WMDs and The Psychology of Fanaticism, part 2

[jeskibuff]

FunDUHmental made a recent post to an old thread: [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]. I've been out of this site for years now, but I felt a reply was warranted. Unfortunately the thread is locked now, so I'll start this one.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

This thread is an example of how ugly DoD got when the war began. Now, over four years later, just about everything bad said about the president and the war, then, has come to light and has been accepted by the American people.

"DUH"

It's the basis of a new car commercial: "DUH" is a word that implies something is so obvious, it should be a no-brainer.

Yet, SOME people still don't get it. They never will. One of them is Fun"DUH"mental.

FunDUHmental is one of many liberals who will just NEVER "get it". You can try explaining it to them until your face turns blue. What should be simple concepts for a normal person to grasp just goes in one ear and out the other.
There are really just 2 possibilities:

1. a liberal is so intent on protecting their agenda that they refuse to let anything come close to bringing down their house of cards, or
2. they're just unbelievably stupid and can't grasp simple concepts.

Actually, I think it's a good combination of both.

Let's examine the evidence...

First FunDUHmental says "just about everything bad said about the president...has come to light and has been accepted by the American people".

Well, just WHO are these American people? Could it be the liberals who run the mainstream media and feed their left-wing propaganda to the masses?? We've heard it said many times how foreigners now HATE the U.S. and President Bush. It's been repeated so many times it's hard NOT to believe it. But just several weeks back something strange happened. I was watching NBC Nightly News when they showed Bush in Albania getting the "rock star" treatment by throngs. These not only were foreigners, they were Moooooslims! And "rock star treatment" was the wording used by the NBC anchor.

Omigod!

Just HOW did THAT happen? I'm not wondering why they were praising Bush for giving fellow Muslims in Iraq the chance to live a life free of oppression: that should be a no-brainer for ANYONE who prefers freedom to dictatorship! The puzzlement is WHAT WAS NBC THINKING??? How in the world did they let that little news clip get broadcast to millions? Someone at NBC must've been hitting the bong a little too hard there that day! Maybe they figured it was an off-day and no one would be watching! Just how does one reconcile statements like "the whole world hates Bush" after seeing this exhibition of adoration??

Similarly, there's John McCain's poor showing in the polls. The mainstream media just LOVES to attribute his "lackluster performance" to his solidarity to Bush on the Iraq war. They want us to believe that if McCain were against the war his numbers would be much better. Then how do they explain Fred Thompson's numbers? He hasn't even declared himself a candidate yet and his numbers sometimes better Giuliani's, McCain's and Romney's! Thompson's stance on Iraq is much like McCain's and Bush's. The fact is that conservatives aren't all that fond of McCain because of some of his liberal tendencies. But the media WANT us to believe otherwise because it furthers their agenda.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Al Qaeda was not operating in Iraq, as the Vice President claimed then.

How many times in 4 years has FunDUHmental and similarly intellectually-challenged liberals had this explained to them?? Isn't it obvious that no matter how much effort is expended to help them understand...they will JUST.NEVER.GET.IT!!!!???

I look forward to every Sunday night now. 10pm is when the Fox News channel airs its new show "The 1/2-hour News Hour", a comedy similar to Saturday Night Live's "Weekend News Update" segment. It's downright hilarious and obviously picking up momentum; there are more commercials now than when the show first aired and there has been a new episode every week for the last 4 or 5 weeks. It's great to see blatant ridicule of liberal stupidity. It's what's needed because there is no way to reason with the liberal mindset. But liberals sure do understand when their ideas are so dumb and their actions are so hypocritical that people laugh at them. Maybe that's the only way to get them to "see the light"; reasoning with them certainly isn't possible.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Saddam and Osama were not in bed with each other as Rice insinuated.

No WMD in Iraq.

Just more evidence that millions of words later, FunDUHmental and others like him will never understand.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Over 3000 Americans dead and over 66,000 seriously wounded.

Unfortunately, freedom is not free. If FunDUHmental was in charge of the Normandy invasion in 1944, the minute Americans started dying by the scores he would have pulled the troops back. D-Day was just the start...it still took an enormous toll of Allied lives, but in the end a powerful dictator was defeated. Without that terrible sacrifice the world would've been a very different place today. Freedom is very costly and it doesn't come instantly when you begin fighting for it.

Today's enemy is just as evil as Hitler, if not more. Today's enemy is NOT just Osama or Al-Qaeda. It is THOUSANDS of radical Muslims, each intent on destroying our freedoms; each intent on subjecting the world to Taliban-like rule. If you value your freedom you should do everything in your power to preserve it. You will have no problem ensuring that Islamic radicals will never get their hands on WMD whether it came from Saddam's regime or Iran.

And to reiterate the "no WMD" argument: intelligence from several different nations said Iraq had WMD. Saddam himself claimed to have WMD. You don't point an authentic-looking toy gun at a police officer then expect him to examine the weapon closely before he kills you, do you? It's Saddam's fault alone that he lost his dictatorship and his life.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

One trillion a month is being spent in a quagmire.

I'm sure Mikey Mooron is thanking you for pulling that number out of his derriere, FunDUHmental. He's grateful to have minions like you relieve his constipation while helping to broadcast his bogus, deceptive messages to those who are impressionable and naive. He also thanks you for making him wealthy by watching his "fictition". And I'm sure you'd also have qualified D-Day as a quagmire, wouldn't you? Apparently you'll never learn from history.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

From signing statements to the expansion of Presidential privilege, the Bush administration has walked over our legislative process.

