Comments on: Yellowcake http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/ Remember, I do this to entertain me... not you. Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:55:44 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Sebastian-PGP http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/comment-page-1/#comment-165858 Sebastian-PGP Fri, 23 Feb 2007 01:47:10 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/02/22/yellowcake/#comment-165858 The comments in that are just funny. Never let the dream die, eh? The comments in that are just funny.

Never let the dream die, eh?

]]> By: Rustmeister http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/comment-page-1/#comment-165818 Rustmeister Thu, 22 Feb 2007 16:00:10 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/02/22/yellowcake/#comment-165818 Sorry, SA. That's a sucker's bet. :-P Sorry, SA. That’s a sucker’s bet. :-P

]]> By: straightarrow http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/comment-page-1/#comment-165815 straightarrow Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:46:57 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/02/22/yellowcake/#comment-165815 My prediction; when the proof of his possession becomes indisputable the same people saying now "it never happened" will be saying "it doesn't prove anything" and "it wasn't weapons grade" and "he lacked the technical capability to make it into WMDs" and "so what? Our objections have never been about WMDs, but the illegality of the war". Any bets? My prediction; when the proof of his possession becomes indisputable the same people saying now “it never happened” will be saying “it doesn’t prove anything” and “it wasn’t weapons grade” and “he lacked the technical capability to make it into WMDs” and “so what? Our objections have never been about WMDs, but the illegality of the war”.

Any bets?

]]> By: #9 http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/comment-page-1/#comment-165811 #9 Thu, 22 Feb 2007 15:12:35 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/02/22/yellowcake/#comment-165811 Isn't that <a href="http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/2/220331.shtml" rel="nofollow">old news</a>? <blockquote>Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005 9:58 p.m. EST Saddam's 500-ton Uranium Stockpile Thanks to Leakgate Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald's decision to indict "Scooter" Libby last week, Bush administration accuser Joe Wilson is once again the toast of Washington, D.C. - recycling the fifteen minutes of fame he first purchased in July 2003 with the claim that Bush lied about Iraq's plan to acquire uranium from Niger. Why was Bush's uranium claim so important? Because if true, the mere attempt by the Iraqi dictator to acquire uranium would show that he had clear and incontrovertible plans to restart his nuclear program. Maybe that's why the press seldom discusses the fact that Saddam already had a staggeringly large stockpile of uranium - 500 tons, to be exact.</blockquote> Isn’t that old news?

Wednesday, Nov. 2, 2005 9:58 p.m. EST
Saddam’s 500-ton Uranium Stockpile

Thanks to Leakgate Special Counsel Patrick Fitzgerald’s decision to indict “Scooter” Libby last week, Bush administration accuser Joe Wilson is once again the toast of Washington, D.C. – recycling the fifteen minutes of fame he first purchased in July 2003 with the claim that Bush lied about Iraq’s plan to acquire uranium from Niger.

Why was Bush’s uranium claim so important? Because if true, the mere attempt by the Iraqi dictator to acquire uranium would show that he had clear and incontrovertible plans to restart his nuclear program.

Maybe that’s why the press seldom discusses the fact that Saddam already had a staggeringly large stockpile of uranium – 500 tons, to be exact.

]]> By: Standard Mischief http://www.saysuncle.com/2007/02/22/yellowcake/comment-page-1/#comment-165806 Standard Mischief Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:59:22 +0000 http://www.saysuncle.com/archives/2007/02/22/yellowcake/#comment-165806 She's a blogger. Upload the unclassified documents as PDFs or it didn't happen. She’s a blogger. Upload the unclassified documents as PDFs or it didn’t happen.

]]>