Ranting Nutjobs, and other political delights.
 

Ladies and gentlemen, start your engines.

(1) As set forth in the Lord Butler report, the phony set of documents were not relevant. I also note that Wilson cited these as evidence backing his claim, even though they didn't come to light until 8 months after his "report."

By "not relevant," you mean "now not the only things the Brits say they were relying upon." They are highly relevant, and no one outside England knows of any other support.

As for Wilson, he explains himself in the six-page statement neither you nor Slave apparently can be bothered to read, but -- again -- you are discussing Wilson's credibility, and I am discussing something much more important.

(2) Take it up with Lord Butler

You may have noticed that he is not a U.S. government official, and I would prefer that we only go to war when U.S. government officials have first-hand knowledge of the cassus belli.

(3) They had a nuclear program. It may not have been as advanced as we thought, but it was there.

It was shuttered some time before. We now know it was not active.

(4) It is true what you say about the mines . . . in Niger. Niger is not Africa, however.

Yes. And then there's what I said earlier. But if you're going to stop relying on Niger, maybe you owe Wilson some kind of apology for trashing him.

(5) Wilson, himself, cites evidence that Iraq sought uranium in 1999.

That is, at best, an overstatement.

(6) Scare is a pejorative term. He laid out what he believed to be true. At the same time, Saddam was in violation of 1441 and was playing games with the inspectors. And, of course, the nation had just been bombed 1 year before, and the intelligence agenices were roundly being criticized for "not connecting the dots." What do you think dots look like? Hint: it is not a perfect picture where, if you work hard enough and are smart enough, you get an infallable answer. Frankly, I would be calling for Bush's removal had he not done what he did.

Do you really believe that Bush had any "belief" about Iraq & WMD? Transparently, he had decided to invade, and was looking for a pretext. The intel was boiled down to a [b]single page[b] for him. Give me a break.

Saddam was in violation of 1441? BFD. Like you guys give a rat's ass about UN resolutions at any other time. When the UN passes resolutions about Israel, you scoff, and not without good reason. And "games with the inspectors"? Please. Hans Blix was there, looked in the places our intel suggested, and found nothing. Nada.

We're not talking about getting an infallible answer here. We're talking about being flat-out wrong. Iraq's so-called WMD were no threat to us. Meanwhile, Iran has a nuclear program and ties with Al Qaeda, but we shot our wad in Iraq.

Hank, Hank, Hank
 

And this is why you'll see more military personnel vote Democrat this year than in a long, long time.

Compare Kerry's understand of being in battle with Bush's lack thereof and the apparent desire of the R's to not even talk about what the soldiers are going through (and to not even let the coffins be photographed for example).

It's not unpatriotic to acknowledge that war is hell. Indeed, it is part of appreciating what soldiers are doing for us.

Weapons of Thread Destruction
 

It wouldn't let me start it. I would like you to rename it "Ranting Nutjobs" though please.

"Moore" on Linda
 

Apparently, booing is becoming commonplace on the '04 Ronstadt tour:

"Those fans who came to Wolf Trap on Wednesday to hear tunes from when Linda Ronstadt wore satin short shorts and roller skates -- and the place teemed with 'em -- went away disappointed....

The biggest excitement of the night, by a long shot, came when Ronstadt then dedicated her encore of "Desperado" to filmmaker Michael Moore, kick-starting a boo-cheer competition throughout the venue that drowned out her singing and left grown-ups in tuxes and evening gowns yelling at each other on their way to the parking lot."

Homeland security
 

In a mild panic, I started reading a yahoo article entitled " Man sought for taking photos of refineries". The man apparently was seen taking photos in Texas City, which is about 30 miles south of here. You may remember that Texas City has the dubious distinction of being the site of the largest industrial accident in the United States. Nearly 600 people died in 1947 when an uncontrolled fire hit a ship full of ammonium nitrate and a few chemical plants. My dad--who was sitting in a kindergarden classroom over 50 miles away--was knocked out of his chair by the blast and still bears scars from the flying glass, so I'm not really comforted at the distance from here to Texas City if something were to happen there.

Anyhow, the guy who is investigating the photographer seems competent, and I'm comforted that he's not leaving any avenue unexplored. "This is based on the idea that al Qaeda does its homework," Clawson said. "That's not to say we don't have enough home-grown idiots already who might want to do something."

Here's hoping that it's a harmless idiot.

Weapons of Thread Destruction
 

How about "Nutjobs Ranting About Politics"?

Hank, Hank, Hank
 

My posts are going to change military votes? and if you really believe the military will be voting democrat this year, will you please get word to Kerry's people not to exclude such a high numbers of the absentee military ballots the way Gore did in Florida. tell him hos you think he might be getting some of 'em.

Max Cleland revives the mantra
 

and gives new meaning to the words "Stump Speech"*

"US Democrats stepped up attacks on George W. Bush's anti-terror policies when an official of White House candidate John Kerry's campaign said the president "flat-out lied" over the Iraq war.

