-Caveat Lector-
| Media |
;)
Pundit Pap: 'Weapons of mass distraction'
Posted on Monday, September 09 @ 09:54:49 EDT
By The Pundit Pap Team, American Politics Journal
NEW YORK (APJP) --
President Bunnypants' top players -- Colin Powell, Dick Cheney and Condi
Rice -- were sent forth this weekend to spin, dissemble and "go on the
offensive" for takin' out that most evil of evil evildoers, Iraqi
President Saddam Hussein, this pundit Sunday.
"Offensive", yes.
Offensive to our common sense. Facing the meltdown of his domestic agenda,
huge embarrassment over the leaking of his party's memos on the plan to
privatize Social Security, all-too-suspicious ties to corporate crime, and
a sagging economy, the Smirking Doofus has decided he is going to take out
Saddam, possibly launching a military campaign.
Unfortunately, the
public isn't buying it. Smirk's approval numbers are tanking --
particularly because of his irresponsible, insane foreign
policy.
So the planned "talking offensive" by his senior
public relations team took on tones of being on the defensive -- even with
the complacent (and in the case of FAUX News cooperative) talking head
army lobbing the softballs.
Here's the low-down on the
saber-rattling.
FAUX News Sunday: Smirk's other lapdog -- Tony
Snow?
Tony Snow began FAUX News Sunday ostensibly on the
subject of the Smirk-Blair tête-à-tête -- but the presence of Colin Powell
and the line of questioning betrayed Tony's real agenda: "proving" that
there's "unity" in the Junior Bush Cadre.
Powell was, of course,
guest one, first hammering away at Saddam supposedly possessing WMDs and
attempting to obtain specialized aluminum tubing used in the process of
enriching uranium, wielding this "evidence" as if it were a severed head
whipped out of a duffel bag.
It was Powell's way of saying, "See?
SEE? Saddam IS a clear and present danger, and we need to take the bastard
out NOW!"
And, naturally, Tony played along. He tried to show how
dangerous Saddam is by asking how many people he could kill with his WMDs;
Powell admitted that Saddam is working on "ways to disseminate these
weapons" (he must have said "working" three times in one answer). Powell
also said that he believes Saddam has some SCUD missiles left.
Of
course, Powell said nothing about what intelligence reports say about the
condition of said missiles or whether they can or cannot be weaponized
with WMDs.
Tony then played a clip of Scott Ritter speaking to the
Iraqi parliament -- decrying a lack of facts on what Saddam has (in a
speech that sounded engineered to persuade Iraq to let the UN back in, but
you'd never know that listening to Colin and Tony). Powell tersely
responded that "We have facts, not speculation." (Of course, the problem
is that those facts are based on words like "might" and "could" and "may
be".) Powell did, however, have a good point: why is Saddam blocking UN
inspections?
Now, we've heard Saddam's weak reasoning: the
inspection regime was completed. It may play in Baghdad, but nobody --
even those who oppose military intervention -- buys that line. Saddam
sounded even phonier than Smirk making campaign promises.
How much
of a danger is Saddam to America right now? Powell said he is a danger,
and becomes more dangerous "as he is able" to deliver weapons over longer
distances. No civilized leader, he added, wants to see him remain in
power.
True and true -- but tell me, Colin: how do these people
feel about the US going after Iraq?
Then Tony worked to make sure
it appeared Powell was "on the team" by quizzing him on the executive
branch's Iraq policy. Powell was given broad leeway to talk about the
Holy-Roller-in-Chief's "policy" with an emphasis on the goal being
disarmament of Iraq insofar as WMDs are concerned. Powell also paid lip
service to "consulting" our allies -- a not-so-subtle hint that Smirk may
move unilaterally, allies be damned. Tony, of course, pushed the notion
that the US has been in a state of war against Iraq for years. Powell then
previewed the Texas Dauphin's speech to the UN, saying that the Bogus
POTUS would point out that Saddam has ignored a slew of UN resolutions and
mandates.
Tony then turned to a report from one of Saddam Hussein's
mistresses, a woman who claims that the wily dictator had "contacts" with
Osama bin Laden. Powell wouldn't dismiss it. Is it possible that Saddam
has been supporting and working with Al Qaeda? Powell said the US cannot
make a definitive "smoking gun" determination.
Hey, guys -- why no
comment on Osama's having called Saddam a "bad" Muslim? What about
evidence that Osama's pals have been tied to domestic opponents of Saddam?
What about the fact that this hearsay from a mistress who may hold a
grudge is dubious at best?