The Office of the President and the office of the Vice President are the Executive Branch; they are subject to the rules thereof, despite what Cheney has said.

The value of the dollar is shrinking all over the world.

The U.S. is in a far better state under this administration than it would have been under Gore or Kerry. God forbid that GWB had listened to the moronic lefties who said the U.S. would collapse under his tax cuts. Still, as the economy rebounded liberals tried EVERY trick in the book to get people to believe that things were worse than they were. When it was obvious that the old arguments wouldn't work any more, they tried new ones. When the new ones didn't work they had to resort to lies. Dan Rather went down in flames trying to push one particular lie. Mikey Mooron's "Fahrenheit 9-11" film was so laced with lies and distortions (as are ALL of his films) that it probably HELPED G.W.B. get re-elected in 2004! Good going, Mooron!

It's really hard to believe that lefties will still cling to their idols. What fools would believe that "Bush is Hitler" or "Saddam won a popularity contest against Bush"? I'm aghast that millions of Iraqis now have a chance to live in freedom because of G.W.B., yet he is considered E.V.I.L. by lefties nationwide! These same lefties embrace national figures like Fidel Castro and Hugo Chavez, ruthless dictators who have stolen (and are in the process of stealing) people's freedoms. One of these idiots used to be the President of the U.S.A.! Yes, peanut-brain Jimmy Carter joins Cindy Sheehan, Danny Glover and countless other fools who heap praise on ruthless dictators! Then there are the left-wing nutjobs who volunteered to be human shields for Saddam! How dumb does one have to be to do THAT???

What fools still voted for Kerry in 2004 after he was caught in SO MANY LIES??? How can anyone believe that such a liar will do as he promised if elected? Certainly Sheehan was disillusioned after Pelosi & Fools, Inc. took power earlier this year. As incredibly stupid as Sheehan has shown herself to be, she'll probably continue to vote for the Dimocrats. Some people never learn.

Gore is still "Mr. Environment" to his dumb followers. Don't they care that he tells everyone else to conserve while his own household consumes 20 times the national average?

Seemingly the biggest reason that people vote for Dimocrats is the hope for "wealth distribution". Most liberals think that voting "D" will get them a candidate who is against big business and will bring back "power to the people". Nice in theory. Bad in practice. Democrats tend to raise taxes and chase businesses out of their neighborhoods. This leaves the locals less opportunity for employment. The end result is higher unemployment and LESS tax revenue. Democrats will NEVER get it! That's why they're so flummoxed that GWB's tax cuts produced GREATER tax revenue! They still don't understand how that worked!

And just who are the leaders flaunting their wealth? You had to laugh at Kerry pretending to be a "man of the people" while he zipped around on his multi-thousand dollar bicycle near one of his (really Theresa's) many mansions. John Edwards paying $400 for a haircut? Al Gore's 10,000-sq ft home? The debt-ridden Clintons buying their Chappaqua home for $1.7 million, anticipating cashing in on a lucrative speech circuit? Don't forget the Kennedys. Then ask yourself: what President wears a $50 Timex Indiglo watch and gets simple pleasure out of clearing brush? Oh yeah...that would be G.W.B. It seems the Dumbocrats take the forefront for the "money grabbers" title. If you think that Democrats will redistribute wealth your way, then why are all these prominent Democrats redistributing wealth THEIR way?? Why don't they practice what they preach?

Then you've got the many other examples of liberal idiots. Every time Rosie O'Donnell opens her mouth it just spews idiotic statements. Steel has NEVER melted before? What kind of brain-dead people are still adored by millions after exhibiting such sheer stupidity?? Linda Ronstadt gets booed off a Las Vegas stage because people wanted to hear her sing, NOT to hear her stupid opinions! Don't these people understand that they're paid millions for their entertainment value, NOT their mental prowess?? Obviously they believe their net worth is in direct proportion to their intelligence. Boy, are they EVER wrong!

So, if you think this post is "ugly", so be it! I've learned that it's no use to try to get a liberal to understand something. They DON'T want to understand it, because submitting to the facts would only undermine their selfish personal agenda. Liberal agendas are varied, including wealth distribution, homosexual "rights", sla-very reparations, etc. Their hatred for conservatives stems from their fear that any kind of morality threatens their agendas, and they're probably right. Rather than expending tons of energy to reason with liberals, the best thing is to just annihilate their platform and ridicule their belief system. They'll dance all around your arguments, thinking that evasive maneuvering and changing the subject will save them when they find themselves pinned down. You can painstakingly respond to each and every one of their points and the next thing you know, they'll repeat some point you've already shot down. Jwelch111 was famous for that little trick.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

It is a shame so many people were hoodwinked into believing this war was justified.

It's a shame that so many people will NEVER overcome their "destiny with density"! And after so many years on a message board, I'd think that by now you'd know how to use the quote function properly!

[FUNdamental]

I don't get it? Every step of the way I questioned the so called "evidence" of Iraq's nuclear program, WMD, and chemical and biological weapons W, Dick and Ms. Rice claimed, I did the questioning publicly here on DoD. What did I get for it? Nasty name calling just like you are doing now.

Also, most threads that were started by the Republicans on this board in regards to further the war propaganda effort were removed after I pointed out how factually inaccurate they were. But the White House kept making new claims, Republicans kept posting them on DoD, I kept rebutting, and you kept name calling. Who was right about the lead up to the war, anyway?

