If the libs wont believe GW maybe they will believe their favorite son.

Ain’t that a b!tch. hehe

Thanks for pointing this out, berg.

Interesting. I thought they would have found something by now, but OTOH they had ten years to hide stuff.

nice one goldberg.

and warhorse- they had 10 years to hide them in the greatest hiding place in the world- an utterly amazing expanse of desert. It dont get no better than that when you wanna hide stuff…

It’s all those silly conspiracy theorists, who apparently attach themselves to the Dean camp if they even care to attach to a major party (as opposed to, say, Ralph Nader or some version of the Workers Socialist Party), who refuse to think and persist in believing Bush “knew” there were no WMDs but went in anyway for oil or to benefit defense contractors, depending on the specific Kook with whom one is conversing.

It’s good to see this. Perhaps now the conspiracy theorists will acknowledge that perhaps the CIA, the same entity which completely failed to anticipate the collapse of the Soviet Union, might have not supplied Bush with an open-and-shut case that there were not WMDs. Perhaps we could have had an intelligence failure. Perhaps, even, it was logical to assume from all of Hussein’s noncompliance that he might be hiding something.

Anyway, thanks for illuminating this Goldberg.

I find it interesting that Bill Clinton would come forward with this information. He is a very sly individual, what do you think he could be up to?

My guess is that any information like this that makes President Bush look good, harms the democratic nominees chances of winning in Novemebr. This, in turn, clears the way for a democrat such as Hillary Clinton to run for the top job in 2008 since there will be no sitting president at that time if Bush wins a second term!

Just one possibilty, would love to hear others.

ZEB, Clinton has ALWAYS maintained that Saddam had them, from just before the Lewinsky situation up until the invasion of Iraq.


Yes I think you are right about that. I also think mentioning it is still strange at this time.

This is a conspiracy being put forth by the warmongering capitalists that own Yahoo who stand the most to gain from Bush remaining in office, as he only makes the rich richer and the poor poorer.

He’s probably mentioning it because the Carnegie report just came out, which suggested that ideology inflated the same facts that existed before 9/11, and he was asked about it.


Yes, that could be why he is mentioning it. Knowing that he is a political animal however, he could be mentioning it for political reasons.