Posted on 06/13/2005 1:49:51 AM PDT by nickcarraway
For those of us who are occasional targets of the Soros-funded propaganda machines, it's encouraging to discover a useful purpose that they can serve. The hyperlib machinery, and the reactions it commands, are as accurate a gauge as I can find to measure the import of the key points of the liberal dogma. As demonstrated by the reaction they manufactured to some comments I made on MSNBC last week, the volume of hate mail the organized hyperlibs generate is directly proportional to the importance they assign to an issue and the weakness of their position.
At issue was the so-called "Downing Street memo," a top-secret Brit document memorializing a meeting in July 2002. The document says that the decision to take military action against Saddam had already been made two months before we took the case of Iraq to the UN Security Council. It is as significant historically as Nick Nolte's DUI record, and far less accurate. After Ron Reagan pressed me to admit our casus belli was a tissue of lies, I told him that the fact we haven't found Saddam's WMD proved precisely nothing. That's so, I said, because while we fiddled and diddled in the UN for six months before military action began, Saddam almost certainly moved all his WMD and scrubbed away all the evidence of it.
When Reagan pressed me further, contending that none of the commissions investigating the missing WMD said they had been moved, I cited the report of Charles Duelfer's Iraq Survey Group, which spent many months searching for WMD in Iraq. That report, I said, showed the substantial body of evidence that a lot of people, money, and materials, possibly including WMD, were smuggled out of Iraq in the months before March 2003. The destination of these cargoes was Syria. I had touched a nerve: by the time I got home, the "Media Matters for America" blog had accused me of lying, and dozens of nearly identical e-mails (on the intellectual plane of, "liar, liar, pants on fire") were pouring in. I quickly stopped reading them and just hit "delete" when I saw them.
I hadn't merely touched a hyperlib nerve. I had challenged the basis for the hyperlibs' existence: to discredit George Bush and the war at any cost. But the problem, for them, is that I had stuck to the facts. Which are very uncomfortable things, if you're Soros or Howard Dean. Or any of their Michael Mooron drones. Having demonstrated that I can drive them into a fit of apoplectic rage with a 30-second comment on television, the scientific method requires a controlled, repeatable experiment to see how many can be driven to nervous breakdowns with a more elaborate exposition of the facts. In the interest of science, let us proceed.
WHAT I SAID ON MSNBC was, of course, just what the Duelfer's ISG report said, and what Duelfer has said personally and repeatedly in Congressional testimony. You can look it up. On November 17, 2004, Duelfer told the House International Relations Committee that a lot was moved by Saddam's people from Iraq into Syria and no one knows whether or not the WMD were among the shipments to Syria: "I can't confirm anything one way or the other. What we do know is that a lot of stuff was crossing the border before the war. Trucks, but you don't know what was in them. So that's -- you know, I would like to be able to state definitively one way or the other an answer to that. I'm not sure I'm going to be able to." On October 6, 2004, Duelfer told the Senate Armed Services Committee, "...But what I can tell you that I believe we know is a lot of materials left Iraq and went to Syria. There was certainly a lot of traffic across the border points. We've got a lot of data to support that, including people discussing it. But whether in fact in any of these trucks there was WMD-related materials, I cannot say."
Duelfer's report also said that Saddam's Iraqi Intelligence Service "operated a series of laboratories in the Baghdad area" (up to five in that area alone) and that one of them, a clandestine lab in the Baghdad Central Public Health Laboratory, was "emptied of all equipment and documents in December 2002," and that other labs were also found in the scrubbed-clean-of-evidence condition.
The only reasonable conclusion anyone can draw from the Duelfer report -- even if we ignore the other mountains of evidence about Saddam’s WMD -- is that Saddam had WMD and in the six months we spent trying to convince Kofi, Dominique, and their pals to act, Saddam's regime moved the WMD, cleaned out the evidence, and did their best to conceal what they had done. That they did so with the active participation of Assad's Syria is also terribly clear.
