Despite finding saarin, mustard gas, and other chemical weapons, and despite various prison sentences for those who used them in Iraq or those who sold them, apparently, the only thing that would have satisfied the left that Saddam had WMDs would have been discovering a giant SPECTRE-sized Ken Adam-styled laboratory with men in white lab coats hard at work caught in the act. But as Elizabeth Blackney, AKA “Media Lizzy” notes on her Facebook page, my how the definition of WMDs has changed:
Just read Abdulmutallab charging docs. He’s charged w/having a Weapon of Mass Destruction. Hmm. So, since we’re using the ‘criminal’ standard, shouldn’t all those thousands of pounds of mortars, bombs, missiles, etc in Iraq as WMDs? (leaving yellowcake out of it, since that was sold to Canada for energy)
WMDs — they’re anything you want them to be. And less.
Update: On Twitter, “SeeDubya” notes hand grenades were once judged to be WMDs, having been almost used in a foiled 2006 Christmastime terrorist attack on an Illinois mall.
Update: The left’s flexible definition of WMDs brings to mind this passage from near the end of Orwell’s 1984:
‘What are the stars?’ said O’Brien indifferently. ‘They are bits of fire a few kilometres away. We could reach them if we wanted to. Or we could blot them out. The earth is the centre of the universe. The sun and the stars go round it.’
Winston made another convulsive movement. This time he did not say anything. O’Brien continued as though answering a spoken objection:
‘For certain purposes, of course, that is not true. When we navigate the ocean, or when we predict an eclipse, we often find it convenient to assume that the earth goes round the sun and that the stars are millions upon millions of kilometres away. But what of it? Do you suppose it is beyond us to produce a dual system of astronomy? The stars can be near or distant, according as we need them. Do you suppose our mathematicians are unequal to that? Have you forgotten doublethink?’
No, but I suspect most of the left internalizes it, so they don’t have to think about it. Let me check with Antonio Gramsci and get back to you.
Update: “WMD’s Are Finally Located — Is there nothing that Obama can’t do?”
It’s all a joke and the joke is on the left. They are making fools of themselves in their attempt to make the flailing Obama administration into something significant. Might work if this administration would quit botching everything. The gang that can’t shoot strait.
CherryVale Mall, is not in Chicago, it is 70 miles away in Cherry Valley, a small town that has been engulfed by Rockford.
Recently, the town that houses the new GITMO has been thought by many to be in Chicago’s back yard. Chicago is next to Lake Michigan, Thompson is 150 miles across the state on the Mississippi.
Hi Rio,
I was going by SeeDubya’s description of the location. I changed it from Chicago to Illinois.
Thanks,
Ed
My granddaughter was employed at the mall at that time. It was a chilling experience when the news broke, the local news scanned the parking lot and I saw her little purple car in the footage. Terrifying!
TO: Ed Driscoll, et al.
RE: Heh
A couple of months ago, black powder pipe bombs were being identified as WMDs by Fox News.
I pointed out to them that a 2-pound sack of refined flour could bring down a 1400 square foot building, if used properly. That would make every kitchen in America into a bomb-factory for WMDs. And don’t get me started on what you can do with bacon drippings.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[ANYTHING can become a weapon.]
Yes, they found some rusting, aged chemical weapons in Iraq. But not being a child, I remember being told over, and over that Saddam’s weapons presented a “grave and gathering” threat; and that the “smoking gun” might be a “mushroom cloud.”
These were obvious lies and absurdities.
Clark,
So you’re not happy with Clinton and Gore either, huh?
7. Clark: Please document.
8,
Just to be clear, I think we need confirmation on the “over, and over”, not just singular mentions.
If an airplane can be a WMD, Saddam definitely had access to WMD.
A: Have you ever been to Spain?
B: Well, I’ve been to Madrid.
A: Oh my dear. You haven’t been to SPAIN!
OK, I can’t let this one go. You’d think that the lefties, being SO much more intelligent than us bitter-clingers, would have gotten the message by now. Apparently, the aren’t as bright as they think. Well, to tell the truth, that’s been obvious to me for the last couple of decades.
Listen closely, Clark, and TRY to understand. I know I’m asking a lot.
