Search






Jeff's Amazon.com Wish List

Archive Calendar

November 2024
M T W T F S S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

Archives

“Your tired talking points about an al Qaeda connection to Iraq has been thoroughly debunked, wingnuts!”

Oh.

“…Well, what we meant to say is, there was no al Qaeda in Iraq until colonialist oilsuckers like you FORCED THEM TO ENGAGE COALITION TROOPS ON THE SIDE OF THE FREEDOM FIGHTERS! 

“So you see?  Thoroughly debunked.  Again.  You lousy, warmongering Halliburton enablers.”

(h/t CJ Burch)

****

update:  “NO BLOOD FOR BLEEDING SORES THAT CAN ONLY BE HEALED THROUGH DIPLOMACY—AND MAYBE JUST A SCHMEAR OF NEOSPORIN!”*

update 2:  “HOW DARE YOU QUESTION OUR CRAVEN OPPORTUNISM!”*

82 Replies to ““Your tired talking points about an al Qaeda connection to Iraq has been thoroughly debunked, wingnuts!””

  1. happyfeet says:

    Al Qaeda is so like two election cycles ago. Important thing is, this was is gonna elect Democrats! Bring the troops home now! Slowly! In bags… On the TV…

  2. happyfeet says:

    ack

    was = war

  3. Rosie O'Donnell says:

    But that Al-Qaeda flag is moving. I thought there was no air current in Iraq. Just like the Gulf of Tonkin. Google it.

  4. McGehee says:

    “Push ‘em back! Push ‘em back! Push them goalposts waaaaaaaaaaaay back!”

    </peacenik>

  5. david says:

    Prospects seem to get bleaker everyday, don’t they?  How are you ever going to get out from under this “war”?  This has been interesting to watch, in a sort of repellent yet fascinating way.  You can probably relate, I imagine you had similar feelings as a child, watching the struggles of the bugs after you pulled off their legs.  Please, continue.

  6. wishbone says:

    Wherever did you learn to use quotation marks so expertly, david?

    Idiot.

    The last time the amateurs got their wish on war funding millions died in Southeast Asia or in the waters around it (although, to their credit they did belly up to the bar that time and actually took a stand that was not couched in political quotation marks–Russ Feingold is a poor man’s Frank Church).

    This time, if they position themselves correctly, they can cause a general regional war where a nuclear exchange is a possibility.

    And blame Bush.

    Congrats.

  7. blaster says:

    Look, if Dick Cheney can control the President and get him to blow up the twin towers, don’t you think he can photoshop some goll – danged flag? 

    There is no al Qaeda in Iraq because there is no al Qaeda, GWB just made him up so we would be scared and he could take our rights away. 

    Not only do they not exist, we created him in the first place.  It’s called blowback.  Google it!

  8. Merovign says:

    Sorry david. What you are screams so loud, that I can’t read what you’re saying.

  9. Merovign says:

    Wow, thanks blaster! You’ve changed my life!

    I googled “blowjob” like you said, and…

    Wait, that’s not what you said.

  10. Wait, that’s not what you said.

    eh, close enough.

  11. ThePolishNizel says:

    Actually david, I was protecting you from the little girls who were constantly kicking your crying ass.  Pulling legs off of spiders is your side’s kick.  You guys had to be bigger and tougher than something, right?  Spiders were an easy target to take your “rage” out on.  In other words, david, you were most likely born a pussy and, little guy, you more than likely will die a pussy.

  12. Jeff Goldstein says:

    I envision david rubbing his chin as he writes.  Don’t know why, but I do.

    Oh. And he’s wearing a robe and sandals, and drinking “a very underrated Zinfandel.”

  13. Rob Crawford says:

    I’m pretty sure blaster was being ironic.

  14. guinsPen says:

    David, OTOH, was being moronic.

  15. blaster says:

    You know, I thought the irony would be easy to spot. 

    But I forgot moonbattery is beyond parody now.

  16. Pablo says:

    Prospects seem to get bleaker everyday, don’t they?