Former senator Max Cleland made his remarks in a conference call to reporters with Democratic chairman Terry McAuliffe as part of a party offensive ahead of this week's release of a major report sure to fuel criticism of Bush's war on terror.

Cleland, a national co-chairman of Kerry's campaign, described the Bush administration's arguments that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction and ties to al-Qaeda terrorists, as a "pack of lies."

The former lawmaker from the southern state of Georgia defended the vote that he, Kerry and others cast in the Senate to authorize military intervention in Iraq, saying the Congress was "flat-out lied to."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...iraq_democrats

*admit it, this one is funny.

Originally posted by Slave

As remarked here and elsewhere, some phony, some not.

What's not phony? The truth is, we have no idea what else the British may have been relying on, although we know they were relying in part on bogus information. You have no problem with buying a big in a poke, it seems.

Its program (or programme as the Economist likes to call it) was shuttered and Saddam, by most accounts, intended to ramp it back up once the UN sanctions were lifted. So to say "no program" is misleading.

And I indeed to buy a new 911 as soon as I have the money, but I am no threat to be doing so soon.

Isn't "French control" an oxymoron?

Nicely done. Now work in the flood thing.

Uranium constitutes near 80% of Niger's exports - was this the rainy season?

Oops -- I guess we have to give the French some credit.

I like how you include the words "now know"

You'll recall that the Admininstration classified the material which undermined the war effort, so none of us were privy to all of it before the war. eta: Max Cleland knows more about this than I do.

Max Cleland revives the mantra
 

And you seriously think you're the first to have thought of it?

Max Cleland revives the mantra
 

I'm sure that somewhere, somehow, Paigow claimed to invent it.

This is rich.
 

A British paper reports that their other source was the French:

• Though it has not been stated in the four official inquiries into British intelligence, London's source for its claims about Iraqi efforts to buy uranium - widely repeated in the US until discredited - almost certainly came from French intelligence.

The Guardian

Too fucking funny. Am now waiting for Right Blogistan to line up to say that if the French told the Brits, it must be true.

your illiberal media
 

Radio & TV -- from which most people get their news -- give more money to Republicans than Democrats:

http://jackotoole.net/misc/tv-radio-dollars.gif

Carry on.

"Moore" on Linda
 

Were they booing because:

(a) Linda R dedicated a song to Michael Moore, an implicit compliment?

(b) Linda R dedicated a song to Michael Moore that starts with the line "why don't you come to your senses", a clear insult?

or

(c) because they finally realized that they had paid money to hear a washed up singer who belongs in a parody of a Vegas lounge act?

Lemme guess. This is a smear campaign of the VRWC
 

AP: Clinton Adviser Probed in Terror Memos

By JOHN SOLOMON

WASHINGTON - President Clinton (news - web sites)'s national security adviser, Sandy Berger, is the focus of a criminal investigation after admitting he removed highly classified terrorism documents from a secure reading room during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings, The Associated Press has learned.

Berger's home and office were searched earlier this year by FBI agents armed with warrants. Some drafts of a sensitive after-action report on the Clinton administration's handling of al-Qaida terror threats during the December 1999 millennium celebration are still missing.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp...1_berger_probe

Lemme guess. This is a smear campaign of the VRWC
 

Yeah, "smear" is a good word.

your illiberal media
 

And the journalists that write the stuff you read haven't given a dime to the Bush Campaign.

http://www.mpetrelis.blogspot.com/20...s_archive.html

Tally ho

BUSH LIES YOU REPUKELICAN MFs!
 

Today I sat back and reviewed the chronology of the swampdive our country has taken in less than 3 years.

In the days after 9-11, W and the Christian right browbeat Americans to choose:

We could join the right on its crusade to take preemptive action or we were one with the terrorists.

And yet we took no preemptive action against the illegitimate military state of Pakistan.

A violator of human rights that has the WMDs; aided and abetted the Taliban; aided and abetted al Qaeda; and sold nukes to the North Koreans.

Instead W and the wingnuts took off on follies to Afghanistan and Iraq and created the false illusion that anyone who resisted their imperialistic designs on the Arabs were docile camels with their heads stuck in the sand.

To resist…nay…..protest was to be faithless to the Republican's factory of lies.

”Are you a god-fearing Christian or one of them there Islamic terrorists????” This is what counter-protesting fascists shouted when I marched in Washington Sqaure park and then later in Trafalgar Square to protest the torture of innocents at Abu Grabe.

Of course, if you gave the “wrong” answer these jackboots will invoke the imagery of the people jumping out of the WTC, until you break down and agree with them.

But what about the innocent children in Palestine?

What about Rachel Corrie?

The W-Blair coalition of imperialism has a lot of blood on its hands. More bodies than OBL.

And now it looks like W is gunning for Iran, god forbid. And the crystal ball says if we allow this reelection then 18 months from now when the country mourns another 1000 of its finest souls lost in battle that Cheney and Rumsfield will be lauding W as the savior of Iran. They will tell us Dick Clarke was wrong and the new CIA guy too. The crazy mullahs were bad man who killed kurds or whomever and lied to the inspectors about WMDs.