1. Virtually the entire world believed that Saddam had WMDs of some type, including most of the alleged liberals in Congress. Look it up; it’s all over the web. This was made plausible by the fact that he did have them at some point, as he used them on the Kurds. Moreover, up to the invasion, his actions indicated that he did have at least some on hand.
2. Given #1 above, there were two ways to find out for sure:
a. Go in and check
b. Wait for him to use one.
I realize that the Left in this country would have preferred option 2b, but that’s not the sane option, and not what we did.
It appears now that he did NOT in fact have any on hand when we invaded, although that is subject to a caveat: the fact that our so-called “rush to war” took 8 months. It’s possible that there could be a cache of them buried somewhere, or that he decided to ship them to another country for safekeeping. You may argue over the plausibility of either, but to dismiss them simply betrays the typical lefty lack of imagination.
Absurdities? No. As noted, he had them at one point – did you want to bet your life that he was now a good boy?
Lies? No. Lies, to anyone not on the left, are INTENTIONAL misstatements. Saddam had only himself to blame for the belief that he had WMDs. If you want examples of lies, I suggest you listen to Obama. He clearly telegraphs upcoming lies with the prefacing statements “Let me be clear…” and “Make no mistake…”, among others.
Here is a link to Bush talking about the grave & gathering nonsense:
http://tinyurl.com/yaef7qt
Ed, why would you fall back on Clinton and Gore. I don’t particularly care for either man, and disapproved of Clinton’s foreign policy, although he is far preferable to Bush who was a disaster of world historic proportions. Alas, acknowledging that would defeat the whole purpose of Pajamas Media; which is to serve as a clearing house for rightwing delusions and fantasies.
Clark,
So Saddam Hussein, “eh”, but George W. Bush and a Weblog aggregator = locus of evil in the 21st century. Gotcha.
Clark: There are 23 clauses of cause (“Whereas:…”) listed in the “Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002, PL 107-243 – Oct. 16, 2002.
Clause Eight says:
Whereas the current Iraqi regime has demonstrated its capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction against other nations and its own people.
The other twenty-two (22) clauses of cause lay out the severity of the threat that WMD might be passed on to terrorist orginizations hostile to United States and United Nations interests, the refusal of the Iraqi regime to abide by its agreements ending the Gulf War and the Inspection Regime imposed upon it by the United Nations, the Iraqi regime’s continueing flaunting of U.N.Security Council Resolutions, the direction of Congress in PL 105-235 (14 Aug 98) that the President “to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations”.
As you are well aware (or should be), this Resolution was passed by large bi-partisan majorites in both Houses of Congress, in response to a call for public debate by leading figures of the Legislature, including the Junior Senator from New York, Hillary Rodham Clinton.
Clark has obviously not read Public Law 107-243 of 16 Oct 2002.
Just Google “AUMF-Iraq”, it’s only six pages, which includes the title sheet.
“…Bush who was a disaster of world historic proportions.”
Note to Clark: Making an assertion is not equivalent to proving it. I’m sure he was a disaster in what passes for your mind, but it would help your position if you had any evidence – any at all – that supported your statement. Sorry, more assertions such as “He ruined our standing in the world!” do not count as evidence.
TO: All
RE: clark
It’s a waste of mental acuity and internet bandwidth to discuss such with ‘clark’. They are obviously one of the ‘useful fools’ described so accurately in that YouTube item by the KGB agent who defected in the 1980s.
For all intents and purposes, I think it could be said of clark, that he is—as the BlogFather puts it now and then—”on the other side”.
Sooner or later, their behavior could be identified as ‘treason’. That is IF their obvious and deliberate ignoring of ‘factual material’, becomes grossly obvious to even the most casual observer.
Regards,
Chuck(le)
[We laugh at honour and are shocked to find traitors in our midst. -- C. S. Lewis]
The Duelfer Report also documents hundreds of thousands of deca-litres of biological agents, including bacillus thurengenisis and anthracis, found in Iraq. Also remember al-Qaa-Qaa where yellowcake was stored under “U.N. Seal” which was literally a cheap brass cable lock, some of that material was enriched illegally and it’s not all been accounted for to this day.