    Whose prospects?

    How are you ever going to get out from under this “war”?

    By “winning” it. You got a better idea?

    This has been interesting to watch, in a sort of repellent yet fascinating way.  You can probably relate, I imagine you had similar feelings as a child, watching the struggles of the bugs after you pulled off their legs.

    Speak for your own childhood, david. Are you saying you want to pull the legs off of Iraq, or off of our troops?

    Please, continue.

    I think you can bank on that.

  17. Merovign says:

    Of course blaster was being ironic.

    Or did you think I just discovered the word “blowjob” today, by mistake?

    smile

  18. rickinstl says:

    No Jeff.  He’s wearing brown corduroys, Chuck Taylors and a green T shirt.  He’s grinding his crotch on the back side of the bookstore where he works 3 nights a week for 8 bucks and hour as he types..  He spends a lot of time in the park.

  19. B Moe says:

    How are you ever going to get out from under this “war”?

    I would suggest a tight grip on the tablecloth and just ride that sucker out when the Democrats pull it.

  20. Mark says:

    I would suggest a tight grip on the tablecloth and just ride that sucker out when the Democrats pull it.

    It is very worrisome that I can’t recall reading a single thing about what thought the Dems have put into dealing with the consequences of their successful implmentation of their cut and run two-step.

    That third step is going to be a doozy.

  21. david says:

    Dance, silly weirdos, dance.

  22. Pablo says:

    Dance, silly weirdos, dance.

    Ah, more devastating leftoid rebuttal.

    Why do you fools even bother, david? Why not just wag your dick at us? At least there’d be some humor in that.

  23. Sean M. says:

    Well, I, for one, don’t blame the Iraqis for turning to al Qaeda.  Ferchrissakes, people, we took away their kites!

  24. N. O'Brain says:

    Dance, silly weirdos, dance.

    Posted by david | permalink

    on 04/23 at 08:07 PM

    Um, dude, you, like, forgot the quotation marks.

  25. Spiny Norman says:

    This one’s even more of a dullard than alpee or timmeh. Even since Jeff’s sabbatical, the troll ‘round these parts have been especially flacid.

    tw: week67 No, I don’t think it was that long.

  26. Spiny Norman says:

    *Ever since*

    ::sigh::

    Preview helps, but not always…

  27. wishbone says:

    Dance, silly weirdos, dance.

    Welcome back to “Deliberate Lefty Intellectual Dishonesty Theater”.

    Today, the first part of david’s Quotation Trilogy:  “Consequences”

    Tomorrow, Part II: “Giving an Oscar to the guy who plays the Sunni genocide survivor in the Iraqi Killing Fields to atone for being craven.”

    Next week, Part III: “That whole general regional war and $15 a gallon gasoline and rationing are all a giant C-O-N-S-P-I-R-A-C-Y”.

    Call me, “PROPHET OF PROFIT”.  I dig the quotation marks.

    Really, david–get some new material.  BDS is tiresome and soon-to-be antiquated.

  28. Luther McLeod says:

    I know Jeff, why would you care about a comment from a cretin, who seemingly advised you wrong on computer selections (though Acer has 10 patent claims filed against them from HP). But your last six posts have been excellent. Short, succinct and to the GD point. Your only danger, is in being ahead of the curve. Stay that way, please. This may well bring down the hammers of Thor, but you seem to have the clarity, and sense of purpose, of seeing through the bullshit. Carry on. Please. TW – It damn sure was.

  29. B Moe says:

    “Your tired talking points about an al Qaeda connection to Iraq has been thoroughly debunked, wingnuts!”

    “But we are still keeping an open mind about everything else.”

  30. furriskey says:

    FWIW, the script on that flag reads

    “There is no god but god”

    and below that

    “god is the prophet of muhammad.”

    That doesn’t mean it wasn’t embroidered by an arab, but it is odd.

    as one alfi closes, another dave opens. how long, oh Lord, how long?

  31. furriskey says:

    Well, “messenger” rather than “prophet”, in fact, but still arse about face.

