Video: When believing Saddam had WMDs was cool

posted at 10:32 am on November 15, 2006 by Allahpundit

Red meat. It’s what’s for breakfast.

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

GW Bush made them say that.

I’m not sure how since he’s a stupid, studdering, retarded chimp… but he did. Somehow.

Right?

Hoodlumman on November 15, 2006 at 10:38 AM

Vindicated.

JamesVersusEveryone on November 15, 2006 at 10:40 AM

My network administrator won’t let me watch youtube =(.

Theworldisnotenough on November 15, 2006 at 10:41 AM

The Low Spark of High Heeled Boys? Won’t Get Fooled Again would have been a better musical choice.

Or, maybe “The Way We Were”

This is very nicely done, and should be disseminated widely.

Pablo on November 15, 2006 at 10:41 AM

Can’t we just all get along. Can’t people change their mind. I am sure they said they are sorry.

Wade on November 15, 2006 at 10:46 AM

“I can support the President in an effort against Saddam Hussein because I think it’s in the long term interest of our national security.”

What has changed, Shrillery?

Where’s Waffles and algore?

Pablo on November 15, 2006 at 10:46 AM

End of Sarcasm

Wade on November 15, 2006 at 10:47 AM

That’s exactly what upsets me about my lefty/Bush hater friends… They can’t remember this stuff, at all. They refuse to believe that it happened, and they argue the same old tired “Bush lied” crap. They must get their perspective from the MSM…

Otherwise they are great people and wonderful friends. Very confusing…

RalphyBoy on November 15, 2006 at 10:55 AM

It was ok to say all of that when the president had a D next to his name and wouldn’t do anything about the situation. But once the new president has an R next to his name we should suddenly develope amnesia before we do something about those bio/chems, which somehow “don’t exist” now.

Suggested reading for Hotair posters:

“Saddam’s Secrets” by Georges Sada.

Tony737 on November 15, 2006 at 10:57 AM

Funny how no one wants to talk about Geoges Sada. Good post. Thanks for the vid.

One Angry Christian on November 15, 2006 at 11:05 AM

So what? They were for the war before they were against it. They just happened to let GW do the dirty work and now they hope to get the credit.

bloggless on November 15, 2006 at 11:07 AM

Guess you won’t see this on cnn or the networks.Why didn’t the republicans come out with something like this a few years ago?! Am I missing something??

SAM 1X on November 15, 2006 at 11:11 AM

Ouch… thats gonna leave a mark…

Romeo13 on November 15, 2006 at 11:12 AM

Great post, AllahP. “Time” is a strange and wondrous thing. Not the magazine, of course.

hillbillyjim on November 15, 2006 at 11:16 AM

Where was this before the election?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on November 15, 2006 at 11:17 AM

I que…naaahh….nevermind.

hillbillyjim on November 15, 2006 at 11:20 AM

I’m quite surprised that YouTube hasn’t banned that video or at least flagged it as “inappropriate.” any guesses on how long that will take??

pullingmyhairout on November 15, 2006 at 11:29 AM

Allah,
Where is this video on YouTube? I want to make a copy before YouTube takes it off the net for a ‘terms of use violation’.

gmaninatl on November 15, 2006 at 11:30 AM

Every single American should be forced to watch this brief clip before commenting on the battle in Iraq and the wider IFW.

12thman on November 15, 2006 at 11:37 AM

… was cool.

Clever…Time keeps on slippin’…

hillbillyjim on November 15, 2006 at 11:37 AM

is this deja vue? i know that i have seen this before, months ago!

mfnorman on November 15, 2006 at 11:51 AM

MSM=network of Winston Smiths

The media is in the position of Winston Smith in 1984, the man who worked for the Ministry of Truth where the past was expunged and made to fit the relevant spin of the day. And if someone should ask if that was what really happened in the past, no-one could remember things occuring any differently than what they were being told in the present. This is the world as we know it today in America 2006 for way too many people.
Only the blogosphere and conservative talk radio are here to prevent a total erasure of our past history and to remind those who care that it was not always thus. Chilling.

Jen the Neocon on November 15, 2006 at 11:57 AM

Where is this video on YouTube? I want to make a copy before YouTube takes it off the net for a ‘terms of use violation’.