It is a pity that the embittered hyperlibs can't accept facts or use them to assemble the logical, and inevitable, conclusions to which they lead. When any of them -- Soros, Moore, Dean, Franken, or any of them -- call a conservative a liar, it must create a rebuttable presumption that it is the lib who is falsifying. Not that they care.
Jed Babbin, a contributing editor of The American Spectator, was a deputy undersecretary of defense in the first Bush administration, and now often appears as a talking warhead on MSNBC.
Ya know what I always: Wake up and smell the gunpowder! Or don't. Whatever..
:p
HAH!
Ron Reagan is the greatest living proof as to why the Monarchial system of government was fatally flawed.
lol! you're a funny guy!
You might be right about the Sarin itself, but the whole chemical warhead (and we have several dozen Iraqi warheads) leaves a more complex Iraqi mark on it. About yellowcake being yellowcake, you are incorrect. The relative percentages of uranium isotopes would dictate where in the world it was mined. That wouldn't necessarily point to Iraq on its own, but would offer clues.
Hey TX - must be the same folks that like you so much! ROFLMBO!!
Yellowcake isn't a "WMD" anyway.
Only way it could kill you would be if somebody dropped a drum of it out a third-story window onto your head as you walked by.
".. going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. You just leave a lot of useless noisy baggage behind.
-Jed Babbin, former deputy undersecretary of defense in the first Bush administration"
Hey, stop insulting the accordion! I still play the thing.
I have been known to clear a room in 5 minutes. I call it Accordion Assault.
I find it amazing that anyone could possibly suggest that there were no WMDs.
It still looks the same though.
Can't say much more, but there ARE.
No doubt.
No sane person would believe that after President Bush has won re-election of his second term that he would at that point have WMD planted. If he were inclined to do that, which in itself is a silly idea, it would have been before November 2, 2004.
There's not the slightest doubt in my mind that Saddam had WMDs in 1988.
Anyhow, it's way past my bedtime!
Personally, I've always thought that the WMD's that Libia gave up (that the US didn't know they had) were the WMD's that Saddam moved out of the country before the war.
So basicly we already found the WMD's and are in possession of them.
Saddam is himself WMD.
Uh, just FYI, binary munitions don't "have" a "limitation on efficacy", and neither do MOST non-binary types. US WMD stocks from WWII are still viable and quite dangerous--which is why it has been so slow and difficult to destroy them.
Furthermore, it wasn't a bunch of Iraq janitor's looting those factories.
It was a very well managed group of Russian technicians performing a deconstruction, NOT a demolition.
...which brings to mind whatever happened to those ships the United States saw before going into Iraq...and what about the satellite pictures of those huge trucks being loaded with...WMD....
"Even though the Liberals/Leftist machine of propaganda against president Bush and the Iraq war doesn't hold water and is baseless ( the WMDs WILL BE FOUND ) .... once the WMDs are found, and the worlds gets to see that President Bush was RIGHT, it will be interesting to see how the liberal/leftist/anti-America crowd will spin themselves out of a corner and tie themselves in knots."
Let me try.
1. See, we told you the WMD's weren't in Iraq.
2. See, we told you that there were in fact WMD's in Iraq.
3. OK, there are WMD's. So how do we know that that is all of them? If they never left Iraq, they wouldn't be scattered across the globe in the hands of the terrorists.
4. John Bolton knew this and didn't say anything about it. What is Bolton covering up?
5. George Bush knew the WMD's went to Syria and chose to fight a meaningless war in Iraq rather than go after the real culprit, Assad. Look, here is a memo from Dan Rather saying this. Oh, the date of July 1999? Ignore that, the intent was there although the document may be false.
Should I continue?
"Let's suppose for the sake of argument that they were sent to Syria, and let's ignore the time limitation on efficacy for most of the hypothesized WMDs, do you think that the Syrians would have a big fat MADE IN IRAQ label on them? "
No, everyone is concerned that the WMD's say "MADE IN THE USSR" or "MADE IN FRANCE."
This is what held us up in the 6 months leading up to the war.
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.