Q: Why isn’t this story leading the news cycle?
The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council on new findings that could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam’s missile and WMD program.
The briefing contained satellite photographs that demonstrated the speed with which Saddam dismantled his missile and WMD sites before and during the war. Council members were shown photographs of a ballistic missile site outside Baghdad in May 2003, and then saw a satellite image of the same location in February 2004, in which facilities had disappeared.
[…] In April, International Atomic Energy Agency director-general Mohammed El Baradei said material from Iraqi nuclear facilities were being smuggled out of the country.
A: Because then anti-war talking heads wouldn’t be able to begin discussions on Iraq with their rote preemptive boilerplate, “We know now that there were no WMDs in Iraq, so it’s clear President Bush took us to war on false pretenses, and the only question that remains is, ‘what did he know, and when did he know it’…?” Plus, nearly every media outlet reporting the story would have loads of crow to eat. And crow isn’t nearly as tasty as Belgian waffles, or those little liver bits wrapped in bacon and secured neatly with a toothpick.
via Ace; more here. And here. And here.
***
update: additional items from other news sources: the AP’s take; the StraitsTimes; and, via Iraq.net, the Reuters story.
lacrosse-playing despoiler of daughter of update: looks like Drudge has the story.
illegitimate child of trampy daughter of update: Neglecting to mention that in addition to the Tribune link I likewise linked to both the AP and Reuters version of the story, Jim Henley suggests I’m a cheap epistemological date, which may or may not be the case. I prefer “easy,’ but then, I’m kinda simple that way. For what it’s worth, the phraseology offered in the Tribune matches that of AP and Reuters (who presumably all took their cues from the text of Perricos’ report).
In other update news, I’m also racist (or a race-baiter, or both) [see comments], and a pimp for anti-semitism. Which I find gets top dollar if I put it on the streetcorner in some fetching Nazi regalia.
social worker to illegitimate child of trampy daughter of update update: Here’s what an “anti-semite pimp” is, according to the grandiloquent “editors” at Poorman:
It’s what you are. Further understanding is left as an exercise for the reader, but, if it helps move things along at all, it is a very low and very contemptable thing. It is as contemptable as being given intelligence, but, by choice, making oneself absurdly, contemptably stupid. There’s also a reason I said that; again, further understanding is for your own time.
Translation: not sure, exactly, but “anti-semitism pimp” / Jeff G / contemptible stupidhead appear to be interchangeable.
And crow isn’t nearly as tasty as Belgian waffles, or those little liver bits wrapped in bacon and secured neatly with a toothpick.
Even when you’re not talking about Michael Moore, you’re still talking about Michael Moore.
I think, because, in general, not to be contrarian or anything, things rarely go from the World Tribune directly into mainstream circulation. I mean, I can think of at least ONE cable news outlet that would run the hell out of it.
And goddammit I’m hungry now.
Well, I’ve updated the post to include the AP story and the Reuters story. Those sometimes make it into mainstream circulation—though generally moreso when they say things like, “New study shows Bush re-election likely to maim children, kittens; spell end to reality TV.”
It made Drudge now as well.
It’s the moving goal post syndrome. It’s not a STOCKPILE of weapons so it really doesn’t count. It will only count when they find a Costco size facility with a bunch of boxes with those cool nuclear symbols on them.
This is not exactly vindication for Bush. Even before the war, try as I might, I never could get upset and outraged about missile engine/range phase of the WMD dispute. I know it proves that Saddam was violating the truce, whic is the bigger issue (one of them). But in terms of human psychology, you’ll never generate a huge drama over whether Saddam had extended the range of his missiles an extra 50Km past the allowed maximum distance.
If I’m reading the story correctly, John, there’s more to this than rocket engines…
I can’t find the story on Drudge’s page, but I don’t know how to navigate that mess anyway. Either that, or he pulled it. There was a reddish-haired womon on CNN earlier today talking about this strange report from the UN, and their concern about finding rocket engines in Jordan that had beet tagged by inspectors earlier, and that some of the sites they had indentified for inspection had disappeared. So if CNN has the story, the issue is how they’ll play it. They weren’t exactly blasting headlines that “WMD have been found,” or anything. But still, that riddish-haired woman (and no, it wasn’t Red Sugar Muse) seemed intrigued.
Without some smoking gun style hard facts, the story lacks the necessary sensationalism to force its way into the rotation in spite of the media’s desire to supress news that would help Bush. Also, the media has happily ignored it for Reagan coverage which must’ve been great for ratings.
It’s now in the Drudge archives. I updated the link in the post.
“A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on.”
— Winston Churchill
I really don’t know how you guys (Jeff & BH) can stomach places like The Poor Man, let alone participate in debates in the comments section. Don’t get me wrong–I’m glad (and amused) that you ARE willing to, I just can’t imagine enduring it. Jew baiter.
You know John, I had stopped debating in such places, and I’m going to stop again. As I noted over in BH’s comments, the left’s (and I’m not speaking of Democrats here, but rather leftist ideologues) new tactic for silencing people like me (who happens to be Jewish, and who supports the war) is to call me an “anti-semitism pimp.” Which means I’m being dismissed as someone who beats the anti-semitism drum, presumably—the implication being that anti-semitism doesn’t exist to the degree I (supposedly) claim it does, and that I’m just some selfish Jew agitating for victimhood. Which doesn’t deserve the dignity of a response other than to say I’ll let those who know me draw their own conclusions.
Ja, Saddam is slyly saving his fearsome weapons for the time when he really needs them. Be afraid, be very afraid.
I don’t blame you Jeff. The depth of that debate was very shallow to being with. The tangent of “you hold your position” was a pretty early in the conversation to throw in the proverbial towel and talk about something else besides the subject at hand. The goal is of course not to talk about the subject but to talk about HOW you talk about the subject. I could smell the elitism oozing from those posts.
Jeff, won’t surprise you to hear this from me, but that guy is suffering from some serious true believer syndrome.
Kool-aid anyone?