Until he raises up all the dead, returns all the money, and actually does something about al Qaeda for a change.
From the cite:
"Iraq maintains a small missile force and several development programs, including for a UAV probably intended to deliver biological warfare agent.
<snip>
Baghdad’s UAVs could threaten Iraq’s neighbors, U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf, and if brought close to, or into, the United States, the U.S. Homeland."
Scroll about halfway down, some of it is italicized.
Well, I rather doubt the Defense Department is in the habit of elaborating to reporters the specifics of “classified briefings.” If it’s “glee” that you feel over this, then I can only agree; I’m happy, too, that the DOD refuses to divulge classified material to the Florida newspapers.
And some questions: Is the esteemed Senator Nelson in the frequent habit of revealing information obtained in a classified briefing to the press? What’s that all about? Also, does this Florida newspaper often publish uncorroborated stories? Because that’s all they’ve got - one statement from one Senator and he won’t even give them enough information to be able to verify his assertions.
And on a lighter note:
See? We told ya the man was unqualified for the position. I’d also comment that you guys must have been sadly mistaken when, during Bush’s campaign, you labeled him an imbecile. He appears extremely capable of maintaining a rather elaborate web of lies and subterfuge. Surely no simpleton would be able to do maintain such a complex cover for such a complex deceit perpetrated by Rummy and Rove.
I think we all know that calling information “classified”, or something similar, can be a useful way to hide total bullshit from the light of day.
You’d probably be real happy wearing earplugs and a bag over your head then.
Can we get Elucidator’s posts classified?
lies make the baby Jesus cry
I’m well aware of that. And of Nixon’s cries of “national security” & “executive privilege,” and the utter bullshit they were. I’m also of the opinion that what you suggest may indeed be the case in this specific incident.
However, if the recipient of material which has been designated by a legitimate source as “classified,” is permitted to re-evaluate that designation and distribute the material as he sees fit, it kinda destroys the whole system. If a person believes that material designated “classified” by the source, should enjoy a wider distribution and even public dissemination, there are legal avenues which may be pursued. And blabbing it to the press ain’t one of 'em. Expediency isn’t another. Following the duly constituted laws and regulations can only lend credence to a person’s allegations. Failure to do so detracts from his veracity and may actually be criminal.
Sure he would, because they also claim that most of the country is comprised of complete morons. It’s almost logical.
Not only did the White House (kinda miss Ari Fleischer, huh?) pass all that on as bald-faced facts, but certain habitual posters here, in this very citadel of ignorance-fighting, believed every single bit of it too - and derided anyone in GD who showed any skepticism about it. Some of them are still there, too.
stick a pacifier in the Prince of Peace
Well, it depends what you’re being skeptical of. If you were being skeptical that the Iraqis actually had the existing hardware, then you were probably justified. If you were skeptical that they could build it, then probably not. Here’s an interesting link for the do-it-yourselfer… http://aardvark.co.nz/pjet/cruise.shtml .
Note that Elucidator has, in the past, mis-characterized the claim as being that the Iraqis had intercontinental delivery capabilities. In fact, the concern was a fairly short range delivery based on a off-shore vessel -- something not far beyond the capabilities of your average RC hobbyist.
Realistically, though, if the concern is an attack on the US with biological or chemical weapons, then who cares about UAVs when we have a perfectly serviceable postal system and will rent Cessnas to anyone with a current license?
Now, friend, the loud insistence all along was that they did have the stuff, launchable within 45 minutes. That had to be the claim to uphold the urgency of invading Iraq right then - if the call to action was that they might be a risk to us someday, well, you know how well that one works.
elucidator is exaggerating the claim for literary effect, yes, but only slightly. The attempt by the warmongers to claim that a duct-taped model airplane is part of the package of weapons of destruction, mass or otherwise, is the fabrication. Lay blame where it’s due. Accept responsibility for spreading simple lies if that’s what you did.
I get in a model airplane mood around Christmas so it’s only fair to say that it can be done: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3145577.stm
Maynard Hill has long been my god.
In other words, lying.
Here ya go, elucidator! Now you can dance – yep, that’s right, dance – to the wonderfully creative and nostalgic tunes of Dubya & The Fearmongers Greatest Hits!
From the same people that brought you “Shrinking Freedom,” “Bring Them On!” and that all-time great, the unforgettable, “See No Boobies on The Statue”!
Just in time for the holydays, run don’t walk to get your copy! Act now, supplies are going fast!
“THIS is the operative statement. All previous statements are inoperative.”
Miss the part about “literary effect”, Beer? Oh, wait - you were looking for a way to dismiss all criticism of your idols, or perhaps to avoid facing your own gullibility, weren’t you?
Made my day, darlin’.
Another exaggeration for literary effect (from SimonX’s posted transcript of the press conference):
Considering he had no WMDs, cooperated with the inspectors, and destroyed what he was told to destroy when he was told to, the above is a complete fabrication.
But it’s been repeated so many times that it really doesn’t matter anymore.
Reminds me of a review of a Donna Summer record, where the reviewer observed that she says, breathily, “Come, come, come into my arms.” By the time she says “into my arms”, well, it just doesn’t matter anymore.
But I’ll just repeat the truth: Scott Ritter was right.
Can’t say that often enough.