WMDs the final word?

[Chris Alger]

In his NPR interview yesterday, David Kay was asked the following question about Con Coughlin's alleged quotation by him in the Telegraph and gave the following answer.

Q: "You told the Sunday Telegraph newspaper that you do believe that some weapons materials may have been moved to Syria. What can you tell us about that?"

Kay: "I think that's a compressed [laughter] view of what I said. What I said is there's ample evidence of movement to Syria, uh, before the war. I mean there's satellite photography, there are reports on the ground, of a constant stream of trucks, cars, rail traffic across the border. We simply don't know what was moved. And that's an important area for which continued work has to be done. Although I must say there's very little you can do in Iraq to determine what was moved, the real answers to that are in Syria. And the Syrian government has shown absolutely no interest in helping us resolve this issue."

In other words, prior to the bombing, people unsurprisingly fled. It is therefore conceivable that something Kay is looking for went with them, but he can't say if there's any evidence of this other than "movement" of people and vehicles. He offers nothing about weapons, weapons components, weapons program-related components, or any of the other increasingly distant threat words the White House now uses to justify the war.

Three things are interesting here:

1. Con Coughlin's reputation as an unscrupulous shill for the war is unabated. After reporting huge Iraqi demonstrations in support of the war that no other journalist ever sees, after reporting secret documents linking Iraq to al Qaeda that not even the U.S. government sees, and now a "compressed" (i.e., overly specific) "quote" from Kay. Small wonder that Coughlin doesn't report even the nature of the evidence he claims Kay disclosed. (Coughlin's boss Conrad Black, BTW, also publisher of the Israeli propaganda tabloid The Jerusalem Post, is being sued for looting $200 million from the Candian holding company while it's directors looked the other way. One of the directors is Iraq war architect Richard Perle).

2. Ariel Sharon claimed back in December 2002 that "We are certain that Iraq has recently moved chemical or biological weapons into Syria." So why hasn't the leading recipient of U.S. aid refused to disclose to the CIA's chief weapons inspector even the slightest evidence for the alleged certainty? Why doesn't Bush castigate Israel by saying "we give it $5 billion of taxpayer money every year and Israel won't even give us a clue about what went to Syria, even though lack of WMD is undermining my credibility and Israel is 'certain' of its proof?" Because it's transparent nonsense.

3. Kay's last comment about Syria's refusal to cooperate is a telling indicator of how U.S. policy actually undermines efforts to curtail terror and the spread of WMD. I think it was Nicky that posted some excellent stuff about Syria's early cooperation with the U.S. in tracking down al Qaeda members. This budding relationship, however, was terminated by the White House in order to maintain a constant state of hostility toward Syria. Syria was also the sponser of a UN resolution to verifiably ban all WMD's from the Middle East. The U.S., of course, opposed this, meaning that it died on the vine, because it would also apply to Israeli nukes which threaten the entire region.

These bits of innuendo about Syria are nothing more than scraps of red meat the right occasionally throws to race warriors like you to support bloodbaths in more Arab countries, as you evidently hope for, "after the election."

[MMMMMM]

Thanks for the additional information.

I cannot, however, but take issue with the foloowing statement of yours:

"These bits of innuendo about Syria are nothing more than scraps of red meat the right occasionally throws to race warriors like you to support bloodbaths in more Arab countries, as you evidently hope for, "after the election.""

Syria promotes and supports terrorism, and the government is Baathist as was Saddam's. The terrorist training camps should be eliminated and if Assad won't do it, I'll bet we will.

You truly cannot be thinking straight if you think I am in any way a race warrior. I despise bigotry based on race, and I despise ideologies and political systems which deny their citizens equality before the law.

Apparently, according to Chris Alger, despising bigotry or totalitarianism is itself bigotry. Amazing.

According to Alger, despising a system such as Islamic law under which women are treated as chattel instead of as human beings, is bigotry--which makes me a race warrior, lol.

I despise intolerance. I am only intolerant of cruelty, stupidity, and intolerance--and systems which institutionalize such things.

[MMMMMM]

With all that said--however much may be accurate--the bottom line is that we got rid of a bad tyrant and that the people of Iraq will be far better off. So let's rejoice, andy.

[Chris Alger]

What "terrorist training camps?" Something you read on the net somewhere? Know any recent terror attacks from graduates of these "camps"?

The last time this issue surfaced was when Israel bombed an abandoned facility in Syria, resulting in no casualties. Even the U.S. said it had no evidence of any activity going on there. Do you really think that Israel couldn't bomb with impunity any such camps, that the IAF just sits around looking at recon photos of training terrorists? How naive can you be?

"I despise ideologies and political systems which deny their citizens equality before the law."

That's horseshit. Israel's control over the West Bank is totalitarian, and your regular response to that is that the residents should move elsewhere if they don't like it. You're a huge cheerleader for a President that wants to give lethal aid to countries that you purport to "despise."

As for despising bigotry, this isn't even slightly credible from someone who so constantly complains about group inferiority based on nearly immutable characteristics such as religion and culture.