First, let's address your "several other countries" claim by seeing what someone on the inside has repeatedly stated;

"Republican-led rebuttal are statements made by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who noted that 'every intelligence agency in the world, including the Russian, French, including the Israeli, all had reached the same conclusion, and that was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.'

But this is disingenuous. The intelligence services of everyone else were not proclaiming Iraq to be in possession of WMD. Rather, the intelligence services of France, Russia, Germany, Great Britain and Israel were noting that Iraq had failed to properly account for the totality of its past proscribed weapons programs, and in doing so left open the possibility that Iraq might retain an undetermined amount of WMD. There is a huge difference in substance and nuance between such assessments and the hyped-up assertions by the Bush administration concerning active programs dedicated to the reconstitution of WMD, as well as the existence of massive stockpiles of forbidden weaponry."
Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector

Got it?

To continue to address this falsehood that several other countries thought so, foreign intelligence officers all over Europe and the middle east reported back to the United States claims made by the White House were highly suspect, unreliable, or down right wrong. Two separate investigations, one by the Italian government, the other by an Italian newspaper, both declared the Niger documents fake months before the President made the yellowcake claim during the State of the Union address. The Italian government was even able to track the document's letterhead to an embassy burglary the year before. The German government continued to report to the CIA "curveball" was at best "unstable and unreliable" about his statements to the German government concerning Iraq's alleged mobile chemical labs and weapons factories. As you recall, the CIA removed "curveball's" claims from Powell's UN speech only the have the White House re-insert it.

Russian government scientists wrote the CIA about false claims the President made about the end use of aluminum tubing. No neighbor of Iraq reported to the United Nations any suspicion of a growing nuclear, biological or chemical arsenal before the President started to talk about it.

The president claimed a Swiss report was about to be released concerning Iraq's new nuclear program; the Swiss government said they were unaware of any such report.

Do you feel better informed now, Jesk?

Like a few years ago, you continue to blame the liberal media for bad news or news not in step with the White House's claims. Ridiculous; did the liberal news media cause the death of 3,600 American soldiers, includeing six yesterday? Is it the liberal media that is responsible for 65,000 wounded soldiers? Is it the liberal media's fault that humvee's were not equipped to handle roadside bombs? Is it the liberal media's fault we have a civil war in Iraq? "How's that "greeted as liberators" thing going anyway? Where is the "freedom" in Iraq you speak of? What is "Freedom" for Iraq? It can't be a goal, by definition. Where is that "laser-like focus on Terrorism" you attributed to Bush a few years ago? Where is Osama? The president has said he doesn't give it much thought; do you?

By the way, Osama and Saddam had no working relationship. Al qaeda was not in Iraq befor the invasion, and the Iraqi government was not sponsoring al qaeda. I made these claims on DoD back in the day, remember, or are you still to busy with your Republican, carefully worded, talking points?

I think McCain blew it with the flak (or flack) jacket press statement in Iraq claiming the streets were safe. Really a bad visual, don't'cha think?

I think the Christian Science mmonitor pretty well explained Bush's welcoming in Albainia here [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

It is good to have you back Jesk, we needed a boost of that Republican propaganda to stir things up around here. Thanks for posting, but newsmax.com is calling you now.

Bubye.

[whitequeen96]

OMG, I can't believe this is still going on! Some people refuse to wake up and face facts. They believe that changing your mind, even when faced with new facts and evidence, somehow shows a lack of "integrity." What it really shows is a lack of intelligence! We are supposed to learn from our mistakes; to fail to do so is the way to disaster.

I'm not interested in a long rant or insults, so don't bother. And just to be perfectly clear, I agree with Fundamental!

[FUNdamental]

Originally Posted by jeskibuff

I look forward to every Sunday night now. 10pm is when the Fox News channel airs its new show "The 1/2-hour News Hour", a comedy similar to Saturday Night Live's "Weekend News Update" segment. It's downright hilarious and obviously picking up momentum; there are more commercials now than when the show first aired and there has been a new episode every week for the last 4 or 5 weeks. It's great to see blatant ridicule of liberal stupidity. It's what's needed because there is no way to reason with the liberal mindset. But liberals sure do understand when their ideas are so dumb and their actions are so hypocritical that people laugh at them. Maybe that's the only way to get them to "see the light"; reasoning with them certainly isn't possible.

From ThinkProgress

TVNewser reports today that the HHNH has been canceled. In a memo to senior producers today, Fox News Corp.’s senior vice president Bill Shine announced:

Joel Surnow and I have mutually decided that we will not continue the Half Hour News Hour beyond its current 15 episode run. The last show will be presented on September 16th.

Shine claimed the reason for the shelving of the show was that Fox is “considering ways to retool the show for future scheduling needs.” He held out the chance that the show would air again: “There is still a chance you will see the program at some point in the future.”

The reviews for the program were consistently dismal. Its very first review, from the Orlando Sentinel, decried the “[l]aughter, of an awfully canned variety, greets all the gags. Nothing happening on screen justifies these outbursts. … If we’re lucky, we’ll never hear of this dreadful show again.” “Sometimes the humor is so heavy-handed that it seems almost like self-parody,” said the New York Times. “The 1/2 Hour News Hour is slow torture all by itself,” said the Philadelpha Inquirer.

