Does GOP Hypocrisy Ever End?

[Stephen Eisel]

If I can claim the intellectual high ground on this tool topic.

Takes one to know one.

or I am rubber and you are glue... What ever you say bounces off me sticks to you... (oldy but goodie)

[ryan costa]

No, I make a strong case for how the Dems and the media pimped this subject for political gain. If any of the missing WMD's are ever used agianst the US or Israel then there will be blood on the hands of the media and the Dems..

I don't understand why Israel is always lumped in with the U.S. or the U.S. with Israel. If the WMDs were so important to Israel, Israel should have invaded Iraq without direct U.S. involvement. granted, we sell them a large chunk of their arsenal. I prefer to believe the United States is not responsible for Israel. Or South Korea, or Taiwan, or Panama, or Japan, or Sierra Leone, or Kenya, or South Africa.

Israel is promoted as a strategic ally of the United States. I wager most folks in the Middle East feel about Israel the way American rednecks feel about Affirmative Action or felt about Soviet-backed Cuba. political ideology has nothing to do with it, no matter how great young arab college students, doctors, and lawyers feel about democracy or mcdonalds. Israel is a strategic liability of the United States. At least, until they have more oil than the rest of the Middle East.


There's a lot of blood and tears on Bush's hands. He has bravely sacrificed thousands of American lives and tens of thousands or hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives. Now they're rumbling about Iran sponsoring certain sects in Iraq: that sounds like the same thing Saddam Hussein said before engaging in an 8 year war with Iran. In business management the idea of heading off "re-work" before it happens is important.


The successful toppling of the Saddam Hussein regime proves no one needs WMDs to produce Mass Destruction.

[Stephen Eisel]

Stephen E. is just riding the horse that brought him here and will take him God only knows where.

Undisputable material fact: No WMD in Iraq.

Undisputable material fact: no operational connection between Saddam's regime and Al-Q.

Undisputable material fact: ginned up mendacities offered as fact.

Undisputable material fact: after promising to put the request for war authorization to the UN Security Council, Bush broke his promise and commenced an illegal war per the UN Charter.

Nothing Stephen has offered overturns any of this.

***

The UN was unable to verify that Saddam had destroyed his WMDs during their inspections.

LOL

Fact: Over 500 weapon munitions which contained Sarin or mustard gas were discovered in Iraq by Coalition Forces in 2003.

[Stephen Calhoun]

Stephen E.

Why don't go farther and give me the context, found in the ISG Report--you have read it, have you not?--available here

http://www.usip.org/isg/iraq_study_grou ... report.pdf

so you can enlighten the entire Observation Deck about the context for your claim.

It's only fair that your claims be fleshed out by the facts, as you say.

I will await your delivery.

[Colleen Wing]

Fascinating discussion.

Thank God I have been at the Convention all week and didn't have to listen to the angry rants of people who would never vote for a Republican regardless of a any variable. Oh, that's right..there were the protesters. They were a hoot.

FYI- If Palin was a hypocrite, she would be the 17year old that was pregnant.

I can't wait until my kids are old enough for me to get blamed for being a hypocrite when my children make choices under there own free will. Maybe I should crush there tiny spirits now, while I still have the chance.

I think it is more hypocritical to represent yourself as tolerant and accepting, oh... and don't forget open minded and then stand in judgement based on your own steroetypes.

Sorry I have to jet off now, to my yacht,and thump my bible without dropping my gun and clinging to my religion. At least I don't have the burden of being tolerant of others who don't agree with me. What a releif.

[Stephen Eisel]

I believe that UNSCOM had it right in 1999... The Commission had no confidence that Iraq had unilaterally destroyed all of its CW agents in 1999. It does not take a leap of faith to believe that some of those CWs were still around in 2003 and then shipped out of Iraq right before the US lead invasion.


http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/s/990125/index.html


http://www.worldtribune.com/worldtribune/wmd2.asp


http://www.un.org/Depts/unmovic/new/doc ... 04-435.pdf


http://www.nysun.com/foreign/iraqs-wmd- ... ays/26514/

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/200 ... 915-1667r/

[Valerie Molinski]

Fascinating discussion.

Thank God I have been at the Convention all week and didn't have to listen to the angry rants of people who would never vote for a Republican regardless of a any variable. Oh, that's right..there were the protesters. They were a hoot.

Um , Colleen, those were anarchists. They certainly aren't liberals/democrats. They don't vote for anyone.

[Stephen Calhoun]

I would say 'unbelievable' but, really, it's more a case of Eisel Operating Procedure.

You haven't read the ISG report. Your claim does have a context but you are unwilling to supply it because it would undermine your assertion.

Instead you bring evidence and claims that were later revised and imply they support your belief. I suppose they do, but 'belief' is cheap compared to actually weighing evidence.

***

It does not take a leap of faith to believe that some of those CWs were still around in 2003 and then shipped out of Iraq right before the US lead invasion.

Here you take up the cause of extreme right wing deadenders. I would add daft and dishonest right wing deadenders too, because there is zero evidence that reinforces this claim.

But this is consistent with your operating procedure here on the Deck, which as far as I can tell, is to deploy google to deflect challenges, and use your findings to present selectively mostly pseudo-evidence, while ignoring the primary and scientific source material, even when you are directed to it.