The Neo-cons will call for all to hail down to Bush and the collaborators in Congress might second guess, but not before there are more dead, with the worst being the Senate with 60 clones of W's horse, Incitatus, sitting in the well, laughing at Cheney’s profandity.

I pray to God that the American public is not so deluded as to buy this cool-aid fruit punch but reading this board makes me cynical. I find it amazing how the so-called educated human intellect can work to fool itself into believing that anything which some pied piper claims is threatening, is. I believe Jung called this the Stockholm syndrome.

your illiberal media
 

It doesn't look like he was looking for people who write for Popular Mechanics and Bugle: The Journal of the Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation.

your illiberal media
 

Two fine periodicals, I might add.

Indeed! -- t.s.

BUSH LIES YOU REPUKELICAN MFs!
 

My name is John Kerry. And I approved this message.

Lemme guess. This is a smear campaign of the VRWC
 

How is the diffferent or worse than what Woolsey did when he ws DCI -- i.e. work on top-level classified shit in his office at home on his unsecured laptop. If true, a slap on the wrist for rules violations.

Or do you think Sandy's working for AQ now?

S_A_M

And Now a Break for Humor
 

http://www.jibjab.com/thisland.html

[spree: video with sound]

BUSH LIES YOU REPUKELICAN MFs!
 

Could you link us to your website for additional helfulf and thought-provoking information?

Max Cleland revives the mantra
 

It's no ongoing fictional gay love affair, but it made me laugh.

PTSD
 

PTSD is overblown. Effete liberals like Atticus manufacture statistics on that because killing bothers THEM, not because it bothers REAL MEN.

PTSD
 

The post you quoted was my attempt to be sarcastic, like the one you fooled Gatti with. But really I'm with you. War is not healthy for children and other living things. I dedicate this post to director Micael Moore. You should go see his documentary. Everyone should.

as the fringe turns
 

You want to talk psycho- babble? I think you'd be nicer person if your mom hadn't kept bringing new "Uncles" home after Dad left.

Wilson lied?
 

Kevin Drum tries to review the bidding and concludes that maybe Wilson lied, but so what?

more

How to control gang violence.
 

I'm guessing Hello will be interested in this. Not so much to debate here -- just how to do the hard work of law enforcement.

Wilson lied?
 

So the debate has now shifted from Wilson Didn't Lie to OK Wilson Lied, But So What? Sound familiar anybody?

Wilson lied?
 

(1) I never said he didn't lie -- I wasn't sure what he said, so I asked for his alleged lies. I don't recall getting an answer, so I found my own.

(2) I did the "so what?" post days ago, as I recall. I don't recall that you had a good answer, either.

Wilson lied?
 

You've got to be fucking kidding me.

Wilson lied?
 

Slave: Wilson lied.

Me: Oh?

Slave: Sho' nuff.

Me: If that's lying, Bush isn't looking so hot.

Slave: [nada]

Slave: Something responding to what I said to club.

Me: So he lied; so what?

Wilson lied?
 

Right. I point out articles that he lied, and you finally concede the fact when one of your guys concedes the point.

And so what - the What is that it finally lays to rest the claims of a spotlight-stealing blowhard for the left.

Wilson lied?
 

I don't recall that the articles you linked to ever pointed to a prior inconsistent statement, which was all I was asking for. (Apologies if I missed it.)

But if it makes you happy that people are taking Wilson down, that's fine with me, since I couldn't be bothered to buy his book and think it won't do the cause of truth and justice any harm.

as the fringe turns
 

Stick with the fat jokes.

Wilson lied?
 

Go back and search the old thread, Slave and I have exhausted ourselves posting on this.

The "so what" is important because it is Wilson that raised the 16 word issue, which I submit was the spark that set the "Bush Lied" crowd ablaze.

I have no problem with you or anyone else criticizing the president's policies. That is fair game, though I think the rhetoric should be toned down a notch when it comes to foreign policy. But this "Bush Lied" shit was WAY over the top, and I believe has harmed our efforts abroad.

Wilson lied?
 

The only "lie" he's been caught in so far is about how he received the assignment to investigate the claims. You haven't explained how this is a lie as opposed to a reasonable difference of opinion as to characterization. And you haven't explained how this affects the credibility of his claims (or, more importantly, the credibility of W's claims).

His wife was in the CIA, the CIA was looking for people with experience in the field and in the subject matter. Are you proposing a wall that separates what undercover CIA operatives learn in their peronals lives from their professional ones?

All you have done is call someone with a distinguished reord in foreign service a lying partisan hack. Go ahead. That meshes perfectly well with the style of stormtrooper, focus group oriented politics currently practiced by the Republican party. The intelligent voter is tired of this talking points bullshit.

So you still think Wilson lied about the details of how he came to the attention of the CIA? It's not like he deliberately misled a nation to whip them up into a fear-fueled frenzy for an ill-advised war or anything. Get some fucking perspective. Those of us who bought into the pre-war rhetoric (and that's all it turned out to be) because we were sure the administration knew something we didn't feel like we're left standing naked with panties on our heads and Lynndie just took our last cowby killer.