As always, you click on the video and it takes you to the page.

DaveS on November 15, 2006 at 12:08 PM

Fauxoaudioism!

This is an outrage! These pillars of government would never say such things and later change their opinions for political gain versus public safety!

Well…. They would but they would never admit to doing so because they never did and that is why it never happened the way it could have if it were true but they could if they would but they can’t so they won’t….

The room is spinning.

Fargus on November 15, 2006 at 12:31 PM

Dhimms have selective memory.

infidel on November 15, 2006 at 12:40 PM

Seems a little hollow today, doesn’t it?

Jaibones on November 15, 2006 at 12:54 PM

Still, crazy after all these years.

Jaibones on November 15, 2006 at 12:57 PM

It’s all photoshoped, voice overs, sock puppets.

Da Dems are too clever to dose dat.

Kini on November 15, 2006 at 12:59 PM

Hey everyone, don’t just sit there. Digg this story. Let’s see what the lefties of diggnation have to say to this video.

Bryan on November 15, 2006 at 1:12 PM

Does this mean the Dems were lying then, or are lying now?

Halley on November 15, 2006 at 2:09 PM

What someone needs to put together is a video with each of the main players in the democratic party, with their pre and post comments. This is a start, but is one side of the equation only.

Why was this not out before the election? Why not the Murtha video? Why not the Abramoff testimony about 6-8 corrupt Democratic leaders? Why not the Rumsfeld resignation in August/September? Did the white house REALLY want to win the house? Or did they want to pass a legacy-making amnesty bill so much more than they wanted to keep the house? I gotta wonder.

trantor on November 15, 2006 at 2:15 PM

What is the point of this? Taking solace in “well other people were wrong too”. Great. This will help us out in Iraq.

When you plum out of ideas on how to go forward, dwell on the past. It’s fruitless, but beats the hell out of dealing with stark reality.

honora on November 15, 2006 at 2:17 PM

Honora, the video points out that several prominent Democrats have been lying about the war to satisfy people like yourself. They were either lying before 2003 and therefore Saddam was innocent, or they have been lying when our troops are in the field enforcing the policies these Democrats advocated before 2003 but are lying about now. Take your pick. Either way, you support liars.

You can’t say the same of Bush, though, since he said the same things about Saddam’s WMDs before and after 2003.

Bryan on November 15, 2006 at 2:30 PM

honora, the point is that you people are flippers, like your great leader, John Kerry or they are liars, as in “libs lied, kids died”. It also illustrates that GW is a man who beleives in his mission to protect the citizens of this country.

bloggless on November 15, 2006 at 2:42 PM

Allah,
Where is this video on YouTube? I want to make a copy before YouTube takes it off the net for a ‘terms of use violation’.

gmaninatl on November 15, 2006 at 11:30 AM

gmanitatl,

Click on the image itself above and it’ll open up the YouTube link and start it playing. Let it completely download and play. Then open up your cache and look for the flv file.

I’ve been looking for this exact kind of video showing the dems in agreement with W well before the invasion of Iraq.

The US policy for regime change in Iraq was set during the Clinton Administration, and I believe it was exactly the correct policy for the US to follow and enact.

Slick and Co. were right about saddam. They’re just turning cowardly now that things are rough. We need to see this through. Running away will do incalculable damage to the US. Real, quanitifiable damage.

Cut and run is a disasterous, foolish, and dangerous idea. You think it’s bad now? The troubles in Iraq will pale by comparison if we force our Military to tuck tail and come home.

We do not lack the ability and power to win this fight. We only need the strong resolve of the American People. The US Military is more than doing their part, and all Americans should be damned grateful for their service and sacrifice.

You people who disrespect the Military disgust me. Before all this is over, you’re going to be thankful they’re between you and the jihadis. Mark my word.

techno_barbarian on November 15, 2006 at 2:44 PM

What is the point of this?

It’s the point Bush spoke quite clearly on the video about people rewriting history to suit their political purposes.

I thought it was awfully clear.

Pablo on November 15, 2006 at 2:55 PM

maybe this should go “viral”?

bloggless on November 15, 2006 at 2:56 PM

A politician telling the truth in either party would be a good thing.

But I stopped beliving in the tooth fairy, easter bunny, and santa claus a long time ago.

