Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Does Half the U.S. Still Believe Iraq Had WMD?

By Amitabh Pal, The Progressive. Posted August 11, 2006.


Could there be some some overlap between these people and those who believe in the existence of UFOs?

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

In Special Coverage

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace:
Jim Hightower, Raising Hell
Jonathan Rowe

Democracy and Elections:
Are Feds Trying to Aid Republican Candidate's Election?
Tim Kalich

DrugReporter:
A Cultural History of the Magic Mushroom
Lux

Election 2008:
The Real Elitist: Video of McCain's Collection of Mansions Reveal He's Not Your Average Joe
Steven Greenhouse

Environment:
Republicans Have Handed Democrats a Winning Election Issue
David Morris

ForeignPolicy:
Blocking a Gazan's Path to an Education
Fidaa Abed

Health and Wellness:
The Misshapen Mind: How the Brain's Haphazard Evolution Left Us with Self-Destructive Instincts
Sasha Abramsky

Hurricane Katrina:
From the Bayou to Baghdad: Mission Not Accomplished
Amy Goodman

Immigration:
Medical Neglect in Immigrant Prisons Reveals America at Its Worst
Kyle Hussein de Beausset

Media and Technology:
What's Going on with the Media's Ballooning Coverage of Celebrity Babies?
Meredith Blake

Movie Mix:
Protest over Use of the Word 'Retard' in Stiller's 'Tropic Thunder' Misses the Target
Annabelle Gurwitch

Reproductive Justice and Gender:
Why Obama Should Pick Hillary
Lanny Davis

Rights and Liberties:
Stop the Execution: Jeff Wood Faces Death Tomorrow for a Murder He Didn't Commit
Liliana Segura

Sex and Relationships:
Catching the Wrong John: When Are the Media Going to Talk about John McCain's Infidelity?
Drew Westen

War on Iraq:
How Many More Iraqis Can You Throw Behind Bars Without Trial?
Fatih Abdulsalam

Water:
What If Your Tap Water Is Not Safe To Drink?
Elizabeth Royte

More stories by Amitabh Pal

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 

I nearly fell off my chair while reading the local newspaper two days ago. There it was. Newsflash headline: Half of U.S. Still Believes Iraq had WMD.

The AP story by Charles Hanley tried hard to maintain an unruffled tone, but betrayed its surprise a number of times.

"Do you believe in Iraqi 'WMD'? Did Saddam Hussein's government have weapons of mass destruction in 2003?" the story began. "Half of America apparently still thinks so, a new poll finds, and experts see a raft of reasons why: a drumbeat of voices from talk radio to die-hard bloggers to the Oval Office, a surprise headline here or there, a rallying around a partisan flag, and a growing need for people, in their own minds, to justify the war in Iraq."

This is beyond baffling. And, wait, it gets worse.

The 50-percent figure is actually a substantial increase from the 36 percent who believed in this myth last year, and the 38 percent who believed it in 2004.

At first glance, all this is very disheartening for those of us who have faith in the power of information to drive away falsehoods.

"I'm flabbergasted," AP quotes Michael Massing, a media critic who has spent considerable effort analyzing media coverage of the Iraq war. "This finding just has to cause despair among those of us who hope for an informed public able to draw reasonable conclusions based on evidence."

On the other hand, maybe this isn't so surprising. After all, in a poll last December, a full 61 percent of Americans said that they believed in the devil, 40 percent of Americans admitted that they think that ghosts surround us, while one-third even accepted the existence of UFOs. Maybe there's some overlap between these people and those who still believe in those spectral WMDs.

Seriously, let's start apportioning blame for this state of affairs.

At the top of the list is the Bush Administration. It has mouthed this nonsense of "mushroom clouds" and "nuclear weapons" so insistently that it is hard for its supporters to admit to themselves that the White House took them for a ride. The closest Condoleezza Rice has come to admitting, for instance, that she and her colleagues were wrong is to say that WMDs were "perhaps" not present in Iraq. One hell of an admission.

Next on the list are the Bush Administration's foot soldiers in Congress. Senator Rick Santorum and Representative Peter Hoekstra triumphantly released a report recently that supposedly proved that 500 chemical munitions had been gathered in Iraq since the invasion. The only problem was that these were long degraded and unusable.

Who pays attention to the likes of Santorum and Hoekstra? Who takes them seriously?

