Posted on 07/11/2004 8:31:23 AM PDT by The Wizard
One of the host of the John Batchlor ABC radio show just announced that there appears to be a report coming from Libya in Septmenmber that Saddam's WMD did exist and were being developed there, and that's why they weren't found in Iraq....
" John Bachelor "
Is a restaurant critic in our local rag. The only WMD's he is familiar with are those found in greasy spoon cafes.
Must be why the facility was allegedly under a mountain in Libya.
Bookmarked
What I don't understand is that you would think Democrats like Rockefeller would know this report is coming and would be more careful about what they say. I pray it's true, but I'll believe it when I see it.
agreed.
Shortly after Libya folded its tent, I saw an investigative news report by a Scottish newspaper stating that most of the nuclear scientists in the Libyan mountain labs were IRANIAN, not Iraqi. No mention of Iraq in that report. I emailed the reporters asking about any indication of Iraqi involvement, but got no response. Reports have been that Saddam was Kaddafi's mentor/idol for years, so I cannot imagine Libya, Iran and NK being in a big nuclear weapons deal without Iraq. Iran in a deal w/Libya w/o Saddam?! Just doesn't fit IMO. So the report from Loftus seems to make sense. But still no reconciliation of the first report out of Iranian scientists w/ Loftus' report of Iraqis. Anyone know any more recent or more accurate info?
More than the media. Explain Pat Roberts. You have the sarin and mustard gas shells found-l0-l2, uranium junk for dirty bombs being shipped out of Iraq, David Kay saying the program for WMD was in operation, the truckload of nerve gas that was supposed to blow up Jordan, the Polish army find...and Republicans are also saying that no WMD have been found in Iraq. I want to throw something at the TV.
I just heard on Fox that information about WMDs may not be released because it could embarrass some of our allies???
WTF??
THEN THEY AREN'T ALLIES, YOU DOPE!
Gen. McInnerny (sp) just said that.
Actually, Rockefeller is changing his WMD spin.
He's now claiming that Bush said we'd find nuclear bombs.
Really. There is a thread on it.
Sounds like he's spreading the lies on thick and setting the definition of WMDs so when this comes out, he can blow it off and say it isn't nuclear bombs.
WMD has been found in Iraq. But apparently it's not enough and doesn't count. They keep raising the bar.
I would buy that.
I'm also thinking that this can be traced back to BJ, and if they politicize it, the information will be leaked and ruin the entire Dem party.
You know, I think I'm going to postpone my vacation. I'm really not up to leaving town one week before the election.
I would expect more to come out about Saddam's WMDs during his trial.
GWB invites Kadaffy to address joint congress who tells the story in his own words...complete with pics and documentation.
(see tag line for explanation)
That's always the way with them.
Estrada wasn't Hispanic enough.
Clinton lying under oath and abusing power didn't rise to the level of impeachment enough.
Saddam would gain nothing from using WMDs on military personnel trained, prepared, able to survive, and expecting such an attack.
In other words, WMDs are far more effective against people who can't do anything about it.
And, who would use them on those people?
Terrorists.
I love it!
October would be a better time!
Better that than a CIA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.