Comments on: IRAQ WMD THAT DOESN’T EXIST IS MISSING

By: Cao

Cao — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 17:14:19 +0000

John Kerry is using this as a reason to impeach Bush.

By: Cao

Cao — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:11:01 +0000

Or maybe some other word that starts with a “p”. If you can’t connect the dots, I don’t think Rick is obliged to draw a picture for you. Rick, your Lead is perfect…! Haven’t you seen the satellite images, pontificating publius?

That’s right, putried pucilanimaous perfidity, I guess in your narrow definition of WMD, it has to be something narrowly used in the production of anthrax. Why would he have to move it at all if it was innocent and not for the purpose of producing something more sinister?

You’re not applying those two brain cells to the equation, lol!

By: Cao

Cao — Sat, 04 Jun 2005 15:03:18 +0000

Private isn’t your name mis-leading? It should be public.

By: Jay

Jay — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 23:26:07 +0000

Awesome post!

By: Joust The Facts

Joust The Facts — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 19:29:52 +0000

The UN Makes A Startling Discovery
The Associated Press is reporting, with shock, that the UN reports missing chemical, biological and missile equipment from the sites that were being monitored by UN weapons inspectors in Iraq.

By: GOP and the City

GOP and the City — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 18:26:38 +0000

WMD AWOL: UN
The WMD issue will most likely never go away, as it provides liberals an issue to fall back on as their other asinine arguments fall into the waste bin of political irrelevancy. So if Saddam’s WMDs (which the UN now claim are now missing) ever do sho…

By: Private

Private — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:36:36 +0000

I did read the article, twice, and re-read it again now and do not see any mention of when. Can you quote where you see reference to the equipment disappearing before the war in this article?

Also, you say at the top “You remember the Iraq WMD? You know, the WMD that doesn’t exist, that’s just a figment of Bushitler and eeeeevil Karl Rove’s imagination who went into Iraq to steal the oil and kill Arabs? Well…according to the UN, it’s gone missing”

Yet the article is not about missing WMD’s but, as you acknowledge yourself, “”dual-use” equipment, that could be used (emphasis mine) to make both pharmaceuticals and bio-weapons”

Isn’t your lede mis-leading?

By: Rick Moran

Rick Moran — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:26:47 +0000

Sorry you didn’t read the article.

UN satellite analysis showed something being moved from those sites before the invasion. My questions stands; why move them if they were not related to the biological weapons production?

By: Private

Private — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 16:24:10 +0000

Wouldn’t US forces have checked those sites in the first days of the war and display the equipment to the world if it was truly nefarious?

Also, you wrote “If they were used for innocent purposes, why move them?” Didn’t you answer that in the previous paragraph? “could have been sold”
Looters, scavengers, profiteers in a war zone? It has been known to happen. Iraq Entrepeneurs perhaps?

By: Alternate Version

Alternate Version — Fri, 03 Jun 2005 15:03:07 +0000

Pointing at each other in circles.
I supported the decision for war based not on some WMD threat, but on my feeling that an eventual war with Iraq was inevitable, and that one now would be far less bloody than one later. So often this position gets me caught in the middle of an argument.