Of course, the Republican echo chamber in the right-wing media is also to blame for the mass delusion among half the American public. FOX News is the leading weapon of mass deception. As a poll famously revealed three years ago, 45 percent of FOX viewers believed that weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq and that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda and that global opinion supported Bush's Iraq invasion. An incredible 80 percent believed at least one of these fibs.

To top itself, as the AP story reveals, FOX had a recent headline: "ARE SADDAM HUSSEIN'S WMDS NOW IN HEZBOLLAH'S HANDS?"

I give up.

Digg!

Amitabh Pal is the managing editor of The Progressive.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oh dear god
Posted by: demonspark on Aug 11, 2006 2:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I give up too...I'm exhausted with ranting and arguing with people who refuse to read or watch more than one news source and make up their own minds.

Well maybe not just yet...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Oh dear god Posted by: willymack
» It's hard-wired in our brains Posted by: launcher
» RE: Oh dear god Posted by: Doubtom
» RE: Oh dear god Posted by: Basenjis
Strategic thinking
Posted by: coldeye on Aug 11, 2006 3:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I read several national newspapers a day, watch CNN and Fox(which often has liberal commentators) and find Huffington and American Prospect to be sound left wing sources, as well as CNS as a sound right wing news source. The Bush Administration on many occasions has admitted there were no WMD in Iraq, and even at the beginning of the war, clearly stated when asked that there was no Iraqi involvement in 9/11. That does not mean that there were not some limited relations between Sadaam's regime and Al Queda, there were. That was not the reason for the war, and WMD was never the sole reason for the war. Iraq had the potential to develop nukes, and worse, the intention. That has never been rebutted. Its imperial ambitiions in the Middle East would be denied only by the naive(ask the Iranians about the peaceful nature of Sadaam). In a post-9/11 environment, it was not irrantional to consider and implement a preemption strike on the Sadaam regime. In a World War, you deprive the enemy of potential bases and resources which if in enemy hands, provides the enemy with key strategic adavantages and encourages further aggression.

I personally thought in 03 that the strike was premature, and that the US had done a good if flawed job of "containing" Sadaam. Clearly the UN was corrupt and the petroleum sales program had to be shaken up. An invasion was not necessary to do that.

But was the invasion irrational? Yes in the sense it was poorly planned, premature, and not enough troops or postwar planning was involved. No, it was one way to fight the war against Al Queda, by deprivation of one of the key nations in the Middle East-the others being Egypt and Saudi Arabia which also cannot be allowed to fall into Al Queda or proxy hands.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: mazel
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: mwildfire
» Better invade Bulgaria Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: rhinojos
» uh, "Not .." Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: uh, "Not .." Posted by: ConnecttheDots
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: Jesse
» Fair and Balanced Commentary Posted by: coldeye
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: brunowe
» ditto my response to jesse Posted by: coldeye
» TROLL ALERT Posted by: ssegallmd
» HOBBIT ALERT Posted by: coldeye
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: badkitty
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Strategic thinking Posted by: squiddly
That's OK...
Posted by: adp3d on Aug 11, 2006 4:00 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I still believe in Santa Claus...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: That's OK... Posted by: markusmark
zombies
Posted by: rsaxto on Aug 11, 2006 4:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This indicates that half the US public are zombies who have been brainwashed to believe every propaganda blast that the fake TV blabberouths spew from the fake presidency of Cheney/Bush.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: zombies Posted by: squiddly
Is is time to admit we have failed?
Posted by: Serafim Tkachuk on Aug 11, 2006 5:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Have we failed? Are we so inept at telling the truth in a way that makes the truth believable that we should give up? Is the sickness of neocon delusion so wide-spread that no cure is left? Is it time to despair and shut up and let the madness completely exhaust itself in an orgy of totalitarian destruction? Like the proverbial image of the addict, can nothing be done save let the nation hit rock bottom before the people wake from their collective nightmare of political, religious, and social agony? The truth seems to have failed, but what does this say about our fellow citizens? Is the future nothing but comic book darkness? Has the republic been lost to lies already?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Belief in WMD's
Posted by: Willy on Aug 11, 2006 5:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Maybe, as Noam Chomsky says, it's too late for America. When the level of idiocy rises to the critical mass level, I wonder.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Chomsky Posted by: rwa
» RE: Belief in WMD's Posted by: decembrist
WMD AND IRAQ AND NUKES
Posted by: bbfmail on Aug 11, 2006 5:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The point is not to waste time and money attacking countires that might have nukes, but attack those that we know have them. That includes Russia, UK, France, China, India, Pakistan and Israel. I'm sure after we complete these attacks and get rid of all the countries that have nukes, then the other countries will surely lose interest in obtaining nukes of their own.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: WMD AND IRAQ AND NUKES Posted by: symcokid
» RE: WMD AND IRAQ AND NUKES Posted by: squiddly
Umm...but there were WMDs in Iraq
Posted by: LouisFallert on Aug 11, 2006 6:20 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
according to Noam Chomsky in his "War on Terror" speech at the 2006 Amnesty International Annual Lecture

