The content on this webpage contains paid/affiliate links. When you click on any of our affiliate link, we/I may get a small compensation at no cost to you. See our affiliate disclosure for more info -----------------------
Last updated on August 5th, 2017 at 04:09 am
This’ll be news to Al Gore and Sir Nicholas Stern: Chinese car standards ain’t all that high.
(Via Michael J.) Meanwhile, from Bob Parks:
Today Al Gore says Saddam and Iraq has never had terror ties. Today Al Gore says Iraq was never a threat to the US. Today Al Gore and hundreds more say President Bush lied about all these things.
But what did Gore say yesterday on these very topics?
oh wait, I forgot that there are actually people who believe that.Posted by daddy dave on 2007 06 27 at 12:45 PM • permalink
Gore wasn’t lying either time. Both times he was saying whatever he thought would get him more support.
He’s not a liar, he’s a weathervane.Posted by Patrick Chester on 2007 06 27 at 01:25 PM • permalink
Al Gore has just gotten confused because he was caught in a temporal disturbance while he was using the Tardis to go into the future to see the bad effects of Gullible Whortening. That’s why he was so irate a few days ago with the Scientists who failed to reach a concensus about Goebbels Wartening.
The solution is to get His Goreness his own Tardis—used is fine (recycling!), possibly one with 600 million years on it already. If we’re lucky, it’ll make just a one way trip.
Yeah, a Glowball warmening weathervane.Posted by Tex Lovera on 2007 06 27 at 01:44 PM • permalink
The man is a cynical opportunist of the first water. I used to think it would be a great idea for Gore to run for president in 08, because I thought the Republicans would tear him to shreds. These days, the Republican Party being what it is, I’m not so sure, and it’s a scary, scary thing to think of Ol’ Lizard Eyes as president.
Can anyone think of a former US President or Vice President, except maybe Henry Wallace who was a bit of a screwball, who has denigrated a successive Presidential administration like Al Gore and Jimmy Carter has?
There are very important reasons why ex-Presidents and Vice Presidents do not remain involved in political affairs. Not least of which is to avoid giving aid and comfort to the enemy. Of course, a small consideration is given to instilling a degree of statesmenship and prestige to the position of former leaders of the US government.
The only reason I can think of Gore and Carter continuously bad mouthing the Bush Administration is to make their own individual performances look better in comparison. Fat chance that.Posted by wronwright on 2007 06 27 at 02:07 PM • permalink
John Tyler. From Wikipedia:
’…Tyler urged Virginia’s immediate secession.
Having served in the provisional Confederate Congress in 1861, he was elected to the Confederate House of Representatives but died of bronchitis and bilious fever before he could take office. His final words were “I am going now, perhaps it is for the best.”’
Your point is well taken however and I believe the Carters and Clintons and Gores will go down in ignomy for their self-serving revisionism.
#9 Wronwright: I think I read somewhere that even Wallace bacame a fan of National Review before he died. Carter and Gore are both, undeniably, losers, though why they should wish to draw attention to the fact by constantly entering the arena of ideas to a fanfare of dented slide trombones is quite beyond me.
Both Gore and Carter are losers, and they know it. But, being the self-serving egotistical bastards that they are, they will go to extreme lengths to cover up their mistakes. In blood, if necessary.Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2007 06 27 at 02:57 PM • permalink
What Bill Clinton’s administration was saying about Iraqi state sponsored terrorism in 1998…
“In 1998, Baghdad continued efforts to rebuild its intelligence network, which it previously had used to support international terrorism…”
“…Iraq continues to provide safehaven to a variety of Palestinian rejectionist groups, including the Abu Nidal organization, the Arab Liberation Front (ALF), and the former head of the now-defunct 15 May Organization, Abu Ibrahim, who masterminded several bombings of US aircraft. In December press reports indicated that Abu Nidal had relocated to Iraq and may be receiving medical treatment. Abu Nidal’s move to Baghdad—if true—would increase the prospect that Saddam may call on the ANO to conduct anti-US attacks. Iraq also provides bases, weapons, and protection to the MEK, a terrorist group that opposes the current Iranian regime.”
