd.com/2005/07/31294/

By all these responses from people like Jackie S and others, just goes to show you they live in an alternative reality..lmao

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

Andrew Sullivan makes the case today that one of the major American political parties is "unhinged."

Or, rather, it is living in an alternative reality. 63 percent of Republicans in a new poll believe that Saddam Hussein had WMDs when we invaded in 2003, despite even George W. Bush's acknowledgment that he didn't. 64 percent also believe that Barack Obama was born in a foreign country, even though we have the long-form birth certificate from Hawaii. This alternate reality is sustained by a 24 hour propaganda network, and hermetically sealed off from any external intervention.
We are reaching a democratic crisis of some sorts. One major political party refuses to accept empirical truths. It has become a hall of ideological mirrors.

Andrew's not exaggerating. His item references this Dan Froomkin piece, published today, on a YouGov poll conducted last month. To help drive home the point, I put together a chart based the YouGov results on the WMD question.

Remember, the poll was completed last month -- as in, May 2012, not May 2003.
About a year ago, I wrote that the scope of the nation's challenges is enormous, but the larger problem is that we lack a discourse equipped to even begin serious conversations about how to address those problems: "[A]ny policy discussion has to progress from a shared foundation of reality, and at this point, the right isn't even prepared to accept the basics."
I still believe that.


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


comments:


o at what point is the media going to start putting pressure on themselves to quit accepting the BS?
You get various reporters who knows they are going to interview someone. The decide what questions they are going to ask. Then the interviewee comes out with some blatant lie and the reporter just lets it slide.
Is this simply part of the equal time nonsense?
Journalism used to mean something in this country. Where are the John Andersons, Mike Roykos, etc. of the world?


------------------
Well now since the main stream media already told us there were no WMDs and since they have shown the long form birth certificate I must assume that you are refering to right wing media. To expect FOX or Rush or any right winged propagandist to correct their own lies seems a little foolish. This is war and truth,justice and the American way of life are mere collateral damage.
These are the same people who think that creationism is a theory rather than a mere belief and the Earth is ten thousand years old. These are the gun nuts who want to carry guns to prtect themselves from the government and other evil things like a skittles totting kid.
The rub is that these kooks not only exist but they exist in numbers that astound. So buy your cotraceptives while you still can, buy mylar by the yard, vote every chance you can before you lose the right and by all means-point and accuse while sipping your water tainted with mercury from clean coal ash.Frack 'em and crack 'em.


------------------------
Why do you believe this distinction to be relevant? Of course we know that Iraq gassed Iranians. Factually true, but completely beside the point. WMDs are a whole other thing, and we were sold on going to war based on Iraq having the ability to strike at the US itself, if I remember that whole tubes on trucks presentation that Powell gave to the UN correctly, and I believe that I do. There were cases in the 80s of Iraq using Mustard gas and Tabun on Iranians, but only in air to surface rockets, artillery and bombs dropped from aircraft. And then there was evidence that Sadaam gassed his own people in the 80s and 90s. There however has never been any evidence that Iraq possessed the capability to deploy Weapons of Mass Destruction, or even the chemical weapons it was never confirmed to have engineered independently, on targets at a great distance. There were no ICBMs, which are also mistaken to be exclusively nuclear.
It may be time to admit that the story that was clearly sold to the public was a sham, based on faulty intelligence. This is an instance where admitting the mistake a long time ago would have been less damaging to those on the right than pretending that they didn't understand and then being forced to admit it later.


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


You guys can read the rest of the readers comments if you feel up to it. There are about 100 comments I believe and still growing.


Link to site on News Report Originally Posted by Sexyeccentric1

It looks like you found a site that specializes in selective memory and 20/20 hindsight. “The 2002 Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502) was a law passed by the United States Congress authorizing what was soon to become the Iraq War. The authorization was sought by President George W. Bush. Introduced as H.J.Res. 114, it passed the House on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133, and by the Senate on October 11 by a vote of 77-23. It was signed into law by President Bush on October 16.” In the House, 215 Republicans voted Yes, 6 No and 2 Present; 81 Democrats voted Yes, 126 No (61% of the delegation) and 1 Present; the sole Independent voted No. The final vote was 296 Yes (69% of the House), 133 No, and 3 Present.
In the Senate, 28 Democrats voted Yes (56% of the delegation, including Senators Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Bayh, and Daschle) and 22 voted No; 49 Republicans voted Yes and one voted No (Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island).

Those are the real numbers and percentages, and they kinda shoot your guy "Andrew's" [sic] imaginary findings all to shit.

not when Schrub went in Originally Posted by CJ7

It's too late now for you to squirm out of your earlier admissions, CBJ7.