"Though enhancement of the threat of terror and proliferation was anticipated, the invasion did so even in unanticipated ways. It is common to say that no WMD were found in Iraq after exhaustive search. That is not quite accurate, however. There were stores of WMD in Iraq: namely, those produced in the 1980s, thanks to aid provided by the US and Britain, along with others. These sites had been secured by UN inspectors, who were dismantling the weapons. But the inspectors were dismissed by the invaders and the sites were left unguarded. The inspectors nevertheless continued to carry out their work with satellite imagery. They discovered sophisticated massive looting of these installations in over 100 sites, including equipment for producing solid and liquid propellant missiles, biotoxins and other materials usable for chemical and biological weapons, and high-precision equipment capable of making parts for nuclear and chemical weapons and missiles. A Jordanian journalist was informed by officials in charge of the Jordanian-Iraqi border that after US-UK forces took over, radioactive materials were detected in one of every eight trucks crossing to Jordan, destination unknown. "

www.chomsky.info/talks/20060118.pdf

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» common sense Posted by: coldeye
» RE: common sense Posted by: squiddly
» RE: common sense Posted by: coldeye
» RE: common sense Posted by: squiddly
THE PROBLEM WITH FAITH
Posted by: ssegallmd on Aug 11, 2006 7:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i>"Does Half the U.S. Still Believe Iraq Had WMD? Could there be some overlap between these people and those who believe in the existence of UFOs?"

Maybe, but the more relevant question concerns the overlap between people who believe that Iraq possessed WMD and those who believe in the existence of heaven. The neocons have mined the churches of America looking for people who could be made to believe anything they said without evidence or a track record, and it has paid off big at the expense of everything dear to those who know better.

And those people not only voted for Bush in 2000 without knowing anything about him because their pastors told them to do so, they did so again in 2004 even when, as Daniel noted in the lion's den, the writing is on the wall.

What Christians call faith I call credulity and guessing. These are dangerous things when applied to things more substantial than the supernatural, such as government and daily life. I consider their political beliefs, ones that require being completely fooled to hold, to be ample evidence that they are gullible and too easily deceived. And we have paid a high price already for that gullibility and it's only just begun.

Could there really be a kind, loving, all-powerful Jesus running this show so badly in His name? I think that you'd have to have a lot of faith to keep thinking so. I just wish I didn't have to reap the results of those guesses.

[Disclaimer: it is not my purpose to insult the religious, but I cannot express this opinion in any way that isn't unflattering to them. My sincere apologies. I respect you and your feelings, which I why I am writing this disclaimer, as well as your right to practice your faith, but not your faith itself or its deleterious influence on the affairs of the world.]

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am an American
Posted by: pahrumphomes on Aug 11, 2006 7:35 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who never did think there were WMD's, who never voted for anyone named Bush ever, and I can''t believe that so many people are so stupid. AS Bill Engvall puts it, "Here's Your Sign". Has anyone noticed that it is getting harder and harder to find anyone who voted for Bush? And yes, I live in Nevada and I believe in UFO's, just not the kind with little green men. You actually see them here before the rest of the world actually knows what they are or that they exist. It's all in one's perception. Strange flying things have always been tested here. That's credible. WMD's in Iraq, not credible. Ghosts? Maybe. Bush is a puppet? That's credible. That he has & will continue to ruin our country as we know it? Unfortunately, that's credible but should be unbelievable. When I have to talk to someone in another country (after all too many jobs have been moved to foreign countries!) I let them know that not all Americans believe in our government's actions. Sorry Toby, Natalie Manes was right. You just couldn't see it at the time!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» I confess Posted by: coldeye
Umm...
Posted by: YHWH on Aug 11, 2006 8:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Hitler and Stalin were enemies. Duh. Hitler hated communism. He invaded Russia! Get your facts straight.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Umm... Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney
» RE: Umm...WRONG!!!!!!!!! Posted by: coldeye
» It's all you baby! Posted by: ignition
» RE: Umm... Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Umm... Posted by: coldeye
» RE: Umm... Posted by: squiddly
Could there be some some overlap between these people and those who believe in the existence of UFOs
Posted by: Dr. P. Mooney on Aug 11, 2006 8:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Unfortunately, the people who believe in UFOs are more intelligent than those who, inspite of the overwelming evidence that there are no WMD or any connection with Al- Qaeda, still believe there is a connection. Call it "blind-faith" or just that they will not believe their own government would lie to them.

