Last Refuge Of Scoundrels
Tweet
There’s no connection between Saddam and Al Qaeda, but Bush’s numbers are in the outhouse and he needs something — anything — to muddy the waters. So you selectively release a bunch of documents of dubious (at best) authenticity written by people nobody knows that says maybe Iraq was connected to Al Qaeda. Up next: photoshopped images of Hussein and Bin Laden’s tropical vacations!
20 Responses to “Last Refuge Of Scoundrels”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
I thought patriotism was the last refuge of a scoundrel, not making shit up to justify several thousand corpses sacrificed to the military-industrial complex?
Oh no! The dubious authenticity meme… Where was that during the RatherGate kerfluffle?
There are thousands of documents.
This time, I strongly recommend you bide your time.
http://fmso.leavenworth.army.mil/products-docex.htm
If there were ANY, and I mean Any chance these documents
could tie Saddam to AQ, do you think Richard Perle and Associates
would have to work hard to get them released?
If you think they wouldn’t be trottin ‘em out with confetti choked
parades of self-congratulation, I’ve got a bridge in Brooklyn
I can let you have cheap.
The dubious authenticity meme& Where was that during the RatherGate kerfluffle?
That was CBS, not ABC. Maybe they like corroboration better over there.
Frank, if the administration thought this was authentic, why would they wait nearly four years to let us in on the secret?
The contempt this administration has for the intelligence of the American people is beyond measure.
Makes you get nostalgic for a good ol’ Orange Alert, the erstwhile strategy for propping up Bush’s numbers.
You mean like the 120 redacted pages in the Clinton Justice Department Barrett report scandal….
Seems like the dems are awfully good and preventing the release of embarrasing records based on their past history.
Who’s been trying desperately to sell to the American people the idea that al quaeda and Iraq were not connected?
The question to ask is not, “Why didn’t the Republicans?” We know why they wanted to.
The question is, “Who benefits if they are not released?”
That’s who would have fought every effort to have them released.
Heh. I propose the Goatchowder’s Law– a corollary to Godwin’s Law–, which is that all debates continue until someone mentions Clinton (or blowjobs), at which point the first person who does so loses, and the debate is over.
You mean like the 120 redacted pages in the Clinton Justice Department Barrett report scandal& .
Who is this Clinton you speak of? The name sound familiar, and yet…
If you leftists are so proud of clinton, why do you get your panties in a twist everytime someone mentions him?
And by selective, do you mean they only released the documents that had been translated and declassified?
Or do you have some evidence that they are being hand picked for release by, I don’t know, the Barvarian Illumunati again?
It’s that the OCD compels you to connect Clinton with every discussion.
That’s Sen. Clinton he’s talking about, not Pres. Or is she out of bounds, too?
“I strongly recommend you bide your time”
They’ve had three years to make the case.
There is no case.
I meant before you dismiss the value of these documents… There’s plenty of time between now and NOV 2006 to ruin any chance the Dems had of gaining any House or Senate seats.
As they say in the British military, “WAAAIT for it!”
And the hits just keep on comin’!:
http://tinyurl.com/hs47w
We know that the Bush Administration has no evidence of Hussein/bin Laden ties. How do we know?
Hussein is in American custody and on trial. If the Bush Administration had any evidence of Saddam Hussein/Usama bin Laden ties, wouldn’t they charge Hussein with complicity in 9/11? I know I sure as hell would. I’d put him on the stand and force him to confront such evidence. That after controlling Iraq for THREE YEARS and having access to the Iraqi Government’s archives the Bush Administration has yet to produce any evidence against Saddam Hussein in this area pretty much proves the obvious: Saddam Hussein’s government and al-Qaeda had no ties.
You just pulled a switcheroo — unconsciously,maybe?
Hussein/bin Laden ties
wouldn t they charge Hussein with complicity in 9/11?
Saddam Hussein s government and al-Qaeda had no ties.
Three different things.
Also, where were these documents?
Why weren’t they released?
Who benefits from releasing them?
Who benefits from keeping them a secret?
If they back up Bush, why keep them a secret until now? (If you were Bush, and you had control of the documents)
If they make Bush look bad, why release them now (If you’re Bush, and you have the control of the documents)?
It is is fairly obvious, but not conclusive, that the Democrats did everything they could to keep the documents under wraps, because they bolster his case, but they couldn’t prevent their publication any longer.
The Democrats are screwed.
And even more Saddam docs:
http://www.ctc.usma.edu/harmony_docs.asp