Tim Russert

[Chef]

I heard Tim Russert talk about WMDs last night on Hardball on how all the everybody, including the Democrats really, believed that Saddam possessed WMDs and voted for the resolution to go to war. I writing him to let him know that perhaps he has been in Washington too long to not to know a liar when he sees one. I knew, my wife knew, and my Senators knew they were lying about WMDs. How come he didn't?

[Melodybe]

1. Because is is a GE piece of shit, do we even have to ask.

[BrklynLiberal]

2. Yup. That's the answer.

[tom_paine]

3. He didn't because he is a greasy creature of THE PARTY and THE LEADER

He didn't for the same reason all the Nazi Bill O'Reillys in 1930s Germany couldn't "tell" Hitler was lying.

It was not in their financial or career interests to do so.

Hell, in Nazi Germany, you could even be killed.

(and that is one substantial difference, for the moment, between the Original Nazis and the LEADER and PARTY who's boots Russert licks with such efficiency)

[Mass]

4. Tim Russert is not somebody to trust

But give me a statement by your senators stating that there were no weapons on mass destructions in Iraq (and this only, not that the war was not necessary or that we needed to send inspectors).

I dont remember anybody stating that. I would be happy to be proven wrong.

Here is for example Kennedy's statement on the subject:

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein is a despicable dictator and that he must be disarmed. But the Administration has not made a persuasive case that the threat is so imminent that we should risk going it alone. We should resort to war only as a last resort. If we work through the United Nations for free, unfettered inspections, we strengthen our hand with our allies, our hand against Saddam Hussein and our ability to disarm him."

http://kennedy.senate.gov/index_news.html

Note that he does not state there are no WMD.

[Toots]

11. Wow 20-20 hindsite

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein is a despicable dictator and that he must be disarmed. But the Administration has not made a persuasive case that the threat is so imminent that we should risk going it alone. We should resort to war only as a last resort. If we work through the United Nations for free, unfettered inspections, we strengthen our hand with our allies, our hand against Saddam Hussein and our ability to disarm him."

I wonder if they still think he was just being an obstructionist. If only someone would have listened to this wise man and not rushed to war on very shaky evidence.We would still have over fifteen hundred brave Americans still living plus over eight thousand badly wounded americans. I can't even imagine how many killed and wounded innocent Iraqis there have been.

[Mass]

14. I agree

But who are your senators? When did they say there were NO WMDs.

As you can see, this is not what Kennedy said. His speech was great and I am proud to have him as a senator.

[stopbush]

15. Not A senator, but...

"We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq..." - Colin Powell, 2/24/01

"But in terms of Saddam Hussein being there, let's remember that his country is divided, in effect. He does not control the northern part of his country. We are able to keep arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt." - Condi, 7/29/01

Then, There's Sen Byrd's statement on the floor of the Senate from Feb 12, 2003: http://wildrooster.com/~pnndorg/senator_byrd.htm

[Mass]

16. Interesting

Particularly Powell and Rice.

Byrd is after the IWR vote, so it is interesting, but that was not my question.

[Me.]

5. He's The Fifty Million Dollar Man

On a thread last week it was reported that's what he earns. Of course he believes in WMD's, he's paid 50 million smackers to do so.

[gratuitous]

6. By all means, write!

Every now and then, I think it really helps to let these serial prevaricators know that someone notices their more outrageous statements and is willing to call them on it.

[Donailin]

7. Oh, exactly

I, a lowly commoner, knew the smell of bullshit from day one. Maybe the folks who walk around in it everyday have gotten so used to the smell that they can longer discern truth from lies. Especially when the liars cut their checks.

[kaitykaity]

8. On Sunday's MTP, the roundtable was

Tim and Gwen Ifill and John Harwood (WSJ) and
David Broder and they were all waxing poetic about
the wonders and skills of Dubya and just giving the
little Emperor a blow job to end all blow jobs.

I wrote to MTP and asked Timmeh if George had left
a $C note on the nightstand the night before or
something.

Of the whole panel, only Ron Brownstein of the LA
Times mentioned Bush's divisiveness and polarizing
effect on politics, so I exempted him for the name
"whore."

[Jacobin]

9. He's the mouthpiece for the junta

He didn't do anything except promote the invasion. He didn't look at any of the competing issues or have any of the dissenting voices on his show.

He had a hard on for this war and now that it's a disaster, he wants to say: "but see, EVERYBODY wanted to do it with me, mom"

He is a sniveling freak.

[AtTheEndOfTheDay]

10. Scott Ritter was proclaiming it everywhere and persuaded me.

Even if they existed the war wasn't justified. There were many sensible ways of dealing with that threat besides Bush's approach. That fucking Moran just wanted to go make his mess. The day of 911 I had a forboding about Iraq. Call it a hunch but I thought he'd been looking for an excuse to finish daddy's Iraq thing.

[girl gone mad]

12. The MSM has been pushing this bit of revisionism..

ever since Bush admitted WMDs would probably never be found.

Just because they refused to air opposing viewpoints does not mean that those viewpoints weren't being expressed. There were plenty of experts who doubted that Saddam had any quantity of WMDs.

Like you, I believed there were no WMDs in Iraq before the war. I remember arguing with my husband that I thought Saddam was grandstanding to look strong to Israel and other Arab nations. I didn't just pull that opinion out of my ass.

[lyonn]

13. Pulling inspectors out to start war?

There was no logic there. Our Representatives only repeated what the Admin. had fed them concerning the intelligence and they didn't do any real questioning as to the imminent threat that Iraq posed. It was plain and simple a rush to war and most got the "hots" for that, gee, so much money to be made in the process. That show was so wimpy I had to turn it off.