Then Tony turned to Chimp-boy's critics,
notably James Baker having said that taking out Saddam will entail
occupation for perhaps a decade or more. Powell said he has tremendous
respect for Baker, but scenarios must be thought through completely, and
His Simian Majesty is considering all scenarios. Brent Scowcroft had said
taking on Saddam is at odds with the "war on terror"; naturally, Powell
fell back on claims that Saddam has WMDs.
There was some
back-and-forth about whether or not to involve Congress, and Powell talked
a good game about "consulting" Congress (Translation: if the pink-tutu
Democrats in the Senate actually do put up a fight, what the hell do we
care? Generalissimo Stupido Arbusto will plow ahead with a war
anyway!).
After the break, the greasiest neo-fascist weasel on
American television, our old pal Brit Hume, joined the questioning. Brit
started by asking about exactly how Saddam "threatens" us -- a setup
question to allow Powell to talk about Saddam having invaded Kuwait and
gassed Kurds, and speculating that he could do the same to us if he had
the means. Hume said that it is argued that Saddam would only use nukes if
attacked; Powell said that America does not want to face this decision
(translation: Smirk is on a mission from God). Hume asked about a "last
chance" for inspections, given that Cheney claims that they are a failure
and even dangerous; Powell gave a sort of 'aw shucks, he's just
demonstrating understandable skepticism' answer before saying that only a
more robust and intrusive inspection regime will be acceptable. Hume,
playing the skeptic, claimed Saddam would say no because we want him out;
Powell said we want him out (well, he said "regime change" and "new
regime" over and over).
Then Tony chimed in about a "time line",
sounding eager to let the bombing and invasion begin. Powell essentially
said that we have to take our time and act carefully -- but with a lot of
"by the end of the year" blather.
Tony began talking about a
so-called "British dossier" )Tony neglected to specify it's from a
right-wing think tank) stating that Saddam has tons of VX nerve gas.
(Really? How accurate is the dossier? Close to the much-touted UN report
on Saddam's "nukes" [http://www.msnbc.com/news/802167.asp] that turned out to
be dead wrong?) Powell admitted that the message he is getting is
speculative, but we are willing to put our cards on the table to play for
moving immediately against Saddam.
Tony then talked about
intelligence photos at a phosphorus plant suggesting movement on a nuclear
program -- but NEGLECTED to mention that even the White House has backed
of on these photos being evidence of anything [http://www.msnbc.com/news/802167.asp].
Hume tried
to corner Powell on how to handle skeptics at the UN. Powell said the
General Assembly will hear Snippy's argument. Tony said there's an
expectation by a number of foreign leaders that "the gates of hell would
open" and/or the US would take out Saddam Hussein. Powell said the
international community is eager to act. (Huh? that's not what they're
saying publicly!) Can the Iraqi opposition put together a democratic
government? With the international community, there is the "promise" of a
better government. "Sure. Why not?"
Powell then bolstered the
floundering Junior by calling him a great commander-in-chief who allows
his team to debate the difficult issues. "Then he makes the decision and
we execute it."
That last sentence merely reinforces Mike Hersh's
report on George the Boy "President" being out of control. Yeah -- he'll
listen, and ignore the arguments, because Elwood Blues Bush is " on a
mission from God."
Finally, Tony confronted Powell with rumors he
will quit. Powell testily dismissed the "speculation." Tony said something
about reports Powell would quit in a huff; Powell laughed it
off.
Lord only knows what Snippy is doing to keep Powell from
bolting the madhouse -- or maybe Powell realizes that he needs to stay on
if only to tamp down Shrub's chickenhawk enablers: "Uncle" Dick Cheney,
Don "Doctor Strangelove" Rumsfeld, Paul "Daisy Cutter" Wolfowitz and
Richard "Invade the Temple Mount" Perle.
-- JJ
Balzer
McLaugh-In: A quick peek at the madhouse (no, not
Junior's West Wing, that other Beltway asylum)
We're not going
to detail the entire McLaugh-In grope, but there are a slew of moments
worth looking at -- most notably John McLaughlin's critical assessment of
the war on terrorism.
Invading Saddamville was NOT on the top of
Bellowing John's agenda -- in fact, his decision to focus on the war on
terrorist thugs nearly one year on as "issue one" suggests that he may be
the sanest of the Beltway bloviators this weekend. His key talking points:
we don't have Osama or Mullah Omar; Al Qaeda is active in 90 countries;
there has been no military action to rout their forces in such places as
Somalia, Yemen, Georgia (no, not Bob Barr country, the former Soviet
state), Indonesia and other nations.
The panel seemed to be taking
a "these things take time", except for Jim Warren, who dared call it a
"dismal failure" -- 1200 in custody and no prosecutions and not one clue
as to how the attacks of last September 11 were orchestrated.