Note; At least three terror groups operating out of Iraq, with the full support of the Baathist government, had carried out attacks against America or its citizens, and all three of those groups had carried out cold-blooded murders of American citizens prior to our invasion of Iraq in 2003.
Those groups are/were the FRC (aka ANO), the PLF and the MEK.
If (please note the “if”) Al Gore is now claiming that the were no “ties” between the former government of Iraq and international terrorist groups, and that the Baathists posed no threat to America…then Al Gore is a stone cold liar…also, an out and out traitor.
Patterns of Global Terrorism 1998 ReportPosted by Dave Surls on 2007 06 27 at 03:03 PM • permalink
Slightly O/T but I am wondering if I suddenly lost my ability to read English, I could have sworn that at the Bob Parks website it says “VP of the Massachusetts Republican Assembly”. Surely this can’t be correct.Posted by Not My Problem on 2007 06 27 at 03:24 PM • permalink
In 1991 the United Nations Security Council acknowledged and condemned Iraq’s state sponsored terrorism in Security Council Resolution 687
“Deploring threats made by Iraq during the recent conflict to make use of terrorism against targets outside Iraq and the taking of hostages by Iraq…”
The Security Council said that because the Baathist government publicly threatened to use the terrorist network they controlled to carry out reprisal attacks if anyone intervened in Kuwait.
The United Nations also demanded the following, as a condition of the ceasefire agreement…
“Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism”
The Iraqis subsequently refused to comply with this order, and continued to support terrorist groups (and also to engage in terrorist activities themselves), thus, obviously, invalidating the ceasefire agreement.
Iraq’s failure to comply was acknowledged and condemned in Security Council Resolution 1141 issued shortly before the United States et al invaded Iraq in 2003.
If Al Gore (or anyone else) claims that there were no ties between the Baathist government of Iraq and terrorists, and that the Baathist government of Iraq was no threat to the United States…then Al Gore is a liar, pure and simple.Posted by Dave Surls on 2007 06 27 at 03:40 PM • permalink
“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”—Al Gore, 2002
Atleast the extensive crumple zones protected the contents in the boot.
Something for Gore and Stern.
I particularly like the “because the forecasting processes . . . overlook scientific evidence on forecasting, the IPCC forecasts of climate change are not scientific”
Great links El Cid and lotocoti. For what it’s worth, I posted this at the dead end of a recent Huckabee thread. Cid’s link at #18 is more comprehensive, but both should tell idiots like Huckabee that prior to the Iraq war, there was widespread opinion agreeing that Saddam appeared to be a clear and present danger.
As an aside to this, if anyone can find the segment from one of those Democrat candidate debates where Obama was asked what his response would be to another terrorist attack on US soil, I’d like to see it. From memory, he initially replied how quick and efficient the response at the scene would be – in other words, how quickly they’d clean away the bodies. In the end, when he finally got around to properly answering what he’d been asked, it was along the lines of tracking down those responsible and initiating some appropriate response, including possible military strikes. It sure sounded a lot like what Bush actually did after 9/11.
As for climate change, may I introduce to you the new kid on the block:Global Worming!
Jim Frederickson, the research director at the Composting Association has called for data on worms and composting to be re-examined after a German study found that worms produce greenhouse gases 290 times more potent than carbon dioxide.
BTW, Frederickson, I was knighted as The Lord Of The Compost, by none other than, Lady Ash_
Natural progression of Gore’s views will be that Bush invaded Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein from signing the Kyoto Agreement. Gore will argue that Saddam was so concerned about global warming that he acted to reduce the pressure on the world’s population by drastically cutting the number of Iraqis, especially Kurdish Iraqis who were particularly high in carbon output. The invasion of Kuwait was also an attempt to save the planet. The torching of the Kuwaiti oil wells was to deny the polluters of the west access to the very substance that is destroying the planet.