  32. blaster says:

    Holy freaking crap!  This is somewhat of a threadjack, but the big guy linked to some Lefty loon haven – wow.  Just wow.  I was kind of being ironic about the irony of the beyond parody thing.  But wow.  That’s what they are.

    That’s just scary.  My favorite part is how they are all using Harry Reid’s backtracking statement to provide the context that he wasn’t backtracking.  My second favorite part is the “he didn’t say the war is lost, even though it is.”

    Jeebus.  They’re raving nutters, and there are lots of ‘em.  And we are losing to them.

    The buying a pallet of ammo and moving to Idaho index continues to rise.

  33. scooter says:

    Speaking of warmongering/chicken hawk yada yada yada Hows about some other HAWKS. Here’s some:

    Someone who drinks water but won’t bathe in it?

    Hippie Hawk.

    Someone who accepts welfare but won’t work? Welfare Hawk. (Also lazy cock-sucker)

    Someone who lives under the umbrella of freedoms afforded by our countrymen and women but always run’s down that country? Traitor Hawk.(Democrat)

    Someone who accepts medical care with no intentions of paying anything for said services? Healthcare Hawk.

    Someone who gets filthy rich( think Hollyweird)and speaks like socialist whilst living like capitalist pig? Communist Hawk.

    Someone who thinks Walmart exploits its employees while in the McDonalds drive thru? Hippocrite Hawk.

  34. cynn says:

    Oh, tone it down.  What, you didn’t plan for this consequence?  Of course Al Q is going to flood a vacuum.  Bad Daddy’s gone, and the U.S. is busy playing whack-a-mole trying to contain things.  Nobody at the switch, because this hybrid government can’t even pull off the oil deal.

    Of course, sitting on a pressure cooker lid tends to burn one’s ass, so let’s swap out al Maliki for Allawi and all is well!  So much for self-determination.

  35. heet says:

    They’re raving nutters, and there are lots of ‘em.

    Well, at least they don’t think the WH has covered up evidence of Iraq’s WMDs because, well, I couldn’t figure that part out.  Something about how they were worried about what liberals might say?  Enlighten us, blaster.  And Pablo, feel free to add your special brand of genius.  Be sure to ask me the definition of “evidence” or whatever you have up your sleeve, counselor.

  36. wishbone says:

    Heet, is of course, playing the “look over there” card to distract us from those damned consequences of running the white ensign up the pole.

    How does it feel to be craven?

  37. Pablo says:

    Well, at least they don’t think the WH has covered up evidence of Iraq’s WMDs because, well, I couldn’t figure that part out.

    That’s odd, given that you’re the only one who has offered the proposition, which you refuse to substantiate.

    Be sure to ask me the definition of “evidence” or whatever you have up your sleeve, counselor.

    I’ll settle for asking you yet again whether you’d have accepted the Gaubatz story as evidence of Iraqi WMD, had you heard it from the White House. And you’ll yet again dance away from the question like the hack you are.

    So, let’s hear from someone with their boots on the ground, as we’ll get absolutely nothing but ignorant bile from you.

    Pat, I met you back in February 2004 at the Government Center in Ar Ramadi, Iraq as a platoon commander with Golf 2/5. I just read your article in Maxim and the email from the 1/6 Cpl which I found on the Drudgereport. That Cpl is correct in his assessment. I am also back in Ar

    Ramadi, and I have a basis for a comparison of the current situation based on my experiences in this town two years ago as well as today, April 24, 2007. As you know this war torn city was once the worst city in Iraq. Today, the citizens of this city are taking a stand against those extremists and foreign fighters who are focused only on destroying any chance at a secure and stable

    future. Those Iraqis who once fought against us are now joining the ranks of the Iraqi Police forces. They are taking up arms against the foreign fighters.

