Hmm I'm not sure what you're smoking but it must be good cause its killing tons of your brain cells. Let me show you why: You wrote
"As the Senate Intelligence Committee found in July, 2004 the director of Oak Ridge's Field Intelligence Element said "the vast majority of scientists and nuclear experts at the DOE and the National Labs did not agree with the CIA's analysis."

But what it actually says to the very link you posted: Most agencies assess that Iraq's aggressive pursuit of high-strength aluminum tubes provides compelling evidence that Saddam is attempting to reconstitute a uranium enrichment effort for Baghdad's nuclear weapons program. (DOE agrees that reconstitution of the nuclear program is underway but assesses that the tubes probably are not part of the program.) (October 2002 NIE)

You're trying to change who said what. Although they didn't think the tubes were for nuclear weapons they still thought that Iraq was trying to make nuclear weapons. End of statement. That's it, that's what they thought. Stop trying to make it look like every scientific agency in the country disagreed with the CIA. You're just trying to push your crazy liberal conspiracy theories and its not working.

Also: September Eleventh.

in short, the aluminium tubes were used to blow smoke up everyone's collective ass.

sully, good point as the rationale of WMD has gone the way of osama "i'm not really concerned with him" bin laden

Torm, you're not helping! What you're essentially saying is that the only debate left to settle is whether the war's "enablers" were idiots, cowards, or liars: idiots because they got it so badly wrong; cowards because they knew it was all crap but were too scared to cross Dear Leader; liars because who cares about the truth when you get a chance to kill a whole society into freedom and, for the same price, watch great bombing videos on FOX News.

Whichever way it is -- and I admire Jon for trying to find out -- history will remember Bush and his hyperventilating cheerleaders for what they were: pathetic, incompetent losers.

I know it's tough, Torm, but someone's got to be the laughing stock of history, and we'll always be grateful that you and your ilk volunteered for the part.

O give me a break fag boy. Idiots cowards or liars you say? Hmm what does that make this man? http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/
Bill Clinton and tons of democratic senators stated that they believed Saddam had weapons. Many of them (including kerry) said that even if he didn't have them he was still too big a threat to allow to remain in power. Saddam and his cronies were evil tyrants. That's all the reasoning one should need to take him out. Those of you who think the world would be a better place with him still in power are just kidding yourselves. You're nothing but cowards that are too afraid to make any sacrafices in the name of justice.

Here's a little something you may not know about history my friend, its written by the victor. Something that democrats will not be for many many years. Get use to being the minority party asshole.

Good point, Torm. Also: September Eleventh.

Torm:

O give me a break fag boy... cowards... asshole...

Clearly I was too hasty in suspecting Torm was not interested in rational argument.

Oh, chill, Torm! Please don't have a hissy fit in public. Children read this blog in search of role models. This site is for tough-minded patriots, not lily-livered weenies prone to hot flashes. Please get a grip.

But you make a good point about sacrifice, though. I see how much you've sacrificed! You could be having a grand old time chasing after bin Laden in the Peshawar mountains, but no, no... Instead, you're doing your part in the GWOT by blogging away on "A Tiny Revolution." Now *that* is true sacrifice!

I remember a time when war supporters were rock-ribbed and hardy. They didn't pull any of this hysterically self-indulgent revisionism or throw out bogus justifications for doom mongering over tinhorn dictators. Whatever happened? We're stuck in a war that was lost before the troops invaded and the Bushists get all bent out of shape when they're called on their bullshit.

We're in a war we lost before it began? How do you figure that? Hell we could end it tomorrow if we wanted to. This little thing called the atom makes it possible for us to easily beat any 3rd world country like Iraq.

"I remember a time when war supporters were rock-ribbed and hardy."
WTF does that mean? Sounds like you've been spending too much time at the gay bay.

Rational arguement? Declaring conspiracy theories is not a rational arguement. Declaring a war lost before its begun, not a rational arguement.

"This site is for tough-minded patriots"
So you're just going to declare yourself a patriot and then lecture me on sacrafice? Yes I suppose I could fly out to Afghanistan and start looking for Bin Laden. So could you. Why don't you? You liberals are always bitching about how Bush isn't chasing him enough. The funny thing is you're lecturing me, but are doing the exact same thing! There's a new book out maybe you should read it. Its called Do As I Say (Not As I Do). Check it out. Maybe if you're a big enough ass the author will add you to the paperback.

