Saturday, October 02, 2004

Newsweek displays their bias

this Powerline post details some further evidence that Newsweek should be stripped of their name which is a mockery of objective "news". I'll try and hunt down a more direct source of this information and post when I find it. If anyone already knows, e-mail me or post a comment

Power Line: The Comeback Is Launched

Democrats are whiners...party of "unity"? As if...This is the party that hates anybody that does not agree with them and counters every attempt at civilized conversation...slams them as "bigots", "racists", "Fascists". Have you ever heard a Liberal back up any of their arguements with actual...y'know, facts? Have you ever heard one admit that they were wrong about something? anything?

Some Facts on post-Saddam Iraq:
-Over 400,000 kids have up-to-date immunizations
-Over 4.5 million people have clean drinking water for the first time ever in Iraq
-100% of the hospitals are open and fully staffed, compared to 35% before the war
-Elections are taking place in every major city, and city councils are in place
-Girls are allowed to attend school
-Over 400,000 people have telephones for the first time ever

3 Comments:

At Saturday, October 02, 2004 9:36:00 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here's a fact: Iraq had no connection to Al Qaida.

Here's another fact: Iraq had no WMD.

How about dem facts?

 
At Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:29:00 PM, Blogger Mike M said...

It cannot be proven as fact that Saddam had no connection to Osama and his ilk, there simply is no evidence to support that conclusion. If you have some feel free to post links to it, or some other documented reference. What the 9/11 commission report actually said, if you read the report, is that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 in and of itself, meaning that Iraq wasn't involved with that operation. I'll give some examples:

-Page 66: "According to one report, Saddam Hussein's efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin. In mid-1998, the situation reversed, it was Iraq that reportedly tood the initiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United STates, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, and Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin." -- There's more, but go read it.

-Page 134, section 4.4 "[Richard Clarke] wrote Deputy National Security Advisor Donald Kerrick that one reliable source reported Bin Ladin's having met with Iraqi officials, who "may have offered him asylum." Other intelligence sources say that some Taliban leaders...had urged Bin Ladin to go to Iraq. If Bin Ladin actually moved to Iraq, wrote Clarke, his network would be at Saddam Hussein's service, and it would be 'virtually impossible' to find him."

On page 334 (section 10.3) we find what people usually cite when they say Iraq had no connection, but if read in context, the passage, "The Memo found no 'compelling case' that Iraq had either planned or perpetrated the attacks." The memo in question is limited in scope to the 9/11 attacks themselves, and does not deal with Saddam's tolerance, cooperation, aid, funding, etc with al Qaeda.

Once again, it cannot be proven as fact that Saddam didn't have weapons, the fact that we have not found large stockpiles does NOT mean they weren't there. There are three possibilities: One, that he had them and hid them (not terribly hard to do in a country the size of California). Two, that he didn't have any (but wait, he USED some against his own people). Now, speaking of pre-war inspections, if he really had nothing to hide, why did he defy the UN? No matter how much you want something to be true (ie, Bush lied) you still have to square with the facts.

Remember, absence of proof is NOT proof of absence. In 99% of situations, the simplest answer that fits the facts is the correct one.

 
At Saturday, October 02, 2004 10:34:00 PM, Blogger Mike M said...

The third possibility that I refered to, but neglected to mention is that since we know Saddam had the capability to make WMD's it's possible he only kept a very small stockpile, or none at all, and that his dodging with the inspectors was to cover up the fact that he could and was making them.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home


FREE Hit Counters!