    They are cleaning up their streets and making an attempt at forming a structured government. They have come to see us as facilitators of peace and allies in the defense of their streets. Because of this they have become targets for the insurgents, yet they continue to show resolve in the face of terrorism. We are gaining ground. This city is undergoing a sea change. To pull stakes now will

    cause this city, the Al Anbar Province, and all of Iraq to fall into the hands of thugs and terrorists. We will lose the nascent but growing faith of the Iraqi people, and all of our spent efforts and lost lives and invested treasure

    will be for nothing. Their courage will be for nothing.

    We are reaching a tipping point in this fight. We have finally learned this culture. We have finally begun to commit the necessary forces. We have truly learned to fight a counter-insurgency. Very real gains are being made despite claims from our Congress that we have already lost. A counter-insurgency battle is not one of quickly attained and easily recognizable benchmarks. It is not won in a year or four. It takes time, resolve, and a willingness to use what we have learned from past mistakes and expectations. From firsthand experience I can tell you, this “Surge” is working. We need to continue to support these

    people and give them a fighting chance at creating a nation on their own terms.

  38. heet says:

    Ahhhhhh….  There it is.  Belissimo :

    I’ll settle for asking you yet again whether you’d have accepted the Gaubatz story as evidence of Iraqi WMD, had you heard it from the White House.

    The coverup!  Because I wouldn’t believe the evidence.  What an evil mastermind this Mr. Bush must be.  I bet he’s reading this thread as we type.  Be careful what you say.

    It is all the more surprising that, at the time, they had no problem offering aluminum tubes as evidence.  Or empty trailers.  Or old CW mortar rounds.  His plan must have been devious.  Wait!  I’ve said too much….

  39. Pablo says:

    Because I wouldn’t believe the evidence.

    And yet you’ll scream from the rafters again and again that others see some WH conspiracy to cover it up, when the only person who sees it that way is you.

    Brilliant, heet. Just freaking brilliant.

  40. JHoward says:

    Heet, is of course, playing the “look over there” card to distract us from those damned consequences of running the white ensign up the pole.

    Ah yes, the helpful heet:  Because haphazard bullshit that looks like the vaguest contradiction fits so perfectly wherever he drops his shorts.  Lessons from Action Chimp and Mr. Supernatural will do that. 

    Dance, silly weirdos, dance.

    You know, that’s just offensive.  I’ve never danced.

  41. wishbone says:

    To pull stakes now will

    cause this city, the Al Anbar Province, and all of Iraq to fall into the hands of thugs and terrorists.

    Inconvenient truths.

    Hang your sorry excuse for a position on that, heet.

  42. furriskey says:

    Still won’t answer though. And you pissed off yesterday without linking to your “proof”

    Come along now, heetster.

  43. heet says:

    Pablo, connect the dots.  Follow the money.

  44. wishbone says:

    Follow the money.

    Ah–Hugo Chavez is behind all of this, then.

    See above, heet.

    With my forecasting ability, I should move to Vegas, baby!

  45. Pablo says:

    Pablo, connect the dots.  Follow the money.

    Well, that settles it, then. IT’S THE DOTS!

  46. heet says:

    Ah–Hugo Chavez is behind all of this, then.

    I am making fun of the loons who think there is a conspiracy to coverup the WMD evidence.  Hard to follow, I know.  I could barely believe it myself.

  47. heet says:

    You know what, forget it.  Carry on w/ the Saddam – AQ connection conspiracy theory.  That one is really gonna blow this thing wide open.

  48. ThomasD says:

    Well, that settles it, then. IT’S THE DOTS!

    It’s always the dots, those fuckers are everywhere.  Like Shriners, but without the hats and go carts.

    But sometimes it’s the dashes, now there’s some scary shadowy sumbitches.  They have their marks on everything.

    I’m more bothered by the conspiracy to ignore a) the WMDs that have been found and b)the previously identified but heretofore unaccounted for stockpiles of WMDs.

    But again, all digressions from the topic at hand, Democrat fecklessness.

  49. wishbone says:

    You know what, forget it.  Carry on w/ the Saddam – AQ connection conspiracy theory.  That one is really gonna blow this thing wide open.

    And the original point of the post is swung on and missed.

