Skip to main content

Making a point when you quote out of context

Back in the days of my Bible debating, we were taught that anyone can make an argument out of taking a passage of scripture out of context. Put enough of them at random and you can prove anything.

Right Wing News has an interesting take on what is going on with the "Moonbat Mania" over the "Downing Street Memos"

An excerpt from Rightwing News's post:

"For those of you unfamiliar with the DSM, it's a run-of-the-mill British memo from 2002 that basically says the Brits thought America was going to go to war with Iraq and that the Bush administration was working to compile the intelligence information they had to make their case. Here's the part of the DSM that the loony left has primarily focused upon:

"C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy."

So basically, we have a third hand account of what the perception was in Washington and the word "fixed," which the lefty kooks have seized upon to mean that evidence of WMD's was being forged, instead of what it obviously means, that Washington was trying to justify it's policy.

As a matter of fact, if you want proof that the Brits and Americans believed Saddam had WMD, you need look no further than -- the DSM. Check out this paragraph:

"For instance, what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one, or if Baghdad did not collapse and urban warfighting began? You said that Saddam could also use his WMD on Kuwait. Or on Israel, added the Defence Secretary."

Yes, the same memo that the left is using in an attempt to claim that Bush tried to mislead the American people about Saddam's WMDs, confirms that the Coalition believed the Iraqis had them. You just can't make this stuff up."

You can read more here.

But it makes my point. The raving lunatic moonbats of the left have believed Bush lied about the WMD and reasons for war since the beginning. They wouldn't even need a memo, in fact they read the memo "through there pre-determined beliefs. There is no reasoning with people like this - the best thing to do is to let them rage. So juiced is their desire to unseat the evil Bush that they latch on to ANYTHING they can. Another saying we used to have:

"Don't confuse me with facts, my mind is made up!"

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Calling Mr. Fitzgerald?

**UPDATED AND BUMPED****

As I told you about in this post yesterday as a source confirmed to me that the Justice Department has launched a probe into the NSA leak. Mr. Risen, you are in trouble - prepare your defense. I told you so.

The White House will be announcing the probe at about 12:30pm. My source tells me that this probe will most likely result in another prosecutor being assigned as of course Fitzgerald is still busy/dizzy on the Plame/Game No-Leak. Additionally, other probes into other recent leaks such as the CIA 'prisons'leak is in the works as well. As I said, this is the NEW Bush - on the attack - it's no more Mr. Nice Guy!

About time! Also covering Michelle Malkin

*****End Update*********

UPDATE II: Looks like I owe my source big time as yet another tip comes true as the Washington Post is on the target list as well for the CIA Prison leak.

****End Update II*************************************

Update III: Via Fox: "The government has no legal right to…

Is the lid about to be blown off Able Danger?

Those who have been wishing for a full blown Able Danger investigation are about to get their wish. The "gate" has been unlocked.

9/11 Iraqi Connection

With Democrats calling for yet more investigations into pre-war intelligence, and Republicans like myself pushing back to help their 'sudden amnesia”, the growing stories of Able Danger and even China Gate, are beginning to make news.

The three main theories about why Able Danger hasn't gotten out of the "blog stage", are 1) To hide Clinton era responsibility for stopping the 9/11 attacks, and/or 2) To hide the truth behind China-Gate, or 3) The facts show that there in fact was a direct link between Iraq and 9/11.

Taking either one you can see why the Clinton worshipping MSM for the most part hasn't touched the story. Of the later point, Democrats, the MSM and even some of our investigations state that there was no 'direct' link between Iraq and 9/11. Say otherwise and the MSM will slice and di…

Able Danger - Pulling Back the Covers of the real Clinton Legacy

First, let's dispense with the bull crap. The meeting between Mohammed Atta and Iraqi Intelligence officer Al-Ani, on April 8th, 2001 happened.

Yet, just don't mention it to the MSM, becaue since May of 2002, the MSM declared an all out assault on the story. A meeting incidently, that the Czech government has to this date stood by.

Let's review a little history:

October 13, 2001: Story of the meeting is leaked from somewhere in the Czech foreign service.

yet.....

October 20, 2001: Ny Times, John Tagliabue writes a story citing other Czech officials said the meeting never took place.

so.....

October 26, 2001: Czech Minister of the Interior, Stanislav Gross has a press conference not only confirming the orginal report but giving further details of Atta's other trip to Prague in June 2000.

then.....

October 27, 2001: The NY Times "recants" the October 20th denial.

The story continues it's oddessy of 'back and forth' until May 1st, 2002, when Walter P…