Earlier this week, we posted the following.
Seems this is a story that will never end:
Russian special forces troops moved many of Saddam Hussein’s weapons and related goods out of Iraq and into Syria in the weeks before the March 2003 U.S. military operation, The Washington Times has learned.
Russia? Oh, say it isn’t so! And yet . .
Defense officials said the Russians can provide information on what happened to the Iraqi weapons and explosives that were transported out of the country. Officials believe the Russians also can explain what happened to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs
Oh really? I guess the volley is back in the Kerry court with this one. His campaign has stretched the truth so far – it has snapped. ABC News has now reported that there were only THREE tons of RDX, according to IAEA reports:
The information on which the Iraqi Science Ministry based an Oct. 10 memo in which it reported that 377 tons of RDX explosives were missing ” presumably stolen due to a lack of security ” was based on “declaration” from July 15, 2002. At that time, the Iraqis said there were 141 tons of RDX explosives at the facility.
But the confidential IAEA documents obtained by ABC News show that on Jan. 14, 2003, the agency’s inspectors recorded that just over 3 tons of RDX was stored at the facility ” a considerable discrepancy from what the Iraqis reported.
The IAEA documents could mean that 138 tons of explosives were removed from the facility long before the start of the United States launched “Operation Iraqi Freedom” in March 2003.
How did 3 tons become 380? What kind of fuzzy math is that?
Why is Senator Kerry still running with this? He is stretching this thing as long as he can in order to discredit to the administration – if I were a Kerry supporter, I would be embarassed., nay – OUTRAGED!
How will Senator Kerry pivot from blaming the US military to blaming the Russians.? And will he? Or will he continue to IGNORE the facts, as they unfold? The United States CANNOT afford to have a Commander in Chief sitting in office who is so EASILY sucked in by headlines in the main stream media! This topic has taken up so much time during the last week heading into the elections – - it has wasted the time of the American people.
“You didn’t guard the ammunitions dump – and now our troops are at greater risk. The President, The Commander in Cheif is not doing his job.” – Senator John Kerry, as early as 6am this morning.
Kerry’s top foreign policy advisor is quoted as saying, “We don’t really know the facts.” John Kerry is making accusations about the President, and decisions about the troops without knowing the facts. This is the man to be in the Oval Office? I don’t think so.
Kerry is impulsive and doesn’t gather all the facts to make good decisions. Kerry reacts to headlines. It shows that Kerry shoots off his mouth before thinking.
Once again, I ask – is THIS is one of those countries . . . one of those members of the United Nations Security Council, that Senator John Kerry wants permission from before we take action to defend our country?
Hugh Hewitt sums it up:
JOHN KERRY now closes his presidential campaign exactly as he opened his political life: Attacking the United States military. Thirty-three years ago, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, he indicted the soldiers of Vietnam as war criminals, the heirs of Genghis Khan. This week he embraced an already discredited account of missing munitions to attack the reputation of the 3rd Infantry Division and the 101st Airborne…
Once again, I state – No thank you, Senator Kerry!
Related:
Saddam’s WMD have been found
Iraqi Weapons in Syria
Russia Tied to Iraqi Missing Arms
The Times ‘Explosive’ Article Could Backfire
The Myth of the “Missing Explosives”: A Shameless Lie
The Commander-in-Chief
Discrepancy Found in Explosives Amounts
Commander Says Unlikely Large-Scale Removal of Explosives Occurred After U.S. Invasion
Russian troops linked to missing Iraqi explosives
198 – how can you ask someone to support a person whose policies one disagrees with? i support my country not the politicians making policy. that’s up to the people to decide. Jefferson said ‘when politicians stop being responsive to the people, throw the rascals out’ we’ll see soon, won’t we?
i think their are terrorists in the Republican Party, comprised of corporate donors and fascists who have hijacked the best angels of the GOP. it wasn’t hard to grab since Bush willingly took their money then gave them their due rewards.
Shiloh,
I personally think that is over played. Every time somebody disagree’s w/ Cheney, the libs scream “Halliburton!”
I guess it’s all based on how you look at things…..
Like I think that the apologists in the DNC are just as bad as the terrorists in some ways because they refuse to acknowledge the gargantuan threat that AL Queda was and Saddam could have presented and those who choose to ignore history are doomed to repeat it.
200 snatch – i wasn’t aware the DNC didn’t view Bin Laden as a threat. Clinton did. he told the incoming admin so.
the PDB called ‘Bin Laden determined to attack within United States’ should have re-enforced that info when given to Bush.
Pull up the memo to back the statement that Clinton warned Bush of that, or better yet, refer to the Final Clinton Papers in the Archives. They are dated 4/6/04 on this site.
right off the bat – this is a non-partisan group. bankers etc.
Share Of Economy Going To Wages And Salaries Drops For Unprecedented 14th Straight Quarter; Meanwhile, Corporate Profit Share Has Risen Significantly – 10/29/04
The Commerce Department’s new GDP data indicate a continuation of a 14 quarter trend: changes in wage and salary income have lagged behind changes in the overall economy. At the same time, corporate profits have experienced exceptionally robust growth.
here
this means that Bush has done a good job in accomplishing what he and his owners set out to do 4 years ago. congragulations.
delete 203 if there’s a choice
Two years before 9/11, candidate Bush was already talking privately about attacking Iraq, according to his former ghost writer.
link
well then, good shiloh, now you see that we don’t think iraq and 9/11 were directly connected. thanks.
but that’s the excuse both Bush & Cheney repeated as nasuem, and incorrectly, as one of the reasons for war.
ELECTION BOARD THROWS OUT 976 CHALLENGES BY REPUBLICAN PARTY
GOP Challenger Barbara Miller Could be Indicted on Felony Charges
AKRON, Ohio -
Republicans have long tried to suppress minority turnout for precisely because of their presumed allegiance to Democrats; indeed, Supreme Court Chief Justice William Rehnquist (news – web sites), who was nominated to the Court by Richard Nixon in 1971, participated in challenges of minority voters 40 years ago when he was a Republican activist in Arizona. But the party is believed to have mobilized tens of thousands of attorneys and poll-watchers for that purpose this year, particularly in so-called battleground states, such as Florida, Wisconsin, and Ohio.
okeydokey
First they came for the Communists,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Communist.
Then they came for the Jews,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I wasn’t a Jew.
Then they came for the Catholics,
and I didn’t speak up,
because I was a Protestant.
Then they came for me,
and by that time there was no one
left to speak up for me.
- by Rev. Martin Niemöller, 1945
Columnist Bob Herbert has a rather eye-popping piece about Republicans in Detroit wanting to surpress certain sectors of the electorate:
link
More than 80 percent of the population of Detroit is black. This is very well understood by John Pappageorge, who is white and a Republican state legislator in Michigan. “If we do not suppress the Detroit vote,” said Mr. Pappageorge, “we’re going to have a tough time in this election.”
baloney
Bad reporters find experts by calling up university press relations officials or brokerage research departments and saying, in effect, “Gimme an expert”; some academic publicity machines send out rosters, complete with phone numbers, e-mail addresses and areas of expertise, so that the lazy journalist doesn’t even have to make that first call. Really bad reporters, paradoxically, work a little harder: knowing the conclusions they want to arrive at, they seek out experts who just happen to agree with them. Give me a position, and I’ll find you an expert to support it – and not just an expert but one with an institutional affiliation sounding so dignified it could make a nobleman genuflect. Give me a Center for the Study of …, an Institute for the Advancement of …, or an American Council on …, and often as not I’ll give you an organization whose special interests are as sharply defined as its name is not.
question everything