Butch

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

YOU ARE SIMPLY WRONG AND HERE IS WHY
Posted by: CW4RETIRED on Aug 11, 2006 8:44 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are some indisputable facts that you have chosen to ignore.

1. Following the first Gulf War (Desert Storm), UN weapons inspectors confirmed the existence of WMDs in Iraq. Details are contained on the UN website.

2. UN weapons inspectors were denied access to some sites even though they were supposed to have "unfettered" access to these sites. On at least one occassion, the UN inspectors were physically manhandled and put back on a helicopter as they witnessed truckloads of materials being driven away from a potential inspection site. Again, this is detailed on the UN website.

3. Testimony given by the CIA on October 2, 2003 gives specifics on what had and had not been found up to that time. Here are a couple of examples and the website where you can view it.

Example A: A clandestine network of laboratories and safehouses within the Iraqi Intelligence Service that contained equipment subject to UN monitoring and suitable for continuing CBW research.

Example B: Reference strains of biological organisms concealed in a scientist's home, one of which can be used to produce biological weapons.

Example C: we have found people, technical information and illicit procurement networks that if allowed to flow to other countries and regions could accelerate global proliferation. Even in the area of actual weapons there is no doubt that Iraq had at one time chemical and biological weapons.

Reference site: https://www.cia.gov/cia/public_affairs
/speeches/2003/david_kay_10022003.html

4. A declassified intelligence report states, "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent."

Reference: http://www.cnsnews.com/
ViewNation.asp?Page=/Nation/archive/200606/NAT20060621e.html

5. One last fact for which I cannot provide a reference:
I was there as a soldier during Desert Storm and our unit destroyed some stockpiles of sarin gas, so I know first hand.

So in summary, you can't convince me in any way that Saddam didn't have WMDs. He did have them. The only thing we don't know is what happened to the vast majority of them. You can't tell me if they were moved or destroyed long before the current invasion or 2 hours before we struck. When normally reliable intelligence agencies agree there were WMDs or WMD capability, I tend to believe them but understand they are not perfect. On the other hand, when a master deceptionist like Saddam tells me he has destroyed all WMDs and WMD manufacturing simply out of the goodness of his heart, I tend to disbelieve him unless we had reliable witnesses on site while it was being done. If you can offer any proof that this information is wrong, please reply and cite your references. Maybe you could at least tell us when all these WMDs suddenly disappeared; years, months, days, or hours before the invasion. Again, please cite reliable references.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: AdamSelene40
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: CW4RETIRED
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: CW4RETIRED
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: CW4RETIRED
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: CW4RETIRED
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
» RE: Ooooo! Sarin gas in '92 Posted by: squiddly
Now, now, think twice
Posted by: fifthworld on Aug 11, 2006 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The WMD business (and such it is) is obviously a scandal of mass hyprocrisy on our part, simply stated.

UFOs however, are not a paranoid conjuring. Unless you can somehow prove mass sensory hallucinations worldwide, they're completely real and confirmed by not only airline pilots and traffic controllers from Chile to China, but the extra-governmental secrecy about them has been attested to by air-force, aviation and high level 'intelligence' circles in recent years -- see especially Stephen Greer's "Disclosure Project" work online. There is a fascinating 4-hr video of interviews with these personnel, and needless to say it is riveting - they discuss in particular the means and purpose of the secrecy, at least as far as has been obvious from particular experiences. These people are willing to testify before Congress but of course such a session has not been called.

