Weapons Were Already Gone...

[Larry Gude]

...This MUST be emphasized.

There are links galore from Drudge, Wash post, you name it. While 'pancaked' and his man Kerry and that dimwit Edwards shout about Bush's incompetency, the truth about Iraq is once more ignored.

US troops found nothing in April. The stuff was GONE. The UN had it listed as a... ... ...W...M...D site. Weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION IE, stuff we fought and bled to take from Saddam because he WOULD NOT COMPLY with us nor the UN.

Some of these materials are used for... ...DETONATING nuclear weapons.

That it is gone is bad. That it was there before is why we took action.

That the media and the Kerry campaign are so transparently playing with this 2 1/2 year old story tells you much.

Bush was right. We were right. Even if kerry wins, this story is nothing but part of the montage of justifiable reasons why both Kerry and Edwards, under George Bushs leadership, voted to act in Iraq.

A President Kerry will have to deal with story after story just like this that the invasion and removal of Saddam Hussien was justifiable and the right thing to do.

 

[Penn]

...This MUST be emphasized.

There are links galore from Drudge, Wash post, you name it. While 'pancaked' and his man Kerry and that dimwit Edwards shout about Bush's incompetency, the truth about Iraq is once more ignored.

US troops found nothing in April. The stuff was GONE. The UN had it listed as a... ... ...W...M...D site. Weapons of MASS DESTRUCTION IE, stuff we fought and bled to take from Saddam because he WOULD NOT COMPLY with us nor the UN.

Some of these materials are used for... ...DETONATING nuclear weapons.

That it is gone is bad. That it was there before is why we took action.

That the media and the Kerry campaign are so transparently playing with this 2 1/2 year old story tells you much.

Bush was right. We were right. Even if kerry wins, this story is nothing but part of the montage of justifiable reasons why both Kerry and Edwards, under George Bushs leadership, voted to act in Iraq.

A President Kerry will have to deal with story after story just like this that the invasion and removal of Saddam Hussien was justifiable and the right thing to do.

Yeah, but that ain't stopping John Kerry:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,136581,00.html

Kerry is blasting Bush over an event that took place some 18 months ago, and out troops weren't even at this site yet!

What a loser J Effing Kerry is!

 

[vraiblonde]

A President Kerry will have to deal with story after story just like this that the invasion and removal of Saddam Hussien was justifiable and the right thing to do.

Where have you been? Kerry is going to get roughly half the vote, regardless of what they find anywhere. John Kerry could spontaneously combust and STILL get half the vote. Teresa Heinz could morph into a succubus on live TV and John Kerry would STILL get half the vote.

Saddam Hussein himself could confess that he and Kerry were in cahoots to get him elected so Saddam could be released to go back to his throne, and Kerry would STILL get roughly half the vote.

There could be video unearthed that shows John Kerry personally firebombing a Bush campaign office, and he would STILL get roughly half the vote.

Half the Democrats would cheer for Kerry and the other half would say it's another made-up story by Karl Rove and the right-wing media whores like Chris Matthews who want to get Bush elected and disenfranchise minority voters.

The whole thing has just become this weird...I don't know what. There's got to be a morning after.....

 

[Penn]

The whole thing has just become this weird...I don't know what. There's got to be a morning after.....

How right you are!!

Consider everything we've heard over the course of this last year:

Bushs' National Guard Records.....

Kerrys' Vietnam Service.....or lack of...

Who in either camp is secretly affiliated with the 527 groups.....

George Soros............need I say more..........?

CBS/Dan Rathers' Involvement with the NG Fraudulent Documents....

The list could go on and on and on. And now this "discovery" that the Dems want to make so much "hay" over.

It's got to have an ending sometime, somewhere.

 

[Larry Gude]

Penn...

...some people are saying that there will be multiple court challenges in close states, everything from Colorodos referendum to split their electoral votes to a repeat of Floridas hanging chads or some variation there of.

If there is a case to be made say, in Florida or Ohio or anywhere that, if the result is suspect and having it overturned would change the outcome, then we will be in for quite an ordeal.

If things hold the way they are today then Bush will be far enough ahead that it won't matter.

I think a tidal wave is going to happen for Bush at the end based on the patterns of all the polls. Hell, right now Hawaii is going Bush for the first time in polls all year.

Kerry is in jeopardy in Pennslyvania, Florida and Ohio plus he's in trouble in some states Gore won.