    You’d make a great Tampa Bay Devil Ray, heet.

  50. Pablo says:

    Carry on w/ the Saddam – AQ connection conspiracy theory.

    I’ve got a little news flash for you, heet. Feel free to extrapolate.

    And remember, BOOOOO$H LIED!!!

  51. Pablo says:

    I am making fun of the loons who think there is a conspiracy to coverup the WMD evidence.

    Whose conspiracy is that, heet? Quotes, as always, will be helpful.

  52. heet says:

    I’m more bothered by the conspiracy to ignore a) the WMDs that have been found and b)the previously identified but heretofore unaccounted for stockpiles of WMDs.

    But again, all digressions from the topic at hand, Democrat fecklessness.

    Yes, I blame Pelosi for not finding those stockpiles as well.  That bitch.  I can’t wait til we can vote her out and get a decent, gutsy person in charge of the Iraq war.  This shit has got to stop.

  53. wishbone says:

    But again, all digressions from the topic at hand, Democrat fecklessness.

    Let’s see if he can set a world record for ignoring the freakin’ point.

  54. heet says:

    And the original point of the post is swung on and missed.

    You know what?  You caught me.  I didn’t read the OP link.  I just did, though.  Want to know something else?  Shhhh… The Saudis are in Iraq as well.  Lots of em.  Iranians too.  Syrians.  Fuck, lots of people from neighboring states.  Wars will do that.

  55. wishbone says:

    By my count that’s 2,450 in a row.

    Keep going, brave clueles little lefty troll.

  56. cynn says:

    Hi, *tap tap* can I just say a few words?  Well, I thought we were discussing a situation that is already underway, today, here and now, I mean, not the second or civil wars, which have already been fought, asked and answered.  But then again, wars come and go, don’t they?

    But this is the huge war on Iraq; although some people say it’s the war in Irag, but I personally don’t see the difference.  And let me know if I’m doing the Irag thing again, because circles with squirts all look the same to me.

    So the bottom line is to be vigilant about all the terrorists in our midsts, and quit obsessing about history book events that may or not occur in the past or the future.

    Conveniently yours, etc.

  57. topsecretk9 says:

    Carry on w/ the Saddam – AQ connection conspiracy theory.

    Is “Heet” Joe wilson?

  58. Pablo says:

    But this is the huge war on Iraq; although some people say it’s the war in Irag, but I personally don’t see the difference.

    The difference is that we’re defending Iraq, not attacking it.

  59. Sean M. says:

    The difference is that we’re defending Iraq, not attacking it.

    Troll bringing up the Lancet study in 5…4…3…2…

  60. Good Lt says:

    the Lancet

    The laughed-out-of-the-scholarly-community Lancet study that even the UN scoffed at?

    I love that thing!

  61. B Moe says:

    Looks like cynn has been taking coherency lessons from emmadine.

  62. Rob Crawford says:

    Is anyone else bemused by the refrain of “STOP TALKING ABOUT WWII!!!” from the same people who keep shrieking “IT’LL BE ANOTHER VIETNAM”?

    Or, for that matter, by the people shrieking about “ANOTHER VIETNAM!!!” then ignoring what the consequences of abandoning the South Vietnamese were.

  63. blaster says:

    Hmmm.  Saddam-AQ myth.  Follow the money.

    Unless, of course, the money leads you somewhere uncomfortable. 

    Consider this.  In 1998, Saddam extended his hand to bin Laden – they say that since bin Laden did not take this hand, there is nothing to see here. 

    But also, in 1998, Iraq gave Zawahiri $300,000.  Zawahiri became AQ #2 (basically he merged his radical Egyptian group into AQ, and got the #2 job in return).  And then, bin Laden, who had never expressed an interest in the plight of the Iraqi people, took it up as a reason to justify the jihad.  And then AQ blew up the East African embassies. 

    So then we launched retaliatory strikes – some in Afghanistan, and famously, in Sudan.  What did we strike there?  A “pharmaceutical” plant.  Our justification?  That it was producing chemical weapons materials.  Investors?  UbL and Iraq. 

