Thursday, October 28, 2004

"Mr Bush broke his silence on the missing explosives - first reported on Monday - by repeating his charge that, if Mr Kerry had been president, Saddam Hussein would still control Iraq and have hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives to share with terrorists." - BBC News

That would be the hundreds of thousands of tons of explosives that they found alongside the hordes of Weapons of Mass Destuction I presume?

Jon 9:15 AM Permalink

Comments:

Oh man, you had to open this can of worms didn't you! You should read Eric Dolecki's post and the accompanying links on the missing weapons misinformation campaign here:

http://www.ericd.net/2004_10_24_blogger_archive.inc#109881547053245892

Iraq is a mess no matter which side you're on, but it just aint right to dig up old news and represent it as current. Shameful.

Of course even if Kerry had left Saddam Hussein in power, I doubt he would have kicked the UN Weapons Inspectors out. As long as they were there, we at least knew where the explosives were! *Sigh*

1. IAEA is to ultimately blame here. Those explosives were supposed to be destroyed.

2. The US military destroyed thousands of tons of explosives from thousands of locations.

3. If Saddam snuck out close to 400 tons of high explosives under the watch of the UN inspectors (most likely since it would take a whole lot of people and trucks to get that stuff out) - why couldn't he have trucked out WMDs too?

4. Kerry is going with the story even after one of his campaign strategists on Good Morning America admitted that John Kerry doesn't know what happend for sure. Kerry is an opportunist and a blatant liar who will say and do anything.

5. John Kerry wanted the US to wait EVEN LONGER before going in. Remember? Saddam had plenty of time to hide things before the invasion after he was warned repeatedly.

6. John Kerry has about every position one can have on the war in Iraq. Which really equates to no position at all. The man has no spine. Why do you think terrorists in Iraq (from Iraq and elsewhere) want him elected? Because Kerry is soft, while Bush and the coalition are kicking their ass.

7. I could go on and on, but I'll end with this tidbit from ft.com:

"At a rally in Iowa on Wednesday, however, Mr Kerry claimed that Mr Bush had allowed the explosives to fall into the hands of Iraqi rebels. Later, his campaign conceded that the Hussein regime might have removed the munitions before the invasion."

John Kerry, your mother told you "integrity, integrity, integrity" - 3 times because she knew you HAD NONE.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20041027-101153-4822r.htm

Pretty interesting. I'm sure the super confident egg on the face Kerry will get a pass from the liberal media.

"it just aint right to dig up old news and represent it as current. Shameful."

If you followed the link to the BBC news site you will see that this was current news at 9am this morning when I posted the article.

It's about as current as last year's Christmas... wake up and smell the coffee man.

This just in, "Man Walks On Moon!" - wow that just happend now!?!?

Old news? Old news??? It was just announced the other day! What, so the news about the discovery of the "hobbit" sized human lifeform is "old news" because it's a 12,000 year old person? Neerrrrrrrghhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh! Bush voters, honestly.

Gary Spaz

Man walks on moon?! now you're just being silly...pff as if!

This post has been removed by a blog administrator.

http://www.coxar.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/

Post a Comment