Both candidates are at about 200 or so electoral votes in the 'leaning to strong for' category. Bush has has 80 some odd in the 'barely' category, Kerry 30 or so.

None of this, of course, means jack but Bush holds a 2:1 lead in the 'security as most important' category, supposedly, among undecideds. This, of course, means jack as well.

One week to go.

 

[Otter]

Where have you been? Kerry is going to get roughly half the vote, regardless of what they find anywhere. John Kerry could spontaneously combust and STILL get half the vote. Teresa Heinz could morph into a succubus on live TV and John Kerry would STILL get half the vote.

Saddam Hussein himself could confess that he and Kerry were in cahoots to get him elected so Saddam could be released to go back to his throne, and Kerry would STILL get roughly half the vote.

There could be video unearthed that shows John Kerry personally firebombing a Bush campaign office, and he would STILL get roughly half the vote.

Half the Democrats would cheer for Kerry and the other half would say it's another made-up story by Karl Rove and the right-wing media whores like Chris Matthews who want to get Bush elected and disenfranchise minority voters.

The whole thing has just become this weird...I don't know what. There's got to be a morning after.....

all true

 

[Penn]

...some people are saying that there will be multiple court challenges in close states, everything from Colorodos referendum to split their electoral votes to a repeat of Floridas hanging chads or some variation there of.

If there is a case to be made say, in Florida or Ohio or anywhere that, if the result is suspect and having it overturned would change the outcome, then we will be in for quite an ordeal.

If things hold the way they are today then Bush will be far enough ahead that it won't matter.

I think a tidal wave is going to happen for Bush at the end based on the patterns of all the polls. Hell, right now Hawaii is going Bush for the first time in polls all year.

Kerry is in jeopardy in Pennslyvania, Florida and Ohio plus he's in trouble in some states Gore won.

Both candidates are at about 200 or so electoral votes in the 'leaning to strong for' category. Bush has has 80 some odd in the 'barely' category, Kerry 30 or so.

None of this, of course, means jack but Bush holds a 2:1 lead in the 'security as most important' category, supposedly, among undecideds. This, of course, means jack as well.

One week to go.

Yeah, I hear you Larry.

I guess what I mean to say is that I'm getting very tired of all the rhetoric, the sniping, the outright lies being spread.

I'm amazed at the sheer hatred bieng spewed out there against Pres. Bush.

The amount of misleading stories, the attempts at scaring old people over medical issues, the Social Security lies.

This is the way we've come to do business in this country, as it applies to the Presidential races?

Somebody remind me again how/why we are considered to be an honest Democratic nation, all "living under God?" It's getting a bit blurry.

 

[jlabsher]

Perhaps you didn't see the video taken by US troops of the weapons?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/p...7200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&position=

I'll admit, I'm not even following this story and could care less if some troops left weapons unguarded during their advance on whereever. Somebody at work told me about it, and I know how much you folks love to ding my Karma for reporting anti-administration/republican/right wing news.

 

[SamSpade]

Perhaps you didn't see the video taken by US troops of the weapons?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/p...7200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&position=

I'll admit, I'm not even following this story and could care less if some troops left weapons unguarded during their advance on whereever. Somebody at work told me about it, and I know how much you folks love to ding my Karma for reporting anti-administration/republican/right wing news.

Well I ain't dinged you yet, as you haven't yet crossed my "too disagreeable and/or stupid to live" threshold. Apparently no one yet seems to know who's responsible - the Russians, the troops - everyone EXCEPT John Kerry, who somehow knows that Bush is responsible.

This is kind of a no-win for Kerry - these are dangerous weapons that if they should fall into the hands of *terrorists* could pose a threat to Americans. Oops. That's why we WENT there. I think if he was smart, he'd shut his mouth before he trips on it.

But I respect persons who have the wisdom NOT to comment on a story they haven't been following. As Aristophanes said :

"Youth ages, immaturity is outgrown, ignorance can be taught, and drunkenness sobered, but stupid lasts forever".

 

[UrbanPancake]

Bush's administration claims it was the troops fault. How can the commander in chief blame someone who is under him? I guess Bush doesn't understand what it means to be commander in chief. What Bush's administration is doing is wrong. It's wrong to blame our troops who take orders from Bush and his crony's. By the way the weapons were found missing after the US invaded Iraq. Bush is to blame. He is the commander in chief, so he has to take the blame. Why can't he just admit that he has been consistently wrong for the last 4 years?