What the right-wing failed to grasp is Jon Stewart is funny not because he spins falsehoods but because he tells the truth.

[FUNdamental]

Anyone that fully read this thread started by Telos2000 where he regurgitated misinformation on the lead up to the Iraq war, should watch 60 Minutes this Sunday. Telos200 was wrong when he said that "intelligence from several different nations said Iraq had WMD." 60 Minutes will expose one aspect of the obfuscation the White House used to convince the American people to go to war; Iraq's chemical weapons build up as told by an informant known as "Curveball."

60 Minutes will show how the Germans and the CIA unsuccessfully tried to squelch the White House's continual claims, attributed to "Curveball," about Iraq's WMD.

60 Minutes will report that German intelligence felt the credibility of "Curveball," and the information he was providing on Iraq's chemical weapons were "suspicious at best." However, The White House, not the CIA, kept quoting to the American people the nonsense "Curveball" was telling the Germans. The program should be very informative on how the White House cherry picked, exaggerated, and equivocated information it disseminated to the American people to justify going to war with Iraq.

[whitequeen96]

Ugh! It makes me sick! I really hope there is a ****!

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

I don't get it?

No, you most certainly don't. And I seriously doubt that you EVER will! Don't feel too bad though, because you're not alone. There's millions of other liberals in this world who don't get it and never will!

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Every step of the way I questioned the so called "evidence" of Iraq's nuclear program, WMD, and chemical and biological weapons W, Dick and Ms. Rice claimed, I did the questioning publicly here on DoD. What did I get for it? Nasty name calling just like you are doing now.

Sorry bud, but you got answers to ALL of your questions. You were just too obstinate to absorb the information. When I find myself having to repeat the same thing over and over again, it's not MY fault that you're too thick to "get it". It's been spelled out in very simple terms for you. You're just too dense, that's all! That's not name-calling...it's a factual observation that any reasonable person can make.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

most threads that were started by the Republicans on this board in regards to further the war propaganda effort were removed after I pointed out how factually inaccurate they were.

Oh, what a load of self-important BS! Any threads removed were done because you were such a crybaby. I'm pretty sure that there has been absolutely no change in your maturity over the last several years. Your ego is so easily bruised that when you're cornered, there's nothing left to do but demand the "bad bad words" be obliterated. I'm surprised that my first post lasted this long. As far as the "war propaganda effort" goes, you obviously believe that anything opposing your viewpoint is "propaganda"; an attempt to swindle someone into believing something. That is so hilarious because you Democrats wrote the book on lying, cheating and swindling people. You are experts at projection!

The dumbest thing for anybody to do is to demand that posts be removed. I prefer that ALL posts be preserved so that I can always point to where you make a fool out of yourself. If anyone posted propaganda "too sensitive" that it must be removed, the prudent thing to do would be to blow it apart with logic and reason and show why it is wrong. You liberals are totally incapable of doing that though, so if you hear words that you don't like, you simply cry "foul" and demand the post or entire thread be removed. Such pathetic crybabies you are!

There is an endless body of evidence of the inability of liberals to engage in civil debate. The most common reaction when cornered is to attempt to switch topics. When hopelessly cornered, the liberal wants all evidence of the loss to be purged from history. This was YOUR preferred method, always crying "foul" until you got your way. It really is pathetic.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Who was right about the lead up to the war, anyway?

Certainly NOT liberals! They were right about practically NOTHING...zilch...nada. Liberals are rarely right about anything. We're talking basic logic here, not wild guesses or inevitable consequences (such as when you engage in war, bad things will happen and not everything will go perfectly).

Once again, the tax cuts are prime examples of liberals guessing wrong. When GWB said the tax cuts would work, liberals proclaimed that the economy would go down the tube. Liberals wanted IMMEDIATE results and conservatives understood that these things took time. In that period before the economy started rebounding, things were still not good and liberals continued to proclaim their "rightness", as you're doing now. "GWB is going to throw the American economy in the toilet", the brainless liberals proclaimed. However with the passage of time, we can clearly see how they were so wrong. You were one of them, FunDUHmental. And like so many liberals who aren't willing to concede that GWB was right, you have to scramble to find some other aspect of the economy that is imperfect just so you can assign blame. If interest rates are low, you complain that the elderly can no longer survive off their savings. If the rates rise, you complain that the housing market is suffering. Whatever happens, you'll find a negative aspect that you will try to use to your advantage. Such changes occur in any market economy. You just choose to exploit ALL negative effects, attempting to use them as ammunition against your political foes. You certainly don't have any GOOD ammunition available!

Anyone can see this happening today with the race for the Presidency. A couple months ago, liberals were demanding an immediate withdrawal from Iraq. GWB's calls for "stay the course" were ridiculed. Once again, time has proven GWB to be right. The surge has yielded results so good that even the liberal media has to knuckle in and report the improvements. To think that if liberals had their way, our troops would have been withdrawn prematurely, allowing Al-Qaeda to fill the void. Once again, the liberal candidates have to scramble to find something else to complain about. Such brainless little monkeys they are!

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

"Republican-led rebuttal are statements made by Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who noted that 'every intelligence agency in the world, including the Russian, French, including the Israeli, all had reached the same conclusion, and that was that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction.'