PS. Don't lecture me about sacrafices asshole. Me and my family have made plenty for this country, and most likely a hell of a lot more than your college nerd ass has. Go back to your dorm room dick weed.

Torm:

Sounds like you've been spending too much time at the gay bay.

Which is the gay bay?

Is it Hudson Bay? Because I've always had my suspicions about Hudson Bay.

We're in a war we lost before it began? How do you figure that? This little thing called the atom makes it possible for us to easily beat any 3rd world country like Iraq.

Sure, we could go nukular and stomp am atomic mud puddle up againt any country's chest. Don't you feel a little embarrassed for proposing something more batshit crazy than Bush himself would contemplate?

It's you and people like you that have put this country's geopolitical interests in peril. We're hated without feared anymore. Thanks to the sick sexual torture you and your ilk support, we're despised as well. You and your leaders pissed on every bit of goodwill we had with other countries' ruling elite. The world is too dangerous a place for angry wingnuts to play out their Stratego crankery and seek relief through multi-billion dollar BDSM schemes. You're a punk. Go back to LGF or whatever cesspool you haunt and chew on that.

Wow! Now THIS is what it's all about! Dialog! Engagement! A rapprochement between adversaries! Truly, this is democracy at work! I dub this the Republic of Trollskogen!

Why can't we all get along? Let's just agree that it's all Clenis' fault...

From the Clenis' speech brother Torm linked to as a proof of something (not sure what it was):

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.

Such a change in Baghdad would take time and effort, Clinton said, adding that his administration would work with Iraqi opposition forces.

Yikes! Dennis, I was not expecting such a bracing photograph so early in the morning.

Also, I believe Torm is the real thing. But if not, I congratulate whoever he/she (it?) is. The telltale psycho fixations are well-modulated.

By the way, does anyone here actually LIKE the Democrats?

Anyone like any politicians?

"Sure, we could go nukular and stomp am atomic mud puddle up againt any country's chest. Don't you feel a little embarrassed for proposing something more batshit crazy than Bush himself would contemplate?"

Don't put words in my mouth fool. I never proposed using nuclear weapons against Iraq or any other country. That would be foolish. I simply stated that given the need, we have the ability to use them and are able to defeat any nation with them. Therefore the notion that we lost this war before it even began is ridiculous.

"We're hated without feared anymore. Thanks to the sick sexual torture you and your ilk support, we're despised as well. You and your leaders pissed on every bit of goodwill we had with other countries' ruling elite"

We were once feared? By who? The Soviets? That's about it. Sexual torture.... ya I'm all for that. Again putting words in my mouth asshole. First of all what happened at Abu Ghraib was not torture. There are people in this country that pay by the hour for the things that happened at abu ghraib. When did getting humiliated become torture? I'm sorry but if you consider what happens to terrorists at abu ghraib to be torture, you would be horrified at what happens to recruits at paris island. Trust me its a whole lot worse. What other countries ruling elite by the way? Europes? Who cares about europe? Their whole continent is going to hell in a handbasket. Just look at France, our number 1 adversary against the war in Iraq. They can't even keep order in their own streets. Europe is losing all of its power and it doesn't matter what their "ruling elite" thinks about us.

"By the way, does anyone here actually LIKE the Democrats?"

O that's nice, a blog full of socialists and communists. I guess that even though you don't "like" the democrats you have nothing against voting for them if it benefits you. Real high moral standards you got there.

O ya and Dennis its nice that you consider our soldiers to be blood thristy murderers. All of you communist fucks that hate this country so much can just get the fuck out. Why don't you just fucking leave. You stay here and bitch about how evil America is, well good, do us all a favor and head to fucking cuba or china or canada even. See if you like it in a socialist or communist country better. here i got a picture for ya http://www.grouchyoldcripple.com/archives/001177.html

"All of you communist fucks that hate this country so much can just get the fuck out. Why don't you just fucking leave. You stay here and bitch about how evil America is, well good, do us all a favor and head to fucking cuba or china or canada even. See if you like it in a socialist or communist country better."

Not bad. A little over the top for a parody, but well within the genre. The anonymous name with no link is an additional clue, since most trolls go that route.

See, Jon, this is why I don't do comments at my place. Offer a blank wall to kids jerking off online and soon it's covered in splooge.