John
McLaughlin continued, turning to a rather bleak assessment of national
security progress since Sept. 11 by National Journal (whose editor,
ultraconservative Mike Barone, a McLaugh-In regular, was a panelist this
week). The overall grade from the magazine was a "C" -- with many crucial
areas of security getting a D or F. The article seemed engineered to
bolster Smirk's dream of a massive "homeland security" police apparatus --
but again Warren scored by noting that many of these steps need to be
taken at the local level, implementing them will be costly, and state and
local revenues are down.
So what grade does the Smirk cadre get on
homeland security?
Mike Barone: C
Eleanor Clift: C-; she cited loss
of civil liberties
Tony Blankley: A-
Jim Warren: D
We never
heard John's answer because the panel had a shouting match over Smirk
having dropped the ball on the Israeli-Palestinian mess.
We
expected John's second issue to be Iraq.
What we did not expect is
the manner in which he framed it: "Wag the dog redux!"
Yeah,
baby!
John asked if all the talk of taking out Saddam's
(not-yet-there) nukes was not "settling an old score [and] wagging the
dog", as Bob Scheer wrote earlier this week. John even played Don Lufkin's
comments on CNNfn -- Lufkin actually did the unthinkable (at least in the
"defer to the West Wing Ignoramus and his minions" never-never-land of the
Sabbath Gasbags) and said the whole Iraq mess smacked of diverting
attention from corporate crimes and a soft economy!
We could
practically smell Dick Cheney's defibrillator kicking in as the clip
played.
Eleanor said that without this "war," Smirk's residency...
ahem, presidency would be in tatters. Mike and John spun the situation as
a "war, not an election, strategy."
Final prediction: will Congress
pass a war authorization before it adjourns?
Mike: Yes
Eleanor: No,
based on UN-related issues
Tony: Yes
Jim: Yes, because Democrats
will cave in
John: No -- Eleanor is right!
Translation: Little
George is in big political trouble, and he's overplaying his Saddam card.
Great Roland Evans' ghost -- John McLaughlin has gone coherent!
--
Dave "Doctor" Gonzo
CNN Late Edition
Before Wolf
Blitzer interviewed Condi Rice, CNN shilled for Team Smirk with a "news
update" touting evidence that "Saddam Hussein is trying to build an atomic
bomb" based on attempts to obtain that special aluminum tubing. Kelly
Wallace did admit that there is a full-court press by Chimpy's Crew to
take on Saddam -- but then she claimed it is "resonating" with the
American people.
What? Is she kidding? Polls show that the message
is NOT resonating -- and his foreign policy F scores are slipping! Will
Kelly be mediawhoresonline.com's new poster girl?
Wolf first
confronted Condi about whether Iraq is a clear and present danger; Rice,
who spent most of the interview repeating the same spin point mantras
(using a mix of facts, semi-facts and speculation in the "if you say it
enough, people will believe it" propaganda tactic), said Iraq is a danger
to the region and our interests; Saddam has ignored, flaunted and
abrogated agreements with other nations and the UN; we have evidence he is
trying to construct WMDs; he won't let inspectors in; we should not wait
for 100% "surety" that he is able to deliver a weapon to
America.
Wolf asked Condi for comment on Iraqi foreign minister
Tariq Aziz's denial that the nation has WMDs; in so many words, Condi gave
a meandering answer painting him as a liar -- and ended by calling him a
"liar" outright.
When Wolf played Scott Ritter's comment to the
Iraqi Assembly that there is no evidence of WMDs or a threat to the US,
Rice said the case is being made by "independent analysts", Saddam has
attacked his neighbors and his own people (Cheney and Powell used the same
point emphatically elsewhere on the dial), pays for terrorists and tried
to assassinate a former president (the first of at least three times she'd
push that point); she added that Article VII of the UN Charter "has teeth"
and "allows" the US to attack. (Are you sure about that, Condi? That's not
the way many nations and diplomats read Article VII.)
Wolf did the
Misadministration's work by tying that comment to Smirk's bellicose "first
strike doctrine" speech at West Point. Condi said the burden of proof is
on Saddam to prove he has disarmed. How close is Iraq to developing a
nuclear capability? Condi said he is actively pursuing a nuclear weapon,
and the aluminum tubes he was trying to obtain are only suitable for
making a nuclear weapon.
Her hot spin line: "We don't want the
smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud." (Look for that one to show up on the
nightly news.)
She also pushed the assertion that it is not
incumbent on the US to prove Saddam has WMDs but on Saddam to prove he is
complying with international law -- and at length redundantly argued
Saddam is a threat.
