Friday, February 16, 2007

Frank Gaffney: Whiny baby

On Alan Colmes' show yesterday, Frank Gaffney and Glenn Greenwald debated about Gaffney's column, which used a made-up Lincoln quote to imply that speaking out against the war was a treasonous hanging offense. You should follow the link and listen to the whole thing, because Gaffney simply could not seem to make, or at least support, a single logical point.

I do want to point out something that I find funny about Republicans, though. Unless someone is willing to give them a soapbox and all the time in the world, they get pissed. Colmes started talking to Gaffney first, then went to Glenn, but, when Colmes turned back to Gaffney, you got this little pissy moment:
COLMES: Frank?

GAFFNEY: Do I get equal time?

COLMES: I mean--I went to you first.

GAFFNEY: You attacked me first.

COLMES: Are we going to spend our time arguing about who gets what? I'll run the show...
And it went on like that with Colmes explaining that it's his show and Gaffney whining like a child.

The truth is this: If you count up the time Frank Gaffney had to speak--minus time when Colmes interrupted or redirected him with a question--Gaffney had two minutes and 23 seconds to speak. While Glenn Greenwald did receive less interruption, he only received 2:04 in which to speak. Either Gaffney doesn't understand what "equal time" means or he was simply more comfortable arguing about Colmes' bias than his disgusting, inaccurate column.

Update: Not only whiny, but a blatant liar
GAFFNEY: The Iraq Survye Group...found, contrary to what Jeff keeps saying, uh, what Glenn keeps saying, that there was a hot production line for chemical and biological agents in Iraq, there were plans to ramp it up when sanctions were lifted (which was immminent) and to place the products of those lines in aerosol cans and perfume sprayers for shipment to the U.S.
Um...
The 1991 Persian Gulf War and subsequent U.N. inspections destroyed Iraq's illicit weapons capability and, for the most part, Saddam Hussein did not try to rebuild it, according to an extensive report by the chief U.S. weapons inspector in Iraq that contradicts nearly every prewar assertion made by top administration officials about Iraq.

Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."

The findings were similar on biological and chemical weapons. While Hussein had long dreamed of developing an arsenal of biological agents, his stockpiles had been destroyed and research stopped years before the United States led the invasion of Iraq in March 2003. Duelfer said Hussein hoped someday to resume a chemical weapons effort after U.N. sanctions ended, but had no stocks and had not researched making the weapons for a dozen years.
But even that is speculation, as Duelfer had to admit (PDF link).
Over time, and with the infusion of funding and resources following acceptance of the Oil for Food program, Iraq effectively shortened the time that would be required to reestablish CW production capacity. Some of this was a natural collateral benefit of developing an indigenous chemical production infrastructure. By 2003, Iraq would have been able to produce mustard agent in a period of months and nerve agent in less than a year or two We have not come across explicit guidance from Saddam on this point, yet it was an inherent consequence of his decision to develop a domestic chemical production capacity.
Update: "Hot production line?" Here's what Gaffney said in November:
For the record, I remain convinced that the liberation of Iraq was a necessary and laudable measure to prevent a megalomaniac from handing off to terrorists weapons of mass destruction for the purpose of attacking us and our allies. Contrary to popular belief, the U.S. government has proof that Saddam Hussein had precisely such plans ready to implement. In fact, such evidence was actually documented in the Iraq Survey Group’s final report released last year with much obscuring fanfare about the absence of recovered WMDs.
To the eternal sorrow of Mrs. Gaffney, Frank uses "hot" in exactly the opposite manner the term is used by the rest of America.

1 Comments:

Blogger PhD9 said...

When he said "hot" he was reading from his cue-card which clearly said "not".

Sorry for the confusion...

7:46 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home