or
Join Now!
|
|
Home/Government/Politics
|
| Forum |
Ask A Question |
Question Board |
FAQs |
Search |
Return to Question Board
| Question Details |
Asked By |
Asked On |
| Santorum outed as Liar about his WMD's Claims |
jackreade |
06/22/06 |
From CROOKS AND LIARS BLOG SITE::::
"Santorum debunked by Colmes over WMD's
Santorum debunked over WMD's by **FOX NEWS***
Santorum showed up to do his thing with Peter Hoekstra on H&C and it took one phone call by Jim Angle of FOX News to debunk Santorum's WMD claims today. That's pretty embarrassing when the Dick Cheney network undermines him. Hannity was all excited and tried to say that WMD's were only "a part of the reason we went Iraq." (See quote.)
If that is the document that's classified, isn't little Ricky breaking about a gazillion different federal laws by exposing them? I've taken the precaution of blackening it a bit. Of course, I'm no attorney, but I believe this is the law.
Santorum: I'll show you the classified documents right here...
Colmes: It's Alan Colmes. Senator, the Iraq Survey Group, uhh, let me go to the Duelfer Report-says Iraq did not have the weapons our intelligence believed were there. And Jim Angle who reported this for Fox News-quotes a defense official who says these were pre-1991 weapons that could not have been fired as designed because they already been degraded.
And the official went on to say that they are-these are not the WMD's this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had-and not the WMD's for which this country went to war. So the chest beating that the Republicans are doing tonight thinking this is a justification is not confirmed by the defense department.
Santorum: Well, ahh, I'd like to know who that is. The fact of the matter is I'll wait and see what the actual Defense Department formally says or more importantly what the administration formally says. This report...
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Santorum called liar by Fox News over WMD remarks.
My comment? bwahah haha hahahahahahah |
Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/22/06 10:28 pm:
If the 'whole thing was on television' then why didn't you quote 'the whole thing' instead of this one excerpt? Just as I don't convict Marines before a trial I don't judge a debate over one question and a partial answer. Maybe you should learn that virtue as well. Clarification/Follow-up by jackreade on 06/22/06 10:32 pm:
Have a nice day. :)
Bye
Clarification/Follow-up by ETWolverine on 06/23/06 5:21 pm:
Interesting. I guess the nicknames of "Chemical Ali" and "Dr. Germ" were just jokes and had nothing to do with any sort of WMD program that Saddam was running. And I guess that the 500 TONS (that's 1 million pounds) of yellowcake uranium that was found in Iraq was just there for $h!ts and giggles, and not for WMD use. And the 500 warheads found with chemical payloads full of sarin and mustard gas were "too old" to be of any concern. And the mobile chemical and biological labs were for "agricultural use". The nuclear weapons-grade tubing that Saddam bought from France was just for plumbing. The anthrax production program that was discussed in the Dalfour report, that must have only been there for medical experimentation, right?
Any other spin you want to put on the CONFIRMED WMDS AND WMD PROGRAMS FOUND IN IRAQ?
Tell me, Jack: If the troops ever found a large amount of WMDs that had manufacturers dates on them that said "January 1, 2003", how would you manage to spin that fact? Would that be enough to stop calling Bush a liar? What constitutes "proof" in your book?
Elliot
|
| |
|
Your Options |
Additional Options are only visible when you login! !
|
|
|
|
