Dead UK expert believed Iraq WMD posed threat

Reuters ^ | 1/21/04

[mtbopfuyn]

Amazing how everyone is denying the existence of WMD, yet the UN (that's the United Nations - plural, with a "S") spent 12 years and untold $$$ on the very same. Remember too, this began long before Bush's or Blair's time.

[mtbopfuyn]

Blair has acknowledged that weapons of mass destruction may never be found in Iraq.

IN is the operative word here.

[areafiftyone]

I actually wanted to scream at the TV last night when Teddy Kennedy shook his bobblehead when Bush mentioned WMD. Apparently the democreeps cannot put two and two together. They (especially Ted Kennedy) are soooo full of hate. You can see it in his ugly face. I will never understand why the People of Massachusetts keep electing this guy just because he carries the Kennedy name.

[cyncooper]

Ping

[Tricorn]

Yes, a major news flash indeed. Iraq had WMD? No, say it ain't so!

[ZAKJAN]

I rather enjoyed his world wide expression of stupidity.. LOL liberals were so upset that they are on the downslide...It was so obvious they are being defeated on merit. Hilliary looked like a druggy, her head was bobbing, and she had a green color to her.....as if she needed a barf bag?

JAN

[marsh-mellow]

I thought Teddy looked like he was slipping into the dark and scary depths of senility.

[leadpencil1]

I actually wanted to scream at the TV last night

I felt the same way. Did you see the second time they showed the witch? I am sure she had an earpiece with someone telling her when she was "on". The first second her ugly mug filled the screen, she looked tired and draggy, then a smile exploded across her face and she looked like a freaking christmas tree, all lit up.

"Hillary, your on!"

[areafiftyone]

I swear there are so many nutjobs in the democratic party. I think they need to do a complete psychiatric evaluation of the democreeps in congress.

[MizSterious]

I know the feeling. I saw the old fool, too. But I also get that same feeling reading some of these FR threads, when people take up the same "there isn't and never was any WMDs" banner. Many useful idiots on FR.

[xzins]

ping

[JohnGalt]

The last honorable man in government?

[rootntootn]

He is despicalbe, that's for sure. Just an old alky that doesn't realize his last useful brain cells went blank decades ago. What a piece of sh!t.

These democraps seem to think that rolling their eyes and wiping their corpulent faces somehow amounts to a cogent argument. How'd you like the jowly one, Hitlery?

[Free Vulcan]

I saw that, it was so obvious. All I could think was 'Busted!.' It made her look twice as stupid.

[RightOnTheLeftCoast]

"Remember too, this began long before Bush's or Blair's time."

Well, yeah. Like when Saddam used WMDs on Iran and the Kurds.

This ain't a hypothetical, folks. The only question is what happened to his WMDs. He didn't provide records of his disarmament to the UN. So, they're somewhere, probably scattered and buried throughout Iraq, which is the size of California: big. Meanwhile we have approximately one soldier per square mile of Iraq. Small wonder we haven't found WMDs yet. Yet, maybe we have. You can bet such news would be very carefully released at the time of our choosing.

[Born Conservative]

Diver Ted was ready to pop his esophageal varices several times last night. If a Republican were to show his level of disgust over a speech by a Democrat President, the media would be in a tizzy. Talk about double standard...

[CaptRon]

Knowing he was going to take a severe whupping, Saddam Hussein decided not to prove he didn't have WMD anyway.

I fail to see the logic in this, therefore I can only conclude he was trying to protect them.

[arasina]

From John McCaslin's Townhall.com column today:

TRUSTING BYRD

When it comes to weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, or lack thereof, it's too bad President Bush didn't read a page from the January issue of Military magazine when he delivers his crucial State of the Union address Tuesday night.

The magazine's military-minded editors, who know more about WMDs than the rest of us, have an intriguing item surrounding what certain politicians said in the not-so-distant past about former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein's possession of these deadly weapons.

Let's start with critics who continue to charge that it was Mr. Bush who said Iraq's WMD program was an "imminent threat."

"Sorry, he never said that," says Military's editors. "He wanted to get them 'before they become an imminent threat.' It was instead Senator Jay Rockefeller, West Virginia Democrat, now a Bush critic, who said, 'I do believe Iraq poses an imminent threat.'"

It gets better, at least for defenders of Mr. Bush.

President Clinton's national security adviser, Samuel R. Berger, for instance, warned Feb. 18, 1998: "He (Saddam) will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has 10 times since 1983."

While House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, California Democrat, added Dec. 16, 1998: "Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology, which is a threat to countries in the region, and he has made a mockery of the weapons-inspection process."

Then there was Mr. Clinton's secretary of state, Madeleine K. Albright, stating Nov. 10, 1999: "Hussein has . . . chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."

Finally, Sen. Robert C. Byrd, West Virginia Democrat, declared with utmost certainty Oct. 3, 2002: "We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical- and biological-warfare capabilities."

[wildbill]

I'll bet you're right. Technically easy and politically savvy. Clintoons don't miss a trick.