Another piece of the big picture!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I thought we went to war because Saddam was going to use WMDs
Posted by: Pittsburgher on Aug 11, 2006 9:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
What really disturbs me is how many people seem to have forgotten that we were told that Saddam had WMDs and was going to use them against us, or give them to terrorists so that they could do so. I would love to see a follow-up question to those 50% asking why Saddam did not use his supposed WMDs when we invaded Iraq. Was he such an altruistic kind of fellow that he decided to send them off to Syria, so that they could be shipped to Hezbollah, while he was going to stay in Iraq? Was he, maybe, waiting until the stars were in a better alignment? C'mon people, he would have used them if he had had them!

And for those forgetful types, here's a couple of links for you.. Bush said "Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons". Bush said This dictator will not be allowed to intimidate and blackmail the civilized world, or to supply his terrible weapons to terrorist groups, who would not hesitate to use them against us. The safety of the American people depends on ending this threat.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Half of America could not answer these questions
Posted by: NoPCZone on Aug 11, 2006 10:14 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Who is your US Representative?
Who are your US Senators?
Who is your State Representative?
Who is your State Senator?
Who is your Governor?
Who is the Sheriff/Executive of your County Government?
Who represents you on your town/city council/board?
Who is the Mayor/City Manager of your community?
Who is your school board representative?
Who is the Superintendent of your local Public School District?

If you cannot answer these questions you really have no business voting. The sad truth is that those who don't know this stuff can tell you who is sleeping with who in Hollywood, the stats on the sports star of their choice, etc.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Oh You Racist YOU Posted by: coldeye
» RE: Oh You Racist YOU Posted by: squiddly
UFO's vs. WMD's
Posted by: olita on Aug 11, 2006 11:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There is a far bigger probability of the existence of UFO's (AKA intelligent life in the universe besides the Earthly human race) than the the existence of WMD's in IRAQ! ...nuff said.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: UFO's vs. WMD's Posted by: aonghus36
Red State Road Trip
Posted by: Ellie1 on Aug 11, 2006 12:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
About a year ago I rode south from an east coast blue state, through the Blue Ridge and Smoky Mountains, to Florida. I felt like I lost ten points in I.Q. every time I entered another red state. It was a real eye opener. Never have I seen such an ignorant bunch of people dwelling so closely together-and probably in- breeding. When I got home to my blue state, I felt like I needed to shower for a week to wash off the stupidity of conservative politics and religions. Sorry, red staters, you are a bunch of imbeciles, breeding cannon fodder for Republican wars. The pathetic thing is you can vote-which you have done so "wisely" in the past two presidential elections. I wish the south had won the Civil War and seceded.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: ed State Road Trip Posted by: squiddly
Political lies & flying saucers
Posted by: willymack on Aug 11, 2006 1:05 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There are plenty of flying saucers, as well as teacups, plates, flatware and tumblers. They just haven't been identified, that's all.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WMDs, 9/11, and the Terror Link
Posted by: rwa on Aug 11, 2006 2:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I guess the 49% of Americans who believe the official 9/11 myth are the ones that have faith in the WMD myth. Lets build a big memorial in the Gulf of Tonkin.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's hard-wired in our brains
Posted by: launcher on Aug 11, 2006 2:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
See my post at the top of this page to see a scientific explanation for why 50% still believe in WMDs from outer space.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It's hard-wired in our brains (disclaimer)
Posted by: launcher on Aug 11, 2006 2:16 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Shoot. Technically "hard-wired" isn't the right term. I should know better. Actually, the brain is a fairly plastic glob of muck, meaning that it changes with experience, age, drug use, etc.

So "severely soft-wired" would be a better term. That leaves a glimmer of hope for Uncle Ted.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

WMDs in Iraq or not, shouldn't matter so much.
Posted by: aouie01 on Aug 11, 2006 2:31 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I do understand that there are significant numbers of people who would feel like the war was a mistake if and only if Iraq didn't have "WMDs", but it is not in the interests of the goodness of world peace to spend so much time and energy on that issue. Focussing as much on the issue tends to make even more people feel like that is the pivotal issue, and that if any "unfriendly" country is likely to get WMDs then that is reason enough to engage in pre-emptive aggression.
Sincerely,
Aouie

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ghosts, Devils, and UFOs
Posted by: Artaraxl on Aug 12, 2006 11:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The author belittles UFOs...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Ghosts, Devils, and UFOs Posted by: aonghus36
An internet search found that...
Posted by: PaktikaTL on Aug 13, 2006 9:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
“Since 2003 Coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent,” states a June 21 declassified summary of a report from the National Ground Intelligence Center.

