I protest.: Weapons of mass retraction.

Who Is This?

Frank, a forty-something software engineer in Southern California.

Weblogs Of Special Merit

Reciprocal Links

Referrers

The TTLB Ecosystem

Why Is This Here?

I'm doing my part, however small, to fight the fearmongering, hatred and lies of so-called "conservatives" such as Bush, Cheney and the rest.

Donate

Buy something from my Cafepress store:

White teddy bear with 'I Love You' in Chinese.

Or chip in a buck or two to help keep this site afloat:

May 28, 2003

War

Weapons of mass retraction.

Well, with Rumsfeld's admission that WMD "may not exist," Tony Blair is in a world of hurt. I read during the early days of the war that if those weapons were not found, Blair would face a serious crisis at home and it looks like that chicken has come home to roost.

... Mr Cook said the Prime Minister's claims that Saddam could deploy chemical or biological weapons within 45 minutes were patently false. He added that Mr Rumsfeld's statement "blows an enormous gaping hole in the case for war made on both sides of the Atlantic" and called for MPs to hold an investigation.

Meanwhile, Labour rebels threatened to report Mr Blair to the Speaker of the Commons for the cardinal sin of misleading Parliament - and force him to answer emergency questions in the House.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if Mr. Blair were to join Mr. Majors as an ex-Prime Minister within no more than a few months' time.

Here at home, though, the only surprise is that Rumsfeld actually admitted that there "may be" no such "weapons of mass destruction." Of course, Wolfowitz was already "spinning" the lies they told to justify their invasion of Iraq, saying in an interview in Vanity Fair (as quoted by Reuters) that they "settled on one issue," WMD, for "bureaucratic reasons." It turns out that according to Wolfowitz the real reason we invaded Iraq was . . . "to remove [our] troops from Saudi Arabia." Okay, not the "real" reason, but an important reason; as he said, it was "almost unnoticed but huge." This certainly makes this article damned interesting. So, if we're removing our troops from Saudi Arabia, where are they going to go? It's certain that we're not going to give up a presence in the Middle East.

Lies, lies and more lies. And our "liberal" media laps it up and pants for more.

Posted by Frank at May 28, 2003 8:45 PM