[Taxman]

I think Andy made some good points, though they were maybe a little extreme. If the sex alone was enough to remove him from office it's amazing that the roads aren't littered with dozens of impeached presidents, setators and congressmen. Did you know that Newt Gingrich was involved in an affair during the whole impeachment proceedings? Did you know that Clinton actually admited previously to infidelity during his first run att the presidency(yes I think he should have done so again)? I think that completely ignoring the will of the UN is far more damaging to foreign policy than having sex with another woman. In fact if you find various foreign opinion sources, you'll see that the world mostly considered the whole proceedings absurd and amusing. His decisions did not suffer a huge credibility hit IMO. Especially when compared with Bush (which I certainly can do). The specific actions were different, but the element of a missing truth is the same. I never said Bush should be impeached (though perhaps something will be revealed indicating that he should be), but it is ironic (and an indication of the spinelessness of the democrats) that he gets away with potentially much more damaging things with relatively little attention. The argument is not faulty because the point was not to compare the two actions, it was to pick a common theme and examine how one president was punnished much more than the other one. As for the "failure to live up to the resolutions," it was mostly a comment on the supposed "fact" that Iraq had WMDs, so it is the same.

Did I ever condemn Bush as a murderer? No, that's right I didn't. After all I'm sure he's never actually shot a man or been anywhere close to a situation in which he might have to. You're last paragraph is fragmented and unclear, but from what I can understand you're claiming that because the Clinton suspected the presence of WMDs and issued air strikes against Iraq, he is responsible for as many deaths as Bush and perhaps indirectly responsible for "Operation Iraqi Freedom". I think you can probably figure out yourself why this is the true faulty argument here. Obviously the Clinton administration did not think a full blown invasion was necessary, which of course means that 500 American lives were not lost as well as far more Iraqi lives than in dessert fox. Besides given the continuing lack of WMD evidence, it looks like Clinton already got the job done.

[Taxman]

I don't think anyone here disagrees that it's a good thing that Hussein is gone, but with dozen of brutal dictators out there, the reasons behind his particular removal are worth serious discussion, especially because it calls into quesiton the competency of our current leader.

[MMMMMM]

"What "terrorist training camps?" Something you read on the net somewhere?"

Yes.

Know any recent terror attacks from graduates of these "camps"?

No.

"The last time this issue surfaced was when Israel bombed an abandoned facility in Syria, resulting in no casualties. Even the U.S. said it had no evidence of any activity going on there. Do you really think that Israel couldn't bomb with impunity any such camps, that the IAF just sits around looking at recon photos of training terrorists? How naive can you be?"

So it was obviously a warning shot across the bow for Syria.

M wrote: "I despise ideologies and political systems which deny their citizens equality before the law."

to which Chris Alger responded:

"That's horseshit. Israel's control over the West Bank is totalitarian, and your regular response to that is that the residents should move elsewhere if they don't like it. You're a huge cheerleader for a President that wants to give lethal aid to countries that you purport to "despise.""

Israel is a special case, too complex to get into for this point. Obviously I believe Israel is forced to take strong measures to try to ensure her own security in the face of frequent suicide bombing attacks aimed at her civilians.

"As for despising bigotry, this isn't even slightly credible from someone who so constantly complains about group inferiority based on nearly immutable characteristics such as religion and culture."

Therein lies the essence of our differences on this subject, Chris: you believe such characteristics are nearly immutable, or are integral parts of persons, but I believe any thinking, truly reflective person should be able to at least partially discard them and think on his/her own.

I condemn grossly intolerant ideologies, period--and condemnation of intolerance is not itself intolerance. Nor is it bigotry. Maybe I just have more faith than you do that the human spirit has the power to transcend traditional ways of thinking. So I freely condemn harmful and bigoted ideologies. Calling me a bigot for that is wrong. Call the bigots who really are, bigots--and that includes all who adhere to the highly bigoted aspects of Islamic ideology. They weren't born believing that crap--so it isn't in them genetically. They were taught it--and anyone who is truly human has the power to transcend, at least for a few moments now and then--anything they have been taught or accustomed to. All one has to do is listen to the little quiet voice of conscience to know what is good or bad, right or wrong. So it is time for the world, which they are now confronting, to tell them that their bigoted ways of thinking about women and other religions and the West are backwards. Maybe it will wake some of them up. Better that than thinking, as you seem to, that such thinking is the near equivalent of some racially inherent quality.

[andyfox]

That a bad guy is gone is for certain. That the people of Iraq will be better off is fervently hoped for. That the people who brought us this war are extraordinarily dangerous seems clear; another fervent hope is that they don't do calamitous damage.

[andyfox]

"Did you know that Clinton actually admited previously to infidelity during his first run att the presidency"

On 60 Minutes anniversary show last week, they showed portions of the Clintons' 1996 interview. Clinton said he had brought pain to his marriage, but when asked point blank if he had had an affair with Gennifer Flowers, he sid no, its not true.

Liar, liar, pants (obviously) on fire.

[MMMMMM]

"That the people who brought us this war are extraordinarily dangerous seems clear;..."

Especially to tyrants and terrorists. Three cheers.