Former weapons inspector David Kay declared on October 2, 2003 that U.S. personnel discovered “a vial of live C. botulinum Okra B. from which a biological agent can be produced.” This was, Kay said, “hidden in the home” of an Iraqi biological weapons researcher.

In January 2004, according to a New York Sun editorial published June 1, 2004, a 7-pound block of cyanide salt popped up in Abu Musab al-Zarqawi’s Baghdad safe house.
On May 2, 2004, U.S. forces in Iraq found a mustard-gas shell, rigged as an Improvised Explosive Device.

“The Iraqi Survey Group confirmed today that a 155-millimeter artillery round containing sarin nerve agent had been found,” also reworked as an IED, Brigadier General Mark Kimmitt told reporters that May 15. Two soldiers exposed to the device “displayed ‘classic’ symptoms of sarin exposure, most notably dilated pupils and nausea,” Fox News reported. Officials also told the network that the shell contained three to four liters of sarin, roughly three-quarters of a gallon.

Weapons searcher Charles Duelfer told Fox News June 24, 2004: “We found, you know, 10 or 12 sarin and mustard rounds.”

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

OVAL OFFICE PHONE CONVERSATION PICKED UP BY NSA SURVEILLANCE TEAM
Posted by: TheStranger on Aug 13, 2006 10:34 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
FROM DIGGING DEEPER BLOG, BY IVAN GOLDMAN
http://ivangoldman.blogspot.com/

Dickie? I told you never to call me here. Where are you anyway? Seems you never pop out of your bunker anymore.

Georgie, is there anything you can help us out with? Anything at all.I mean, it’s all falling apart, Georgie. Not even Rummy can hold off all those damn questions.

The Iranians, it was them calling the shots all along. That’s all I can tell you. . . . I swear to God I didn’t know it was gonna go this far, Dickie. They bumped into me at the Saudi Embassy and they said that you and -- and – them were in on a -- a -- big deal together. And that there was something in it for me if I'd help ’em out. They said that -- they said that -- you were bein’ tough on the negotiations. But if they could get a little help -- and close the deal fast – it’d be good for the family. They wanted to talk . . .

You believed that story? You believed that?

They said there was something in it for me -- on my own.

I’ve always taken care of you.

Taken care of me? You're my vice president and you take care of me? Did you ever think about that -- did you ever once think about that? Send Georgie off to do this -- send Georgie off to do that! Let Georgie take care of some Mickey Mouse fund-raiser somewhere. Send Georgie to pick somebody up in the helicopter. I'm supposed to be the President, and I was stepped over!

That’s the way your Pop wanted it.

It ain’t the way I wanted it! I can handle things. I’m smart – not like everyone says. Not dumb, smart. And I want respect.

Is there anything you can tell me about that Iraqi election?

Allawi, that prime minister guy, he belongs to them.

Georgie, you’re nothing to me now. You’re not my caddy anymore, you’re not a friend. I don’t want you near my office. When you see Condi, I want to know a day in advance so I won’t be there. Understand?

Wait, I have to know -- what's the deal with this Iraq thing anyway? Those reporters are asking about it again.

The Iranians, they left us a couple oil wells, a few rinky-dink contracts for Haliburton, but that’s it. They get the rest. They said we could have that crappy loot from the museums, but I told them the same thing I told Leahy.

They can go fuck themselves, right? Oh, you always know what to say. Dickie. I need you, Dickie.

You should have come to me Georgie. I’d have made you an offer you couldn’t refuse.

Can’t it be like the old days again? Remember when they let me bring you into that congressional hearing? You and me, Dickie. A team. Remember?

You know, Georgie? I just can’t stay mad at you.

So we’re still pals, Dickie?

Sure, let’s go hunting next weekend.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

cold eye no dead eye
Posted by: D78 on Aug 13, 2006 7:24 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
cold eye ,you are an example of a person who learned to talk and write, but not yet learned to think. hey man, the truth is out there! don't you realize all the public media are completely bamboozling us? there are good sources (on the net) that instruct in propaganda analysis that are useful to all of us. try one. best wishes, don

[« Reply to this comment