What will Smirk tell the UN? Condi said that
the problem is not an absence of resolutions -- sixteen of them are being
ignored. So will there be a last ultimatum? Condi would not give a yes or
no, saying that the defiance must stop. (Preemptively, Condi?) She also
said that Saddam lost a war and the subsequent inspection regime Saddam
signed onto was aimed at disarmament; "Nobody is going to negotiate
anything with this regime."
Now hold it right there, Condi! You're
saying that it doesn't matter what he offers, and your boss will do as we
damn well please and may just damn well invade even if he allows
inspections -- and that point alone gives Saddam a reason to say the US
will not negotiate with him in good faith. Rice proved herself an utter
fool with that provocative comment.
Does Saddam have weaponizable
missiles? Condi admitted that there has been no way outside of
intelligence means to know if he does, though he has a history of using
chemical weapons and developing biological weapons.
Condi then
turned to the other big Team Smirk spin point: "blackmail" -- Saddam will
blackmail the region. (Huh? So IF he has chemical weapons, he must be
blackmailing the region NOW -- talk about a disconnect).
Following
the break, Condi dredged up more excuses to get Saddam -- including a
"bipartisan" resolution for Iraq to become a democracy back in 1998
(whoop-de-doo). Wolf touched on Junior's many phone calls to world leaders
-- and, short of Tony Blair, their unanimous no to invasion. Condi put
some lipstick on the pig: they all consider Saddam a problem and a threat,
she said, and nobody goes lightly to use of the military -- including this
"president."
Well, that's not what OUR sources tell us, Condi. We
believe their assessment of Little George as an out-of-control,
holy-roller zealot with one goal on his agenda: get rid of that sumvabitch
Saddam.
Can the US tie Saddam to the September 11th attacks? Condi
said there is no such evidence -- then said that this is setting the bar
"too high", given that Saddam tried to off Poppy, pays off suicide
bombers, is acquiring WMDs, and we cannot allow extremism and high-tech
weapons to mix. (Classic Condi -- deflect from the point of the question,
repeat the spin points as again and again as if they are sufficient to
"prove" a point -- a classic variation on the "big lie"
technique.)
Condi then said that Saddam wants to have the US "at
bay" by threatening to use WMDs against us.
This was way beyond the
pale. She thinks that Saddam has never heard of "mutually-assured
destruction?" A first strike by Saddam would welcome massive retaliation
by the US -- and very possibly from many of our allies.
When talk
turned to Afghanistan and Hamed Karzai, we pretty much tuned
out.
It was all pretty depressing. Condi was sounding as delusional
and dangerous as her boss.
Had we a president with any brains or
integrity -- one who believes that the buck stops in the Oval Office, one
intent on taking on Al Qaeda and Saddam the right way -- the first thing
said president would have done in the wake of last year's attacks on New
York and Washington would have been to fire the ass of the people that
ignored Bill Clinton's and Sandy Berger's warnings that Al Qaeda was the
NUMBER ONE THREAT to national security.
Number one on the pink slip
list should have been Condi Rice. Her record shows she completely dropped
the ball on the number one national security issue -- along with a number
of other idiots in the intelligence community who left America
vulnerable.
But no.
The incompetent zealot Lord Smirkleroy
is so eager to take out Saddam that he decided to retain the services of
Doctor Dilettante.
God help us all.
-- JJ
Balzer
JJ Balzer is a former television news producer. He
lives in New York City.
Dave "Doctor" Gonzo is a maverick record
producer. He lives in New York City.
Copyright © 2002,
2001, 2000, 1999, 1998, 1997, 1996, American Politics Journal
Publications, Inc.
Reprinted from American Politics
Journal:
http://www.americanpolitics.com/
20020908punditpap.html
|
| "Pundit Pap:
'Weapons of mass distraction'" | Login/Create Account | 2
comments |
|
Threshold
-1012345 No CommentsNestedFlatThread Oldest FirstNewest
FirstHighest Scores First
|
| The comments
are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their
content. |
|
Agree, Condi gives bad advice. (Score: 1)
by
lindagun on Monday, September 09 @ 13:22:28 EDT
(User
Info) |
| JJ Balzer is right on target
here. Condi has dropped the ball repeatedly. More accurately she is out in
left field when the play is to the
right. |
[ To reply
to this message, you must first logon or register ]
|
Re: Pundit Pap: 'Weapons of mass distraction'
(Score: 1)
by gorewon on Monday, September 09 @ 15:58:17
EDT
(User
Info) |
| Generalisimo W. Bunnypants is
going to do whatever it takes to gain supreme control of Bunnyland. His
foreign and domestic policies are insane and tanking, and he NEEDS this
war on Iraq in the worst way, i.e., wag-the-dog.
|
[ To reply to this
message, you must first logon or
register ]
<A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.
Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
<A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>
http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
<A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Om
|
pix.gif