But this is disingenuous. The intelligence services of everyone else were not proclaiming Iraq to be in possession of WMD. Rather, the intelligence services of France, Russia, Germany, Great Britain and Israel were noting that Iraq had failed to properly account for the totality of its past proscribed weapons programs, and in doing so left open the possibility that Iraq might retain an undetermined amount of WMD. There is a huge difference in substance and nuance between such assessments and the hyped-up assertions by the Bush administration concerning active programs dedicated to the reconstitution of WMD, as well as the existence of massive stockpiles of forbidden weaponry."
Scott Ritter, former UN Weapons Inspector

It's certainly NOT disingenuous, but what else would I expect to hear from someone who is so disingenous himself? You're quite the projectionist, "DUH". FunDUHmental is too long to type, so I think I'll just call you DUH from now on. It'll shorten what promises to be a lengthy post, anyway!

Now to the point...I don't disagree that the intelligence differed among nations. We later discovered that France and Russia had ulterior motives for the U.S. NOT to invade Iraq. Anyone would be a fool to let a madman play with WMD or deliver it to other madmen like jihadists. If there's suspicion that there's danger within a box, the prudent thing to do is to open the box to be certain that the danger is eliminated. The absolutely most stupid thing to do is to believe others who say there is no danger in the box even though the only one who knows for sure is the party who put the "danger" in there. That would be Saddam himself, and he publicly claimed there was danger within. Too bad for him...his ruse backfired and he is now dead. But this has been explained many times before and you obviously STILL don't get it! You obviously never will!

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

The German government continued to report to the CIA "curveball" was at best "unstable and unreliable" about his statements to the German government concerning Iraq's alleged mobile chemical labs and weapons factories.

You seem to assert that because Curveball turned out to be a liar that it's a slam dunk that the Bush administration lied. What you fail to grasp is that he was just one of many sources of information. Intelligence is an aggregate of many sources of information that have to be assessed in total. There are obviously going to be discrepancies that have to be weighed and judged. If you toss out the Curveball facet, there were still many other factors that indicated Hussein needed to be checked; namely Saddam's own statements and the shell game he was playing with inspectors.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Do you feel better informed now, Jesk?

Are you kidding me?? Do you really think you said anything credible and worthy of consideration?? You really are TOO full of yourself!

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

you continue to blame the liberal media for bad news or news not in step with the White House's claims. Ridiculous; did the liberal news media cause the death of 3,600 American soldiers, includeing six yesterday? Is it the liberal media that is responsible for 65,000 wounded soldiers?

The liberal media is definitely responsible for dead and wounded soldiers. By proclaiming the falsehoods of "war for oil", "Americans occupying Iraq", "Americans torturing Iraqis", "troops bogged down on the road to Baghdad" and many other such inventions, they encouraged terrorists and normal Iraqis to resist "the American occupiers". I have no doubt that American soldiers have died because of the encouragement given by the liberal media against Bush and his "evil war for oil". Only recently have Iraqis learned that their real enemy is not America, but the terrorists who were responsible for the mass murder of their fellow Iraqis. This realization alone has caused a huge improvement in the situation over there. People feel more secure and are moving back from their exile in neighboring countries. It must really pain the liberal media to have to report the improvements that have occurred.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Is it the liberal media's fault that humvee's were not equipped to handle roadside bombs?

As Rumsfeld had wisely proclaimed "you go to war with the army that you have". In other words, equipment isn't prepped years in advance for unexpected events. You have to adjust and adapt to the tactics of the enemy. While this doesn't occur instantly, we have adjusted and adapted to the tactics of these vermin, obviously not instantaneously. Reasonable people understand that it takes time for these adjustments to occur. Unreasonable people (a.k.a. liberals) demand that adjustments not made instantly are cause for blame. Rumsfeld was too reasonable for the puny liberal brain to grasp.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Is it the liberal media's fault we have a civil war in Iraq?

It's the media's fault for proclaiming it to be a civil war in the first place. They mistakenly proclaimed the whole problem to be the inability for Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds to live together. They failed to see the bigger picture; that terrorists were fomenting these conflicts in order to achieve the desired effect: increased violence and chaos. This played right into the hands of the stupid media, stupid Democrats and a few stupid Republicans (Hagel,Ron Paul,etc.): they saw the increased violence as uncontainable and the best way out to be withdrawal of our troops. Most Republicans recognized what was happening and understood the consequences of caving to "popular opinion". Fortunately, we "stayed the course" and proved the Dumbocrats wrong once again.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

"How's that "greeted as liberators" thing going anyway?

Quite well, actually. There are millions of Iraqis that are thankful that we ended Saddam's reign of terror and have given them the opportunity to live in freedom. You might have seen their smiles while they sported purple thumbs. If you hadn't turned off the set in disgust, you might have seen people partying in the streets, beeping their horns and celebrating their new-found freedoms. You probably thought it was staged...certainly you still can't accept the fact that thousands of Albanians (mostly Muslims) treated Bush like a "rock star" (NBC's description). That must have been staged too, eh? You just need to get a firm grip on reality, DUH!! The attitude behind your question totally exposes your ignorance and stupidity. Any reasonable person understands that a transition from 30 years of brutal dictatorship to democracy is going to have rough moments, especially when you factor in bloodthirsty Islamic radicals who will kill as many people as they can to prevent that transition. Would you also have the stupidity to forfeit a football game the minute the opposing team makes a touchdown in the first quarter? That's pretty much the defeatest attitude you possess, DUH.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Where is the "freedom" in Iraq you speak of? What is "Freedom" for Iraq? It can't be a goal, by definition.