    Oh, also in 1998?  The US Justice Department indicted UbL – from the press release about that indictment:

    Additionally, the indictment states that Al Qaeda reached an agreement with Iraq not to work against the regime of Saddam Hussein and that they would work cooperatively with Iraq, particularly in weapons development.

    What else in 1998?  George W. Bush was re-elected as Governor of Texas.  Some guy named Clinton was President of the United States.

    So, yeah, its all Rove talking points, we’re all mind controlled robots blah blah blah.  Same old story – no facts or logic, just name calling.  Dude, that’s beat. 

    Though you have now produced a strawman of your own.  Yo rail on about the conspiracy to cover up WMD in Iraq, and argue against your own ridiculous explanation.

    And yet, you won’t even address the fact that DNI Negrponte strenuously fought the release of WMD information that had been collected.

    Facts are obstinate things. 

    Thanks for playing.  There is no parting gift, not even Rice-a-Roni.

  64. Challeron says:

    In re JG’s original premise: Why bother being consistent when the Reality-Based Community can make Reality into ANYTHING WE WANT IT TO BE!!!

    TW: Heet’s had92 opportunities to respond to a “real” question….

  65. McGehee says:

    I think it’s appropriate that the troll calls itself “heet” instead of, say, “lite.”

  66. slackjawedyokel says:

    Looks like cynn has been taking coherency lessons from emmadine.

    I gotta stick up for cynn here.  She is entirely right—we let heet boy threadjack with his BS about WMDs.  Back to the topic at hand!  Focus!  Focus!!

  67. heet says:

    I will win this debate through the use of just the right mixture of anger, contempt and snark, damn you.

    So don’t even be coming at me with data and all.

  68. Drumwaster says:

    So don’t even be coming at me with data and all.

    Reality is that which refuses to go away when I stop believing in it.—Philip K. Dick

    TW: something to consider58

  69. timmyb says:

    No, heet has a point about Blaster and Pablo’s belief in the Gaubatz hypothesis.  They’re willing to subscribe the insane notion that Iraq did have WMD’s in 2003, that the US government knows about it, and won’t tell.  That is pretty silly, yet there are 40 Pablo posts and blaster post from Friday night offering “how interesting…I bet that happened” (an, no Pablo, I didn’t go back and cut and paste your fascinating prose, because reading your stuff the first time is enough).

    Further, you want to talk moving the goal post?  This entire post is bullshit.  No ONE claims Al Queda is not currently in Iraq.  What the US government claims is that there was no operational correction between Saddam and bin Laden.  Still, when writing crap, full of snark and verve, it’s always good when the Professor sticks to what he’s best at: fiction.

    For Christ’s sake, 9 Americans died today, 30 Iraqis yesterday, April has been the bloodiest month for US soldiers since last fall and you post that?!?  Oh, a genius chokes back enough clam chowder to send us all a post from a Marine in Ramadi about how the surge is working.  Yeah, Ramadi must have some high ridges to see all the way to Baghdad.  Buy a map, Pablo.

  70. Pablo says:

    They’re willing to subscribe the insane notion that Iraq did have WMD’s in 2003, that the US government knows about it, and won’t tell.

    Timmy, you dumb fuck, quote me saying that or anything like it, please. reading once is clearly not enough for you to achieve comprehension, as you have repeatedly demonstrated.

    You see, after having seen you “quote” Bush and insist on what his position was, you are not to be believed without supporting evidence.

    As for what I believe, the only thing you are allowed to take for granted is that I believe you are an idiot.

  71. Rob Crawford says:

    What the US government claims is that there was no operational correction between Saddam and bin Laden.

    That’s not what Clinton said.

