Replies

This should be required reading for you and all the other Ron Paul cult members.

Just show us the WMD or prove that they were disposed of or hidden.

I note that the U.S. government and the Bush administration does not make these claims and has long since abandoned the attempt.

You folks have a kind of reverse Trutherism here. You insist that everyone rely upon the 9/11 Commission findings to answer the Truthers, something I agree with strongly as I don't believe the Truthers have anything but wacko conspiracy theories and some lame architects (dime a dozen) to put window dressing on their ravings. Fine. So we accept that.

Yet, you insist that the government's own statements about WMD cannot be true and that you must rely upon outside sources to prove your case. These same sources do have, like the Truther "experts", a profit motive or are conspiracy nuts of some kind or have a political ax to grind. Or they just want to sell some books.

Make up your minds. Is the U.S. government version of 9/11 and WMD to be taken as a whole and considered valid? Or do you just get to pick and choose your preferred views?

Pick a standard. Stick with it. Me, I'm satisfied with the government's explanations of 9/11 and of WMD in Iraq.

Maybe we don’t know a whole lot because....
“Pentagon Fears Old Iraq WMD May Be Used” on our troops if insurgents knew where to look.
http://www.nysun.com/article/35001

Maybe they fear old WMD might be used against other Middle Eastern countries.....

Well anyway....al Queda has always dreamed using CW...even improvised ones. Why did Zaraqawi have a chemical bomb ready to go off in Jordan?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3635381.stm

Chemicals are plentiful anywhere.
If you have ill will in your heart and a good chemist....you can kill scores of people.

During WWI Chlorine gas was used...

What happens if you have a tanker truck filled with chlorine gas...a improvised chemical weapon in Iraq?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6660585.stm

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/9DDB5758-2725-4E24-AC4C-32CD8EC80046.htm

Let’s wait for the captured Iraqi documents to be translated in full.

I’m still placing my bets Saddam did had those WMD one way or another. My bet he put all his equipment and supplies in civilian establishments; many things to make chemical or biological weapons are used in civilian everyday application too.

That’s where he hid them.
Technically he was WMD FREE.

Former UN Butler said Anthrax can be made in a brewery.
Duelfer Report said Saddam had enough ingredients locally...like Sulfer...to make Mustard Gas.

And....Who wants to vote for Ron Paul?

Were you happy with Jamie Gorelic being the 9/11 Commission?

Why would anyone that visits Free Republic exclude themselves from this important information.

We are on the verge of victory in Iraq due to chasing Al Qaeda out. I have never understood why Democrats or the Ron Paul Cult could be so invested in failure?

Many of the people posting on this very thread have provided your ilk irrefutable evidence showing countless links between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Many of us have not trusted The 911 Commission, Senate Select Intelligence Committee or conspiracy theories.

Could you please explain maybe as a spokesman for the Ron Paul crowd why DR. Pauls campaign has the appearance of being activists for losing the war in Iraq

Still waiting for a response on post #90

When Democrats realize they are in trouble because of their investment of failure in Iraq then you must know the Ron Paul Cult is also sunk.

‘Special Report’ Panel on Majority Leader Reid’s Latest Tactics

Friday, November 16, 2007

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,311939,00.html

This is a rush transcript of “Special Report With Brit Hume” from November 15, 2007. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SEN HARRY REID, SENATE MAJORITY LEADER, D-NEV.: The marines can go until sometime in March, and the army can go until late in February. And those are very conservative figures.

I am confident that if we did not give them another penny, they could go for another six months.

ROBERT GATES, DEFENSE SECRETARY: The high degree of uncertainty on funding for the war is immensely complicating this task and will have many real consequences for this department and for our men and women in uniform.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BRIT HUME, HOST: So what are these guys talking about? Well it is this — the Congress has passed and sent to the president something like a $470 billion Appropriations Bill to cover the Defense Department generally.

This war, however, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are being covered separately on separate funding measures, and the president has asked for something along the order of $200 billion for those, and he is not, apparently, going to get it.
Related

They are passing pieces of it, which contain restrictions that he finds unacceptable, which can’t even really pass the congress as a whole, and they are holding back the funds, Harry Reid arguing, and Nancy Pelosi as well, one presumes, that they can reprogram some of this other money and keep the whole thing going. Some thoughts on this whole controversy now from Fred Barnes, the executive editor of The Weekly Standard, Mara Liasson, national political correspondent of National Public Radio, and Mort Kondrake, the executive editor of Roll Call — FOX News contributors all.