Iraqis have already been freed from a brutal regime, so that's already an improvement. They have been given several opportunities to vote in free elections. That's another improvement, but I'm sure you say that the 99% vote Saddam got was because of their free-will choice, don't you? Just because terrorists responded with unprecedented violence and are trying desperately to take Iraqi freedoms away doesn't mean the whole effort was in vain; it just means that the enemy is still capable of fighting back! Do you have any concept how many tough battles there were between D-Day and V-E day? With your pinhead mentality, you would have demanded our involvement ended at Normandy because there was such a great loss of life that day. You have absolutely no ability to look beyond the immediate to assess the consequences of inaction.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

Where is that "laser-like focus on Terrorism" you attributed to Bush a few years ago? Where is Osama? The president has said he doesn't give it much thought; do you?

That focus is still there. I'm quite proud that Bush hasn't caved in to the demands of the overly-vocal lefties. As far as Osama is concerned, he doesn't deserve much attention. He's just one of many terrorists that need to be eradicated. It makes no sense to put a lot of effort into finding just one terrorist when there's a target-rich environment in Iraq and Afghanistan, does it? In time he'll meet his demise, but right now he's busy cowering in caves. Liberals seem to think that if we killed Osama, all would be good. Liberals obviously don't have a clue about the enemy we face with Islamic fundamentalism.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

By the way, Osama and Saddam had no working relationship. Al qaeda was not in Iraq befor the invasion, and the Iraqi government was not sponsoring al qaeda. I made these claims on DoD back in the day, remember, or are you still to busy with your Republican, carefully worded, talking points?

I can't count the number of times this has been explained to you and other mentally-challenged liberals. I'm convinced that you either are incapable of understanding or choose to ignore simple logic. Are you an idiot or an ignoramus? Are there any other choices? I don't see any other possibilities!

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

I think McCain blew it with the flak (or flack) jacket press statement in Iraq claiming the streets were safe. Really a bad visual, don't'cha think?

Perhaps you need to get an understanding about the difference between ordinary Iraqis and high-profile politicians. Perhaps even the Benazir Bhutto incident isn't enough to knock a little sense into you.

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

I think the Christian Science mmonitor pretty well explained Bush's welcoming in Albainia here [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]

Perhaps you need to be schooled on how to present a link if you want people to be "edumucated". Have you even tried your link? You've had several months to correct it since you posted it, but [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] takes one to The Center for Systems Management. What a bonehead! I tried going to the Christian Science Monitor ([Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]) site back then, but couldn't find the article you were referring to. I did find a pretty worthless article about how Islamists' concept of time is different from ours. Makes me wonder about the intelligence of the whole CS organization.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

It is good to have you back Jesk, we needed a boost of that Republican propaganda to stir things up around here. Thanks for posting, but newsmax.com is calling you now.

If that was supposed to be clever, maybe I'll feign a laugh to make you feel better. Ha, ha...good one, DUH!

Originally Posted by whitequeen96

Some people refuse to wake up and face facts.

Ah, more projection from yet another clueless liberal!

Originally Posted by whitequeen96

I'm not interested in a long rant or insults, so don't bother.

Of course you're not interested in anything except that which agrees with your viewpoint. Tough. You probably won't even bother reading this whole thing, so why should I care what you're interested in? Nothing I say will sink in to the closed liberal mindset. I write what I write to explain to others the logic and common sense behind the conservative mindset. Liberal mindsets are closed systems, unable to comprehend anything beyond base simplicity.

Originally Posted by whitequeen96

just to be perfectly clear, I agree with Fundamental!

Why do you feel the need to state that? Was there ever any doubt?

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

TVNewser reports today that the HHNH has been canceled.

Too bad. It was a great show that had me laughing out loud many times. We need more shows that really mock the absolute stupidity of liberals. Here's hoping it will come back on the air. Sunday night at 10pm?? What a crappy timeslot for it, anyway.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

The reviews for the program were consistently dismal. Its very first review, from the Orlando Sentinel, decried the “[l]aughter, of an awfully canned variety, greets all the gags. Nothing happening on screen justifies these outbursts. … If we’re lucky, we’ll never hear of this dreadful show again.” “Sometimes the humor is so heavy-handed that it seems almost like self-parody,” said the New York Times. “The 1/2 Hour News Hour is slow torture all by itself,” said the Philadelpha Inquirer.

Omigod. How difficult it must have been to find reviews written by liberals! Sorry, but many of the jokes got talked about the next day at "the water cooler" where I worked. I'll agree that it's definitely not a show that a liberal would enjoy. Who would want their own stupidity shoved in their faces?

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

What the right-wing failed to grasp is Jon Stewart is funny not because he spins falsehoods but because he tells the truth.

I watched Jon Stewart once. He wasn't all that funny and obviously not worth me watching him a second time. And "truth" to a liberal is "fiction" to the rest of the world. Just ask Dan Rather, Rosie O'Donnell or Mikey Mooron about their version of truth.

Originally Posted by FunDUHmental

60 Minutes will report that German intelligence felt the credibility of "Curveball," and the information he was providing on Iraq's chemical weapons were "suspicious at best." However, The White House, not the CIA, kept quoting to the American people the nonsense "Curveball" was telling the Germans. The program should be very informative on how the White House cherry picked, exaggerated, and equivocated information it disseminated to the American people to justify going to war with Iraq.