For Jonathan Schwartz: Tom Ryder was a "caretaker" as Acting Director of Intelligence at DOE when that fateful NIE was published. He was (and is) a very good general-purpose bureaucrat in the Senior Executive Service, originally brought in by his predecessor to help with staffing and budget issues; he had no background in intelligence or nuclear weapons technology. In his role as Acting Director he was a member of the National Foreign Intelligence Board and gave the NIE a "thumbs up" without taking a footnote over the aluminum tubes issue. He did so on the advice of the division director responsible for nuclear and proliferation intelligence, who had represented DOE during the drafting process. The "tubes as centrifuge components" argument was pushed mainly by the CIA analyst who was drafting that section of the NIE; he had apparently worked at Oak Ridge National Laboratory in the distant past, which probably accounts for Judy Miller's mention of Oak Ridge in her article. The technical experts in DOE intelligence uniformly rejected his analysis, but the division director believed there was no point in taking a footnote and undoubtedly made sure that no disagreement reached Tom Ryder's ears.

Are you having fun, Torm? Maybe I wasn't clear. It's like this: I have this little thing called a file cabinet, see, and it's make it possible for me to keep files. But don't you go putting words in my mouth and saying I say I keep paperwork in them, you dirty commie. Only a moron who hated transactions would keep paperwork. It's fascist, too. Get it?

Okay so maybe I do and maybe I don't, but maybe you do and maybe you don't. Did you ever think of that? Ha!

That it's hypocritical of us not to admit we would favor the war if the Clenis were running the show.

I suspect that a theoretical Gore administration wouldn't have seen a nice size slice of the anti-war movement show.

As evidence I would point to horseshit like "Harry's House" in the UK where the Blairites began this awful slide to their current point where they are indistinguishable from the lizards of LGF.

There are probably yellow dogs out there in Bush is a War Criminal land (where I proudly reside) who would have been drinking Islamofascist-End of Western Civilization kool-aid with a big fat straw if Gore had done all this.

Not that that's the majority of anti-war folk (who probably aren't even all that political at all) but it is nauseating to know they are out there.

Oh, and can I note the wierd resurrection of the Red Menace?

Maybe I'm crazy but I've been reading these retards for awhile and I don't remember any of this anachronistic and wildly insane red baiting before at least 9/11. It's only really, really, ramped up since Bush and their positions have seen their popularity plummet to somewhere around genital warts. As they are pushed into a corner it seems they have reverted to a fantasy world where they do battle with reality.

I suspect that a theoretical Gore administration wouldn't have seen a nice size slice of the anti-war movement show.

Yes, I think so too. Assuming regime change was on his agenda, he would have been able to count on the pole star anti-Bush people: cruise missile liberals who badly wanted a "decent" war. Trouble is, once you start sipping the Huntington Kool-Aid, everything leads to Abu Ghraib and Falluja. Being able not to foam and rant like Torm is not something to be proud of. And as you say, the "Harry's House" people have lapsed into seriously creepy zeal.

Congrats Johnathan!!

Having publically gone after Judy, you have earned your first official paid troll thug. Torm will attempt to perform the most modern techniques of the Chomskization method in your blog comments section and possibly your email as well.

What is Chomskization? That's the WWF verbal wrestling technique exhibited where and whenever Chomsy opened his mouth in a publically monitored forum. At these times a paid stooge would start screaming insults at him at the top of his lungs. It was a precursor to Crossfirization template used displayed by the hosts of the "news analysis" show of the 90's.

Now the stooge can't just let loose any vicious incoherent drivel and remain effective, he must have enough grasp of the talking points to toss in an occasionally coherent statement to make it seem like his nastiness is a form disagreement rather than the attempt to inspire fear and embarrassment in the viewing audience which it actually is. A dual goal is to try to break the speaker's will to present his message while throwing the speaker into angry contortions. Look out for the well prepared and researched nasty personal insult
that may get into the mix to really throw you off balance.

Welcome to the rewards of gaining notice from the powers that be in the modern proto-facist state of America.

Ed Marshall:

I suspect that a theoretical Gore administration wouldn't have seen a nice size slice of the anti-war movement show

Geez, is it even a question? If Clinton or Gore had done it, I'm sure things wouldn't—for various reasons—have gotten much past the level of demonstrations about Kosovo.

patience:

Welcome to the rewards of gaining notice from the powers that be in the modern proto-facist state of America.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I highly doubt my puny efforts rise to the notice of the powers that be. The weird thing about people and power is many of those low down on the totem pole take it upon themselves to enforce the status quo, all without specific encouragement from their superiors. I think Torm is just such a self-starter.

Dennis:

splooge

Coincidentally enough, I was just thinking of renaming this site that.