Kini on November 15, 2006 at 3:09 PM

You can’t say the same of Bush, though, since he said the same things about Saddam’s WMDs before and after 2003.

Bush has admitted there were no WMDs. Which is water under the bridge. I believe there was cherry picking of intelligence, but let’s stop picking that particular scab. Bush has a couple of years left as Commander in Chief, a position that really requires some forward thinking, versus rehashing the past.

honora on November 15, 2006 at 3:38 PM

Am I missing something? Didn’t the RNC produce this before the 2004 election? I see the end is Bush speaking in 2005 and this does appear to be a bit of a lengthier version, but I’m pretty sure the meat and bones of this video has been around for some time. Ian (if you’re reading this thread) didn’t you post the original video at ETL way back when?

By the way, as a resource for everyone, I enjoy this list of Kerry’s WMD quotes dating back to 1990. Most of these aren’t the usual ones we read in the “Dems on WMDs” lists. And if that wasn’t enough, we have Clinton’s Dec. 16, 1998 speech/case for Iraq’s WMDs before he attacked (a month after making regime change our policy by the way). If you were to (as I once did in a blog post) replace all instances of Clinton with Bush, you would think it was the current POTUS in the lead up to this war.

RightWinged on November 15, 2006 at 3:45 PM

Bush has admitted there were no WMDs. Which is water under the bridge. I believe there was cherry picking of intelligence, but let’s stop picking that particular scab. Bush has a couple of years left as Commander in Chief, a position that really requires some forward thinking, versus rehashing the past.

honora on November 15, 2006 at 3:38 PM

Get the hell out of here with your “forward thinking”… The Dems have done nothing but hammer the WMD thing. “George Bush betrayed his country” “We were told lie, after lie, after lie” “Mislead us in to a war…” “Concocted a war for political gain”, and hundreds if not thousands of other soundbytes of Dems harping on WMDs right up through ’til today, so give me a break.

As for cherrypicked intelligence… that is the point of this video (for me anyway)… Even if we were to accept claims by Dems that “Bush saw different intelligence”… Dems were making the case all through the 90s! Bush had no influence of that intel! So you can say you “believe” it was cherrypicked all you want… but not only is that retarded, it doesn’t matter what you “believe”.

I will continue to say that if WMDs had been found, the Dems would have nothing right now, NOTHING. They wouldn’t have picked up any seats, because the American people would recognize that we needed to go there. While I maintain that they were there, I will set that aside for the moment to stick with concrete evidence. We ALL thought they were there. Worst case scenario is that the intel was bad. Why should Bush alone be punished for that? If the chemical or bilogical weapons we all believed were there made it over here and killed 10,000 people, Dems would have screamed that we should have taken Iraq. They’d have said “look, we argued the case all through the 90s!” and you effing know it!

The problem is a majority of the country has been lead to believe that Bush either lied or mislead us. The facts don’t support that, but good ‘ol mainstream media doesn’t let that stop her! Facts are no obstacle for the media, and they’ve managed to fool everyone. I recently said this in another thread, I would bet that 9 out of 10 people wouldn’t have a clue that the Dems ever made these statements.

So back to the point… Everyone (even on my side) wants to talk about “move on” from WMDs all the time… but I can’t, because I know that it is what is at the root of all of this. If not for the WMDs, the Dems would have NOTHING right now.

RightWinged on November 15, 2006 at 4:04 PM

So back to the point… Everyone (even on my side) wants to talk about “move on” from WMDs all the time… but I can’t, because I know that it is what is at the root of all of this. If not for the WMDs, the Dems would have NOTHING right now.

RightWinged on November 15, 2006 at 4:04 PM

Perhaps a nice sampler with this embroidered on it for Christmas? Would that make it all better? I haven’t done any needlepoint since I had babies, but I’m willing to give it a go….

Let’s assume there were WMDs found. How would the situation in Iraq be any different today?

honora on November 15, 2006 at 4:13 PM

Let’s assume there were WMDs found. How would the situation in Iraq be any different today?

The Dem Libs with their attacks on Bush like “Bush lied, people died” and all the overhype of other Leftist lies like Abu Ghraib and Gitmo, etc. etc. let the enemy know that our President, our troops and our Congress, as well as the American people, could be won over with propaganda, lies and domestic political attacks much more than by guns and bombs in Iraq, although those help at our election times.