I used to watch 60 Minutes regularly, until I realized how deep they were entrenched in the liberal spin machine. The Dan Rather incident sealed the deal. I did watch this particular segment, just for you, DUH. What was exposed was how "Curveball" lied and deceived. It is left up to the vivid liberal imagination to pretend that the show was "very informative on how the White House cherry picked, exaggerated, and equivocated information it disseminated to the American people". This reminds me of the recent issue about the CIA tapes and how liberals wanted the public to believe "that White House officials knew more than what had previously been acknowledged". When nailed to the wall by the White House, the NY Times had to print a "correction": "the White House itself has not officially said anything on the subject, so its role was not ‘wider than it said.’" Hee hee! Too bad more people aren't exposed to the reality of the liberal-controlled media, but it's extremely fun to watch people like Rather take a tumble, O'Donnell get exposed for the idiot that she is and the NY Times have to admit their bogus "reporting".

See [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] (DUH...please note how to correctly post a link to the appropriate article)

[FUNdamental]

Such anger, Jesk; tell me again, where are those weapons of mass destruction the Bush administration warned us about 935 times?

Please don't say that "every other county thought..." nonsense; as we all know, most of Europe didn't believe us and we now have "Freedom Fries" because of it.

So, if "curveball" was discovered to be a complete liar before the war began, why did we go into Iraq again?

I kept asking why we were headed to war when there was no "proof" of the President's claims. All I received from you were the same attacks.

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them." George W Bush
Source: Interview of the President by TVP, Poland, White House (5/29/2003).


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------This statement was misleading because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons without disclosing that engineers from the Defense Intelligence Agency who examined the trailers concluded that they were most likely used to produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons.

"Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production."
Source: President Delivers "State of the Union", White House (1/28/2003).

This statement was misleading because it suggested that Iraq sought aluminum tubes for use in its nuclear weapons program, failing to mention that the government's most experienced technical experts at the U.S. Department of Energy concluded that the tubes were "poorly suited" for this purpose.

[jeskibuff]

Originally Posted by DUH

Such anger, Jesk;

Anger? You bet. I find it absolutely unbelievable that someone can be so voluntarily stupid as you liberals. I find it ghastly that you would choose to undermine the security of our nation with your hairbrained notions simply because you want to maintain the security of your selfish agendas. It would be okay if your stupid notions only affected yourselves, but they affect everyone. If you want to destroy yourself, then that's your choice, but don't take the rest of the country with you. Yes, it angers me when people are so utterly selfish and self-centered.

Originally Posted by DUH

tell me again, where are those weapons of mass destruction the Bush administration warned us about 935 times?

I painfully sat through the movie "Zoolander" a couple weeks ago. I'm glad I didn't pay to see it. It had a couple of funny parts in it ("Prime Rib of Propecia" made me laugh), but for the most part the absolutely stupid characters played by Ben Stiller (and Will Ferrell) remind me too much of liberals. The characters are supposed to be larger-than-life and fictitious, but unfortunately such people exist in real life.

At one point in the movie, Ben Stiller ("Derek Zoolander") meets David Duchovny's character (J.P.Prewitt) in a cemetery. "Derek" asks "But why male models?", wondering why sinister masterminds use unwitting male models to carry out assassinations. Prewitt goes into a thorough explanation which makes complete sense (in the context of the movie plot) and satisfactorily nails the question. When it's all over, Derek responds: "Yes, but why male models?", the very question he just got answered!

This is exactly what we conservatives face when responding to liberal questions. "DUH" asks about WMDs and the 9/11-Iraq connection. "DUH" gets a thorough, reasoned explanation. When all done, "DUH" (a.k.a. Derek Zoolander) asks the EXACT SAME question again, as if he never heard a word of the explanation. Is he just plain dumb? Does he have some kind of mental block? Does he just refuse to listen to logic? Does he have some innate inability to connect the dots? Does he refuse to accept the response because it simply destroys his argument and that threatens his agenda?

So, "DUH" asks "where are those weapons of mass destruction?". He's heard the answer many times before, in this VERY thread. Does he think he's won some kind of argument because they weren't found in the quantities or forms they were expected to be in? Does he think that this is a liberal "victory"? What he seems to refuse to understand is that national intelligence is not always a black-and-white revelation. He can't seem to be able to place himself in the President's shoes, weighing the options: "Do I take a chance that Saddam has no WMDs because SOME people say there is none, or do I err on the side of caution to protect the American public because many others (including Saddam himself) say there IS?" Of course, I explained this at the end of post #7 as "danger within a box", hoping to penetrate DUH's impenetrable thick skull. As everyone can clearly see, it was a fruitless effort. The man is just too dense.

Now, as far as the "no WMDs found" argument goes, that's just more liberal wishful thinking. There are accounts of 1.77 metric tons of enriched uranium, 1500 gallons of chemical weapons agents and other "goodies", certainly enough to qualify as WMD ingredients, just not in the form anticipated: already weaponized. For more information, [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] does a nice job of summarizing and providing links to the info.

Originally Posted by DUH

Please don't say that "every other county thought..." nonsense; as we all know, most of Europe didn't believe us and we now have "Freedom Fries" because of it.