Let’s talk a little bit about this issue, where it is going, who it is effecting, and who is right in the argument over whether holding this money for now affects anything.

MORT KONDRAKE, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, ROLL CALL: It does affect things. The Pentagon can reprogrammed some money in order to keep the troops supplied for awhile without this bridge money being passed, but the, as Harry Reid even acknowledges, the money runs out, and the troops are in danger.

Basically what the Democrats are doing is playing chicken with the lives and well-being of our soldiers in the field, ultimately. And Bush already plans to do one of the things that’s required in this, and that is to start redeploying troops.

HUME: One unit is already home, I think.

KONDRAKE: Right, exactly.

So the issue is over whether you set a goal of everybody out by the end of 2008. Even Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama acknowledged that all troops will not be out of Iraq by even the end of their first term, they’re not even saying.

So this is more extreme than even with the Democratic presidential candidates are saying. And I believe Dana Perino is exactly right —

HUME: White House spokesman.

KONDRAKE: White House spokesman — that the Democrats were going to drop this whole matter. Then Moveon.org and Code Pink started blaring at them, and they decided that they had to revisit this thing again and impose more restrictions. And it is unconscionable, frankly.

MARA LIASSON, NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT, NATIONAL PUBLIC RADIO: I do think the Democrats are caught between their inability to actually stop the war — and they certainly have tried enough times, and we’ve established the fact that they do not have the votes to do that — and the desire of their base, which is unhappy.

And one of the reasons the congress is so unpopular is because the Democratic Congress has lost a lot of support among liberal, antiwar voters who thought they were elected to end the war.

HUME: We have a couple poll numbers that are relevant to what you’re saying, Mara. This Fox News opinion dynamics poll on the congress’ job approval shows that it’s virtually unchanged since less than a month ago. The disapproval number appears to have kicked up.

Let’s look at this on the troop surge, which a lot of people were very skeptical of for a long time. Back in September you had a small plurality saying that it had led to improvements, with fully 45 percent saying it made no difference.

Look at now — 59 to 32 improvement over not made a difference. So public opinion on that appears to be shifting.

I wonder, Fred, if the political hazards that the Democrats face here- -and, obviously they are caught between the fact that the left does not want them to give an inch on this, and that public opinion may be shifting on whether the war is going better — that they may be it in real trouble here politically.

FRED BARNES, EXECUTIVE EDITOR, WEEKLY STANDARD: I think they are in real trouble.

I happened to be at the lunch three or four weeks ago when Nancy Pelosi announced that they would not have any more Iraq votes. They had tried, but those horrible Republicans had blocked them, and they were going to move onto other issues.

And now they’re back again. They’ve had their chain jerked by some of the lefties in their party, and they responded.

Historically, though, let’s just remember one thing. In the 2000 election, Democrats did not run on a promise of ending the war in Iraq.

HUME: In 2004?

BARNES: No, they never ran on that in 2006. They were critical of the war. They never said they would “Vote for us, we will end the war in Iraq.”

LIASSON: Plenty of Democratic candidates did say that.

BARNES: I do not think many did at all, and, certainly, none of Rob Emanuel’s favorites, all these moderates.

Some of the Democrats, including Nancy Pelosi, are in a state of total denial. They pretend that the civil war is still going on in Iraq full speed — of course it is not. They pretend that Al Qaeda is still a huge force there — they have practically been defeated. Al Qaeda has no strongholds anywhere in Iraq anymore.

It still exists, and they can still kill —

HUME: So what are the political consequences of this? How is it going to play out?

BARNES: The political consequence is, if the progress continues, and we are a year from now when the election comes up, and Democrats are still pretending like the war, as Harry Reid said six months ago, is lost, they will have no credibility whatsoever.

HUME: Do you agree with that, Mara? Do you think that is a danger for them?

LIASSON: I don’t know. I think if things really changed, and these improvements continue to grow, it could be a problem. But I think the Democrats have plenty of time to adjust.

KONDRAKE: I agree with that. There is a long way to go. There has to be some political progress on the ground, or else the public will be turned off to this. But if there is, the Democrats are in bad shape.

Good luck trying to end the WOD. Its all you guys have left and its almost ridiculous as the Ron Paul Cults attempt to delegitimize the war on terrorism.