Yohannon (yohannon) wrote,

  • Mood:
  • Music:

Democratically Chosen Reality

So, here's the deal: No weapons of mass destruction found, and none of the scientists (now supposedly beyond the reach of Hussein and retribution) will "admit" that any exist. Three weeks after the war, the best that can be found were a few suspicious oil drums. So, the excuses and spin begins, and the latest theories are that they were destroyed just before or during the war (Huh?) or that Iraq, a country desperately strapped for cash and resources, employed "just in time" production methods that failed because of "shock and awe". The former makes no sense at all: Why destroy weapons that could slow down an invasion? The latter is also bizarre, because Iraq was being attacked for HAVING the WOMD's, not ALMOST having them.

This, though is my favorite spin so far:

"Bush pointed out that the United States was not alone in its accusations against Iraq, noting that the United Nations resolution approved unanimously in the Security Council last fall stated it had banned weapons. "

Taken from This Article

So, you use fabricated evidence to convince the UN that Iraq had the weapons, and the vote to inspect... and that means they have the weapons. You created a "fact" through the electoral process of the UN. What's that again?

Hey everyone, let's create a "fact" ourselves, and vote this nimrod into a former resident in thief.
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.