Who cares what "most of Europe" thinks? Our security shouldn't be determined by the opinions of other nations, should it? They'll be going down the tubes in the not-too-distant future anyway because of their inability to understand an enemy who has blended into their population and is determined to overthrow them. We've already seen the bombings in Spain, the riots in France and the murder of people like Theodore Van Gogh. We've seen the violent protests over cartoons which suggested Islam was not the peaceful religion it claimed to be(how ironic, eh?). At least France now has a conservative leader who understands the danger within. And despite DUH's refusal to understand that intelligence is an aggregate of many different sources, it is NOT "nonsense" to take into account the information from those many sources, weigh them and act upon them in the best interest of the nation.

Originally Posted by DUH

So, if "curveball" was discovered to be a complete liar before the war began, why did we go into Iraq again?

Once again, "DUH" demonstrates his unbelievable density. How many times must I explain that intelligence is an AGGREGATE of information? Curveball was ONE source of intelligence who later turned out to be a fraud. There were many other sources (INCLUDING SADDAM HIMSELF) that formed the AGGREGATE intelligence assessment. What is so hard to understand??? [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now] to the definition of "aggregate" in case that's too big a word for your vocabulary, DUH.

Originally Posted by DUH

I kept asking why we were headed to war when there was no "proof" of the President's claims. All I received from you were the same attacks.

I have been accused (in this very thread by WhiteQueen96) of responding with long posts. There's a reason why: I ensure that each question posed is addressed. If you didn't get an answer to a question, most likely I've answered it thoroughly in a prior post and refuse to cut-and-paste the former response. I'm confident that I've addressed everything you've presented, DUH. If not, please point out a SPECIFIC question in a SPECIFIC post that hasn't been addressed. I refuse to be trapped by the standard liberal tactic of responding to the SAME QUESTIONS over and over again! If you are unable to grasp the first response, I may try a different approach (such as an allegory) in hopes of getting through to you. If you fail to grasp the answer after several tries, I must assume that you're either too dense to get it or that you voluntarily refuse to accept it because it destroys your argument. Perhaps it's a combination of the two, but it seems to be a pretty hefty weighting on the density side.

And let's talk about thoroughness, DUH. I've responded in detail to every one of your questions. Why have I not gotten any answers to the following questions I've asked of you?

1. Post #1: Q:"Just how does one reconcile statements like "the whole world hates Bush" after seeing this exhibition of adoration??" A: DUH responded with a link that not only didn't go to the article, but went to a COMPLETELY different site than intended.
2. Q: Why was Fred Thompson so popular when he espoused the same opinion as John McCain on Iraq, yet the media declared McCain unpopular BECAUSE of his support of the Iraq war? A: Silence
3. Q:"You would have qualified D-Day as a quagmire, wouldn't you?" A: Silence
4. Q:How dumb does one have to be to stand in solidarity with liars and fools like Gore, Kerry, Sheehan, Mooron, Glover & Pelosi? A: Silence
5. Q:What kind of fools think by raising taxes on corporations that they WON'T chase more of those businesses away? Obama is the latest fool to embrace that dumb logic. A: Silence
6. Q:Why aren't wealthy Dimocrats like Kerry and Edwards practicing what they preach by redistributing their own wealth? A: Silence
7. Post #8: Q:"Would you also have the stupidity to forfeit a football game the minute the opposing team makes a touchdown in the first quarter?"A:Silence
8. Q: "Do you have any concept how many tough battles there were between D-Day and V-E day?"A: Silence
9. Q:"It makes no sense to put a lot of effort into finding just one terrorist when there's a target-rich environment in Iraq and Afghanistan, does it?"A: Silence
10. Post #9: Q: "Have you even tried your link?" A: Silence
11. Most of all, I'd like to know what you would do in the situation where it was your decision on whether or not to open "the box". Just pretend that you're in charge of security in a high-rise office building and there's a suspicious box in the lobby. It certainly looks like a bomb. The person responsible for placing it there SAID it was a bomb. Sure, some other people said it wasn't a bomb, but can you trust them? Can THEY see inside the box? Do you take a chance and wait for it to explode or do you make the decision to go in and disarm it? You don't know whether or not it's really a bomb until one of those events occurs. See, you can't really answer this one honestly, can you DUH? The reasonable action is to take the safest approach and proceed to disarm it. The most stupid thing you can do is to ignore it, for if your assessment is wrong many people could die - many whose safety is entrusted to you. Make your decision, but either way you lose. Either you'll choose the unreasonable choice (leaving the box alone) or you'll be forced to admit that GWB took the appropriate action.

Originally Posted by DUH

This statement was misleading because it claimed the purpose of the trailers was to produce biological weapons without disclosing that engineers from the Defense Intelligence Agency who examined the trailers concluded that they were most likely used to produce hydrogen for artillery weather balloons.

If there was misleading, it was done by Tenet's CIA. Read the timeline compiled in [Only registered and activated users can see links. Either login above or Register Now]. Whether the CIA intentionally misled or simply got it wrong, the CIA is the agency responsible for vetting and delivering the gathered intelligence. The President's job is to assess the sometimes conflicting information provided from many different agencies and to respond accordingly. In order to do that, he must TRUST that those agencies are doing their jobs to the best of their abilities. Why are you libs so eager to place the blame on the Bush administration, rather than on the agency that got it wrong? Nevermind...rhetorical question, isn't it? Your anti-Bush/anti-Republican fervor has blinded you from reason and common sense.

[FUNdamental]

Originally Posted by jeskibuff

Well, just WHO are these American people? Could it be the liberals who run the mainstream media and feed their left-wing propaganda to the masses??

Actually, the word "propaganda" was pretty much confirmed by Scott McClellan and attributed to the White House.