 

[SamSpade]

Bush's administration claims it was the troops fault.

Source, please? If you *have* one?

 

[Aimhigh2000]

This just in........

Reports on the news this morning say that the weapons went missing AFTER the invasion...............Hmmmmmmmmmm.

 

[UrbanPancake]

Reports on the news this morning say that the weapons went missing AFTER the invasion...............Hmmmmmmmmmm.

Pancake got back up....... It was on the news this morning and last nights news. So eat Bushchips.

 

[dustin]

Pancake got back up....... It was on the news this morning and last nights news. So eat Bushchips.

man i dunno even know what you just said :towelyvoice:

 

[SamSpade]

Pancake got back up....... It was on the news this morning and last nights news. So eat Bushchips.

Again - source?

 

[ylexot]

WASHINGTON - Videotape shot by a Minnesota television crew traveling with U.S. troops in Iraq when they first opened the bunkers at the Al-Qaqaa munitions base nine days after the fall of Saddam Hussein shows what appeared to be high explosives still in barrels and bearing the markings of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

 

[SamSpade]

WASHINGTON - Videotape shot by a Minnesota television crew traveling with U.S. troops in Iraq when they first opened the bunkers at the Al-Qaqaa munitions base nine days after the fall of Saddam Hussein shows what appeared to be high explosives still in barrels and bearing the markings of the International Atomic Energy Agency.

*Thank you*. Somehow, "I heard it on the news this morning" doesn't quite pass the "proof" requirement.

Still, the same article says there's still no conclusive evidence either way, and that the bunker shown wasn't the bunker where the missing explosives were kept.

"But at issue is whether the weapons were moved before or after U.S. forces occupied that region of the country in early April. No one has been able to provide conclusive evidence either way, although Iraqi officials blamed it on poor U.S. security after Baghdad fell. "

Nevertheless - there's an estimated ONE MILLION TONS of explosives in Iraq, and we've disposed of 400,000 tons of it (or scheduled to do so). Undoubtedly, some were looted or moved before and during the war, because the insurgents are largely using old artillery shells and such for their own bombs. Why is this particular 370 ton cache SO IMPORTANT? Is it because these weapons pose an extra dangerous threat should they reach terrorist hands? Isn't that WHY we went in there?

 

[Penn]

Perhaps you didn't see the video taken by US troops of the weapons?

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/29/politics/29bomb.html?ei=5065&en=9b3f4b6995f82009&ex=1099627200&partner=MYWAY&pagewanted=print&position=

I'll admit, I'm not even following this story and could care less if some troops left weapons unguarded during their advance on whereever. Somebody at work told me about it, and I know how much you folks love to ding my Karma for reporting anti-administration/republican/right wing news.

*WARNING!* The information contained in the is post has been deemed faulty
due to the nature and character of the poster. This individual has been proven to lie, cheat and spread false rumors all in the name of His ghey mentor John Kerry.

 

[ylexot]

*Thank you*. Somehow, "I heard it on the news this morning" doesn't quite pass the "proof" requirement.

Still, the same article says there's still no conclusive evidence either way, and that the bunker shown wasn't the bunker where the missing explosives were kept.

"But at issue is whether the weapons were moved before or after U.S. forces occupied that region of the country in early April. No one has been able to provide conclusive evidence either way, although Iraqi officials blamed it on poor U.S. security after Baghdad fell. "

Nevertheless - there's an estimated ONE MILLION TONS of explosives in Iraq, and we've disposed of 400,000 tons of it (or scheduled to do so). Undoubtedly, some were looted or moved before and during the war, because the insurgents are largely using old artillery shells and such for their own bombs. Why is this particular 370 ton cache SO IMPORTANT? Is it because these weapons pose an extra dangerous threat should they reach terrorist hands? Isn't that WHY we went in there?

Yeah, you'd think that if the insurgents/terrorists had their hands on the stuff that they would be using it, not the old iron bombs and artillery.

 

[UrbanPancake]

*WARNING!* The information contained in the is post has been deemed faulty
due to the nature and character of the poster. This individual has been proven to lie, cheat and spread false rumors all in the name of His ghey mentor John Kerry.

I could say the same for Bible Thumpers who lie, cheat, and spread false rumors all in the name of the second coming of Jesus disguised as Bush.