“I did’t agree with some of my friend Saddam’s ways but his intentions were always good,” Gore will utter.
I’m not so sure it’s the car so much as the driver- the Chinese seem to have some problems with mechanised conveyences.
BTW, if Algore is a liar, why aren’t his pants on fire? That’d be a five alarm special.
He wasn’t lying, he was being Al e Gorical.
Another Demo-dolt holds forth…
“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members…”
“…So Mr. President, for all its appeal, a unilateral attack, while it cannot be ruled out, on the present facts is not a good option.”—Hilary Clinton trying to undermine the war effort.
Ms. Clinton’s position (and the position of just about every Democrat bent on sabotaging the war effort against the Baathists and their terrorist proxies) was that even though Hussein & Co. were providing aid to terrorist groups who had attacked and murdered American citizens…that’s not enough reason to fight them!
Stupid cunt. What the hell do they have to do before you think it’s worthwhile fighting them? Anally rape you on the White House lawn?
And, people are actually considering electing this dumb whore as POTUS?
And, of course, it’s all bullshit anyway, because the Demo-scum were all for making war on Iraq…when they were controlling the White House.
On Dec 22, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Dec 10, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Nov 16, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Nov 14, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Nov 11, 2000 we bombed Iraq (Slick Willie’s peace bombers accidently hit an Iraqi school on that day).
On Nov 1, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Oct 30, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Oct 23, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
On Aug 30, 2000 we bombed Iraq.
And on, and on, and on the list of bombing raids goes.
So the question is is if you Democrat peaceniks are so against fighting the Iraqis then why were you bombing them once or twice a week year after year?
Democrat Peace Raids Against IraqPosted by Dave Surls on 2007 06 27 at 09:55 PM • permalink
Chink car standards will improve once they steal more intellectual property.Posted by flying pigs over mecca on 2007 06 27 at 10:31 PM • permalink
Yet one more reason why the dems have earned my lifelong scorn and contempt. If given the choice between a dem and a beagle, I’d vote for the hound every time. I’d vote for Bin Laden before a dem, at least he’s honest about his position. They are by far the most traitorous bunch of self-serving bunch of idiots America has ever produced. The remnants of the Summer of Love. They were wrong then, and they’re wrong now. If given their way, they’ll be the ruin of a once great nation. May God open the earth and swallow them up, sending to their justly deserved hell.
But, let me tell you how I really feel…
“Yet one more reason why the dems have earned my lifelong scorn and contempt.”
The only difference between MOST Democrats and a bag of shit is the bag.Posted by Dave Surls on 2007 06 28 at 09:59 PM • permalink
“28 December 1998 – 31 May 1999”
“Since the beginning of the present series of air strikes by the Allied war planes in the Northern and Southern no-fly-zones of Iraq on 28 December 1998 till the end of May 1999, bombing has taken place on 61 out of 155 days – 40% of the days had witnessed air strikes either in the North or in the South or both North and South no-fly-zones. On 25 days, these had resulted in civilian casualties. According to available information supplied by the Iraqi News Agency, which in 3 cases were directly verified as correct by UN teams, 73 civilians had died and 257 civilians had sustained varying injuries as a result of these air strikes (31 deaths and 58 injuries in the North – no-fly-zone and 42 deaths and 199 injuries in the South no-fly zone). Statistics shows that if each day’s air strike is treated as an incident, 41% of the total number of incidents had resulted in civilian casualties. Available information indicates that civilians lost their lives in 20 different locations whereas they sustained injuries in 26 different locations. 65 houses were also partially or fully demolished in the process.”
.Democrats oppose making war on Iraq? Yeah, right.
Democrats like Al Gore and Ste. Hilary never had any problem with making war on Iraq, they just have a problem with a Republican being POTUS.
Their opposition is 100% partisan.Posted by Dave Surls on 2007 06 28 at 10:49 PM • permalink
“Today Al Gore says Saddam and Iraq has never had terror ties. Today Al Gore says Iraq was never a threat to the US.”
If Al Gore said that, then Al Gore is the one who is lying.