Blair and Bush join forces to spin away weapons issue

[Tinoire]

By Andrew Buncombe in Washington and Raymond Whitaker in London
03 August 2003


The British and US governments are drawing up a controversial new strategy to convince the public that Saddam was developing weapons of mass destruction - an admission that they have so far failed to make a convincing case.

The "big impact" plan is designed to overwhelm and silence critics who have sought to put pressure on Tony Blair and George Bush. At the same time both men are working to lower the burden of proof - from finding weapons to finding evidence that there were programmes to develop them, even if they lay dormant since the 1980s.

<snip>
But the Prime Minister gave a clear signal of the strategy by adding: "There has always been something bizarre about the notion that Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction." His critics say that is beside the point: the question is whether the US and Britain can prove their claims that he still had them in sufficient quantities to pose an imminent threat to the world.

<snip>

Scott Ritter, the former chief UN weapons inspector and an outspoken critic of the Bush administration's WMD claims, said Mr Kay had nothing of substance to tell the committees. "His job is not to tell the truth - it's to provide political cover for the President. He was brought back from Iraq not because he has anything relevant to say, but because the President needs to buy time. There is nothing of substance in anything he has said."

http://news.independent.co.uk/world/politics/story.jsp?story=430101

[govegan]

1. What a bunch of lying, dissembling, deceitfully duplicitous dunces

How can anyone take these thugs seriously? How often we ask ourselves!

The chimpster said. "And I fully understand that. And I'm confident that our search will yield that which I strongly believe: that Saddam had a weapons programme."

I notice that even the chimpster in chief doesn't claim to know anything. He just believes it. That is an important point. A vast difference lies betwixt knowledge and faith, 'twixt "believe" and "know."

Of course, the chimp's mental capacities being meagre as they are, one cannot expect for any significant knowledge to be harbored in that rather barren cranial cavity.

It's so refreshing to see someone like Mr. Ritter quoted directly, someone who sees clearly through the ruse of the day.

And so the poodle in chief says, "There has always been something bizarre about the notion that Saddam never had any weapons of mass destruction."

Duh!

Yes, we know you and your pals sold them to SH. We know you and your pals delightfully vacationed and lived it up with the proceeds from those sales. We know how important SH was to some of your previous ruses. We know that your pals across the big pond have the largest stockpiles of WMD on the planet, and they like to parcel them out to their thugs of choice, such as SH. A little incentive, a little political bribery to keep the natives content performing cheap labor for the increase of wealth and gratification of the desires of the slave masters.

So, an underpaid, poorly fed private takes a bullet for your ignorance, and shoeless Iraqi children are maimed for life because of your ignorance. Now, that is bizarre!


The mighty US and UK coalition: Making the World Safe (sort of) for Poverty!

[sandnsea]

2. Well, I shouldn't be surprised,

but I swear the audacity of these people constantly amazes me. We KNOW he had weapons and weapons programs. What I want to know is did he have them in 2003? Who cares what he had 20 god damn years ago!!! Why do we need 6 months to figure out whether the intelligence showed an imminent threat or not? They've already got all the pre-war intelligence they're ever going to get. Either it was correct and led them to WMD or it didn't. And if they didn't know it would, why the hell did they say they did. "They're in the area of Baghdad and Tikrit" Well, are they?