And the parade of right-wing gullibility continues unabated as The Strong Conservative weighs in with a post that is almost painful in its cluelessness.
Note first how Mr. Strong describes the report as "declassified" when, as anyone can read, it is in fact quite clearly labelled as "unclassified," with nothing whatsoever to indicate that it represents any astonishing new developments.
But perhaps I'll let Dafna Linzer of the Washington Post (via Glenn Greenwald) blow a gaping hole in Mr. Strong's cluelessness (emphasis added):
[Santorum and Hoekstra] pointed to an unclassified summary from a report by the National Ground Intelligence Center regarding 500 chemical munitions shells that had been buried near the Iranian border, and then long forgotten, by Iraqi troops during their eight-year war with Iran, which ended in 1988.
The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.
Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.
And another Blogging Tory embarrasses his species. Oh, yawn.
2 comments:
i find it difficult to give your posts credence or credibility. your words lash against bush, harper et al, yet to me, they are words of naziism themself.
throughout your blog you comment on news items, but on june 16th you decided to take a comment of mine (i believe from someone else's blog) and make an off-track mountain out of a molehill because i challenged science. this is power mongering.
the blatant hyporcracy displayed by your action leaves me wondering about the intent of your blog. i can only surmise it's an ego-based reason. as ego plays into so much of what's so terribly wrong with the world, right-wingers et al, it seems your choice of attack is no better then those you condemn.
all in all your supposed 'reality base' is a reality you've created for yourself and are comfortable in. that's fine and you can stay there, but to spread it out in attempt to harm makes you no better then heir bush or heir harper. perhaps you are heir cc.
as a woman of cree heritage who follows tradional ways i have seen this 'conqueror' mindset too often. i suggest you take two braids of sweetgrass and call me in the morning.
i'll answer and talk because while you attempt to attack me, i love you and would always help you should you need me to.
scout writes (in part and entirely off-topic with respect the actual post):
"throughout your blog you comment on news items, but on june 16th you decided to take a comment of mine (i believe from someone else's blog) ..."
I did no such thing, as anyone with an ounce of sense who knows how to follow a hyperlink can see back here where, in the very first sentence, I link to the comment of yours I am responding to on my blog.
The rest of your comment here is equally ill-informed and irrelevant to the topic of this post, which is WMDs, and any further comments from you that try to continue this little feud you've started here will be deleted if they have nothing to do with the post to which they're submitted.
"as a woman of cree heritage who follows tradional [sic] ways ..."
Not to put too fine a point on this but, when the topic is scientific methodology related to biological evolution, your cree heritage and traditional ways are spectacularly irrelevant. Deal with it.
Post a Comment