***

The Eisel Operating Procedure is bogus. You haven't been able to fool me on any number of your deliveries here on the Deck. I don't know what to think that you keep trying.

The bottom line is you have placed on the table right new 3 editorials from right wing rags, and two reports. The UN report contains zero information supporting your case, since detritus does not constitute WMD. The 1999 report doesn't support your case, and, obviously, you have plugged in the link without reading the darn report. Most of it inventories UNSCOM's destruction of WMD materials. There are gaps but they don't demonstrate anything in light of what was the material situation in 2002, and, what was later found to be the factual case by the two ISG teams.

Why would you present a report as evidence to reinforce your claim and not read it first?

That you 'believe' Iraq's WMD were shipped to Syria based in the testimony of Mr. Sada really says it all. Consider the nature of this bombshell: were it true, the case for the war would be made. But consider also that Iraq and its environs were the must surveilled real estate on earth, and that the administration has not presented any evidence showcasing those 56 flights violating the no-fly airspace, their tracks, and the loading of WMD onto those planes. Tell me why Cheney Inc. hasn't unleashed this case-making bombshell!

Doh!

***

Stephen, you strike me as a poorly educated, right wing kook, in way over your head in the land of argument and evidence.

Keep trying. Your posts are among the most hilarious that hit the deck. I count on them for much amusement.

[Stephen Eisel]

Stephen, you strike me as a poorly educated, right wing kook, in way over your head in the land of argument and evidence.

Yes and proud of it...

[Stephen Eisel]

The Baker Hamilton Commission / the Iraq Study Group was a bipartisan panel that was charged with assessing the conditions in Iraq back in 2006. The panel met about 9 times and went to Iraq once in 2006. UNSCOM was an inspection group (actually on the groud in Iraq) created by the United Nations to ensure Iraq's compliance with policies concerning Iraqi production and use of weapons of mass destruction after the Gulf War.

I would encourage everyone to do a little research on both UNSCOM and the Iraq Study Group. The main function of the Iraq Study Group was to assess the conditions in Iraq (in 2006) and not to tackle the issue of WMD's in Iraq.



side note: According the Gospel of Calooney / The Iraq Study Group...

SYRIA. Syria is also playing a counterproductive role. Iraqis are upset about what they perceive as Syrian support for efforts to undermine the Iraqi government. The Syrian role is not so much to take active measures as to countenance malign neglect: the Syrians look the other
way as arms and foreign fighters flow across their border into Iraq, and former Baathist leaders find a safe haven within Syria. Like Iran, Syria is content to see the United States tied down in Iraq. That said, the Syrians have indicated that they want a dialogue with the United States, and in November 2006 agreed to restore diplomatic relations with Iraq after a 24-year break.

(serious quand particularly Syria—which is the principal transit point for shipments of weapons to Hezbollah, and which supports radical Palestinian groups.estion)

Did Dennis ever address either of these issues with Bashar when he visited Syria?

[Stephen Eisel]

Here you take up the cause of extreme right wing deadenders. I would add daft and dishonest right wing deadenders too, because there is zero evidence that reinforces this claim.

100,000's of munitions ... And with out a doubt, you believe that each and every munition has been accounted for and destroyed.. lol

[sharon kinsella]

Stephen - do we have to go over this again.

Those aren't bombs.

[Stephen Eisel]

Stephen - do we have to go over this again.

Those aren't bombs.

Bomb or not, they still pose a danger.

[Stephen Calhoun]

For goodness sakes. Stephen, let's turn then to the Iraq Survey Group.

Over 1,000 investigators on the ground in Iraq.

They issued several reports. The main one is here:

https://www.cia.gov/library/reports/gen ... index.html

Go read it and get back to me.

****

As you continue to carry water for Cheney Inc., let me remind you that you have not presented on the Deck a single piece of credible evidence about WMD in Iraq in late 2002 and 2003.

****

A munition; that's like a bullet, dude. I never made the assertion you jammed into my mouth.

The problem you've made for your ignorant self, is that you think I can't visualize you scurrying about via google in an effort to somehow restore your credibility.

But you've failed and failed abjectly.

You won't be able to present evidence because, as we move now to the work of the other ISG, and their thousands of investigators and their hundreds of thousands of man hours spent searching high and low for WMD, you have revealed in your silly argument about the Iraq Study Group, that you most likely were unaware that the Iraq Survey Group even existed.

In other words, I set the trap, you walked into it, and because you're badly educated and a right wing kook, you wrote:

"The panel met about 9 times and went to Iraq once in 2006. UNSCOM was an inspection group"

without even imagining that this other ISG and its report you've never read might come into play. Of course it's patently obvious you haven't read UNSCOM's or the Irag Study group's reports either.

(What might we say about your writing this:

100,000's of munitions

except that you couldn't back this assertion up either.)

Let's visualize what it looks like to be snared. You step into the snare and it yanks you off the ground by the feet and you swing helplessly with your bald spot pointing toward the ground.

Reinforcing my earlier point that you Stephen E. are in way over your head.

[Stephen Eisel]

A munition; that's like a bullet, dude. I never made the assertion you jammed into my mouth.

Iraq had declared over 100,000 munition containing CWs not 100,000 rounds of ammunition.. You do know the difference between a munition and ammunition?