You Dhimms just don’t get it, do you? (Or do you?) I think you ginned up these lies about the Bush Administration on purpose for your own Leftist political gain, but that’s me.
So how would it be different? Iraq would be a lot quieter and well on the way on the paved road to democracy instead of the rocky road of IEDs full of both Sunni and Shi’a killers ratcheting up to civil war because the Dems are talking about withdrawal.

Jen the Neocon on November 15, 2006 at 4:33 PM

Next time the it would be nice if they included the WMD that were actually found in Iraq. Where was this all Summer and especially before the elections?

PinkyBigglesworth on November 15, 2006 at 4:39 PM

Cherry picking. Water under the bridge. Cliches that don’t cover up the fact that Bush’s case for war in Iraq was nearly identical to Clinton’s case for attacking Iraq in 1998 and 2000, and identical to Al Gore’s case for attacking Iraq as late as 2002 (before he flipped to the anti-war side without explaining himself). As Bush’s and Clinton’s (and Albright’s, and Kerry’s, and Kennedy’s, and Edwards’…) cases for war were identical, how was cherry picking of the intel even possible? You as a liberal should ask John Kerry why he talked up the Saddam threat all through the 1990s only to turn on the troops and the war once it got a little tough. But you liberals won’t ask that question, because the answer says more about yourselves than it says even about the people you support and why you support them.

You liberals make no sense. You can’t talk beyond cliches and hackneyed, unserious catchphrases. And now you’ve got the Congress. So we’re well and truly screwed.

Bryan on November 15, 2006 at 4:45 PM

Does this mean the Dem’s were lying then, or are lying now?

Dem’s don’t lie only Republicans lie. Dem’s have progressive intellectual changes in direction.

Wade on November 15, 2006 at 4:56 PM

WE, the RIGHT ones, LOST THE ELECTION RECENTLY, IS THAT CORRECT?
I’m at a loss to explain what has, and is, happening.

And don’t forget the TIMING. #S*$^&#(*u !!!

Bryan, these creeps are the L&D culture (libs/dems) more accurately, culture of Lies and Deciet.

Monologuei-sts ; All talk, no truth, won’t listen = screwed.

shooter on November 15, 2006 at 5:08 PM

Let’s assume there were WMDs found. How would the situation in Iraq be any different today?

honora on November 15, 2006 at 4:13 PM

Aside from the fact that you ignored most of my points… you have to be kidding when you ask that question? I could repeat myself, but you won’t get it anyway. I’ll just say this. If they were found, that means Bush was right (and I’d give a big eff you to every Dem who jumped back on board saying “we always knew it!”). I can’t say if the situation on the ground would be any different, but it would regain our authority because we would have been right all along (again, I still think we were, even in the worst case scenario of bad intel). But the point is, Americans wouldn’t have such a bad taste in their mouth if the majority weren’t WRONGLY under the impression that Bush lied/mislead. They would have a lot more patience. But even without that patience and if they were still pushing for a “way out”, they wouldn’t have voted Dem. Again, this can all be traced back to the case for WMDs that libs and the media has been very successful at leading people to believe was a lie.

RightWinged on November 15, 2006 at 5:29 PM

Aside from the fact that you ignored most of my points… you have to be kidding when you ask that question? I could repeat myself, but you won’t get it anyway. I’ll just say this. If they were found, that means Bush was right (and I’d give a big eff you to every Dem who jumped back on board saying “we always knew it!”). I can’t say if the situation on the ground would be any different, but it would regain our authority because we would have been right all along (again, I still think we were, even in the worst case scenario of bad intel). But the point is, Americans wouldn’t have such a bad taste in their mouth if the majority weren’t WRONGLY under the impression that Bush lied/mislead. They would have a lot more patience. But even without that patience and if they were still pushing for a “way out”, they wouldn’t have voted Dem. Again, this can all be traced back to the case for WMDs that libs and the media has been very successful at leading people to believe was a lie.

RightWinged on November 15, 2006 at 5:29 PM

Which, at the end of the day, is all that matters. Get some perspective.

honora on November 16, 2006 at 1:35 PM