Bush's WMD moment of truth ?

OK so I've been pondering this whole Saddam thing. Now that the administration has caught Saddam and, subsequently subjected him to the worlds most televised de-lousing ever, hasnt the Bush administration effectivly run out of excuses on the WMD's that are failing to present an eminient threat ? The most favored excuse of W's mouth peices on Fox regarding this topic, is that the Iraqi scientists who worked on this stuff are afraid to speak out. Apparently they feared a return of the cold iron grip of saddam if he were ever to return to power in all of his ZZ Top glory. So if theres still no WMD's by the election Bush what does Bush have to say? "My bad" just wont cut it.
I'm curious, fellow dems, do any of you see a way right wingers can talk themselves out of this box? Does anyone expect we're going to "mysteriously find some WMD's" in Iraq soon ? Or is Bush finally boned ?

- Aloha Texan

They are using a strw man approach whereby if you question the reasons for war you must be siding with Saddam and wasn't he a bad man? Is'nt the world a better place without him? Look at the monkey, look at the silly monkey. I Chewbacca lives on Endor you must aquit!!!

Yeah, I know that in GOP spin rooms, wondering what's up with the WMD's = questioning the war = questioning whether it's a good thing that saddams gone = being an idiot, but seriously this is one we cant just let go. I was willing to let go of the 2000 election and the true shadey-ness that went down in florida, but C'mon if we let Bush weasil on the WMD's we dont deserve the title of "opposition party". Why would voters embrace a guy that sent their children to a dangerious foreign country for a year, and then had to suddenly think up a new reason as to why they are there ? Assuming WMD's dont suddenly crop up in Iraqi, this issue would result in political dividends and more importantly it's the right thing to do.

- Aloha Texan ?

But that's really irrelevant. Saddam likely won't reveal any WMD's anyway, and if he does, who would believe him? Rather, what sane person would believe that Bush's goons conducted an honest interrogation?

George W. Bush ruined his credibility long ago. When you see photos of Saddam Hussein on trial, just pretend you're looking at George W. Bush and wistfully sigh.

In fairness, they deserve more time to interrogate Saddam. But that's really irrelevant. Saddam likely won't reveal any WMD's anyway...

That really isn't Aloha_Texan's point. His point is that the lack of information telling us that Iraq does indeed have the infamous weapons of mass destruction which the administration used as a pretext for war from people who should be in the know has been rationalized away as being motivated by fear of negative consequences when Saddam gets back into power. Now that it should be clear to these people that Saddam will never be back in power, we should expect to see the locations of the mythical WMD's revealed to all if the misadministration was correct all along.

To be fair, they could still be fearful of assorted Baathists that are still on the loose or of other pro-Saddam types. Most likely, however, they can't reveal where the WMD's are because they don't know. They don't know becasue there aren't any.

Now write to your local editor of your local paper. :-)

WMDs are dropping off the radar for the electorate, especially if we let them drop.

I encourage everyone to purchase Uncovered: The Whole Truth About the Iraq War, available through MoveOn.org, and show it to all of your friends and co-workers.

Americans and Iraqis died because the administration told us all that Saddam literally had tons of WMD material. There is nothing there...

We've been had.

All news is Faux news. We spend time here conjecturing what will happen when we know full well nothing will become of it. I am included myself in this exercise of nothingness living in the F.S.A. (fascist states of america).

When is the last time you tried to affect the media?
When is the last time you volunteered with a local activist group to advance this issue or any other issue?

Don't say the media is "all Fox news" until you have really tried to impact it. In the last few months, I have managed to get some very pointed remarks out in the local media. I think that in my town, the activist community has been persistent enough that the message is getting through. Even the local newspaper columnists are dissing Bush.

So get on it--channel that angst. Find some compatriots and let's all kick Bush out of the white house.

Posting this around the net might help.

http://bushspeaks.com/home.asp?did=151



FUCK BUSH Buttons, Stickers & Magnets

http://www.kaicurry.com/gwbush/remindus.swf

In a word, SWEET!

I have already been told this story. It is as follows:

"It's top secret, but we actually have satellite photos
of the caravan taking WMDs out of Iraq into Syria."

I don't believe this, of course. How could they know what is in the caravan. Was it labeled and, if so, who labeled it? But, unquestionably, it is a way out, and an excuse for attacking Syria.

We would be wise to begin attacking them on exactly what they have done to this country, not Iraq. Like I have said in another thread, the ennvironment, the destruction of good paying jobs, a static min imum wage, corporate welfare, fascism, the absolutely criminal secrecy of this administration and, more important, what they are doing that has to be kept secret. The list is so big. Why, oh why, do we concentrate on the war, when it can so easily be manipulated in their favor? I know the war was illegal, but they have gotten away with this, already and, while it is vital to have a stand on the war, we must have many more arrows in our quiver.

We can do this. They cannot fool all of the people all of the time. We desperately need to get this message out and widen the net.


FASCISM: A system of government marked by a totalitarian dictator, socioeconomic controls, SUPRESSION OF THE OPPOSITION, and ususally a policy of belligerent nationalism and racism. (emphasis, mine)

We are already there, folks. Shout it far and wide.

I agree with you to large extent, the domestic agenda will be huge and is definitive Bush weakness. We should definately included some critique on the environment, jobs and all that good stuff. But to drop the whole "You sent americans to die for fictional reasons " thing out of fear for the political consequences doesnt quite make sense to me. Again assuming they dont crop up soon, Bush's straight talking appeal is severly wounded on this one. This is really a big deal and to leave it out of the campaign would be a mistake.
I've heard the syria fairy tale before, thanks to the good people at state media, I mean FOX. Even the most gung-ho country music singer is hesitant to jump on that boat. This story appears to be a FOX exclusive and the other networks aint touching it. Also I wouldnt worry about a syrian invasion unless Bush wins re-election. Bush is currently stuck in one quagmire and lacks the political capital to take us anywhere else, especially during an election year.
One other thing though- I think we will come off as less "fringe radical" by demanding some answers as to WMD's then we would by calling the president a fascist. But hey it's all good, I'm sure you can make a strong argument as to the administration being fascist. ( meant in sincerity, not as a smart-ass).

- Aloha Texas

according the article I picked up for the new World MEdia Watch which is up now in Breaking News.....

One says the Saddam thing doesn't mean as much to Brits as it does here because in the US, the subject has been "personalized"....seems everything here is "personalized" these days......