  72. narciso79 says:

    This Al Queda in Iraq is the Taliban like Salafi

    mini-state, it starts out small like like in Afghanistan, from followers of Maulvani Younis

    Khalis (including Mullah Mohammed Omar) In this

    case, it’s Ayub al Masri (the Egyptian)Mahsud

    al Iraqi (who happens to be Afghan)with support from Fazhul Rehman and other Al Queda middle management. There strategy seems insane, but it

    isn’t; its exactly the course they followed in Afghanistan; as a course of there Civil War, than

    occurred ; 1992-1996, when large scale support

    from the US ceased.

  73. timmyb says:

    shocking, pabs, did you find the map of iraq yet?

  74. timmyb says:

    And it’s not what Cheney said then or now or Professor Goldstein or Sean Hannity.  But is the official position of the US government.

    Unless this “Is there a connection between Al Q. and Saddam, Mr. President?” “I can’t say there is” in Pablo land is as close as Ramadi and Baghdad.

    Again, Pabs, Robby, the DoD IG’s report on the non-existence of that relationship can be found (for the millionth time) at http://www.dodig.osd.mil/IGInformation/archives/OUSDP-OSP%20Brief.pdf

    Robert, you seem reasonably bright (referred to in my household as “anti-pablo-ian (what can I say we like metaphors and compound words).  Click on that link and see how the IG for the DoD abuses Mr. Feith.

    Pablo in the meantime will still be trying to figure out why he can’t see Hartford from a high rise in Boston.  Distance is a foreign concept to him.

  75. Slartibartfast says:

    Timmy, what part of that presentation do you think supports your point?  I’m not seeing it.

  76. Pablo says:

    shocking, pabs, did you find the map of iraq yet?

    Did you find that quote, or are you putting your asinine words in my mouth again, Timmah!?

    Do you have anything to offer here? Anything?

    Again, Pabs, Robby, the DoD IG’s report on the non-existence of that relationship can be found (for the millionth time)…

    Once again, you’ve offered a document which does not say anything close to what you’re telling us it says, and you expect to be accorded some credibility. Are you fucking Greenwald? Retarded?

    slart,

    Timmy, what part of that presentation do you think supports your point?

    Timmah! sees the pixels appear on his screen and thinks he’s done magic. He’s a silly bastard, ain’t he?

  77. TomB says:

    Pablo, he must get his talking points from a moonbat website, because he sure as hell doesn’t bother reading what he links.

  78. ThePolishNizel says:

    Again, Pabs, Robby, the DoD IG’s report on the non-existence of that relationship can be found (for the millionth time)…

    Once again, you’ve offered a document which does not say anything close to what you’re telling us it says, and you expect to be accorded some credibility. Are you fucking Greenwald? Retarded?

    Thank you Pablo.  I was having extreme difficulty figuring out WHERE in that document it states there was NO connection betwen Al Queda and Iraq.  Is timmah, like other creatures of the left, conflating 9/11 with Iraq/Al Queda (of which I have NEVER heard anyone even attempt to make THAT relationship) or just a general relationship?

  79. Old Texas Turkey says:

    Timmah linked the incorrect version.  Here is the real report unaudited by Chimpy’s Halliburton stooges:  FOR THE LOVE OF A MILLION TIMES

    Yes. The OUSD(P) analysis included some conclusions that differed from that of the

    Intelligence Community.

    Partially. The alternative intelligence analysis that OUSD(P) produced was not fully

    supported by underlying intelligence.

    Yes. However, both the CIA and the OUSD(P) believed that the CIA had approved

    the ORCON material before sending it to the SSCl in October 2003.

    No. The Under Secretary Feith did not mislead Congress when he sent revised

    ORCON material to congressional committees in January 2004.

    Yes. The briefing did draw conclusions that were not fully supported by the available

    intelligence.

    Yes, however, there is no requirement to provide an internal OSD document to the CIA

    for their review.

  80. Drumwaster says:

    They’re willing to subscribe the insane notion that Iraq did have WMD’s in 2003

    This from a person (?) who can’t even define WMD.

    I have serious doubts you could even spell it aloud without two hints.

  81. furriskey says:

    People forget too soon that timmyb is in fact neoconsstink.

    When he speaks of family we should assume he is talking of the other inmates.

Comments are closed.