All Episodes
Previous Next
June 22, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:24
June 22, 2006, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Health food and he's eating potato chips.
Anyway, Mr. Snerdley is in New York today with us, ladies and gentlemen.
We're all here high atop the EIB building in Midtown Manhattan.
Three hours of broadcast excellence.
You know, we might want to, Mr. Snerdley, do like an open line Friday version of the program today because I'm not going to be here tomorrow.
So let's just do that.
Let's just open.
We go to the phones.
The program is all yours.
Well, normally Monday through Thursday, we talk about things that only I care about, but on Friday, we'll let you talk about pretty much whatever you want.
Ask questions, make comments, what have you.
We'll do that today since I'm not going to be around tomorrow.
I'll tell you why I'm not going to be here tomorrow in just a second.
There are some, well, moderating a panel at the Heritage Foundation with the 24 gang.
We got President Logan is going to be there, Greg Idson.
We got Chloe is going to be on the panel.
Carlos Bernard, who played Tony Almeida, is going to be there.
Michael Cherdoff.
This is going to be a big deal.
A couple of scholars from Heritage, Joel Cernow, Robert Cochrane, Howard Gordon from the producer and writer staff.
And it's at the Reagan building from 10 to noon tomorrow morning.
And we are going to live stream it here at rushlimbaugh.com for subscribers at rushlimbaugh.com.
More on that as the program unfolds.
But this thing got put together.
I had a dinner party for these people back in March, and I had Justice Thomas and his wife Ginny.
There, Ginny works at the Heritage Foundation.
Unbeknownst to me, this whole panel seminar got put together while everybody was having a good time and talking.
And I found out about this about a month ago.
And they asked me just two weeks ago to moderate it.
So I said, well, okay.
That's what's happening.
Phone number, if you want to be on the program, 800-282-2882.
It is the Rush Limbaugh program on the EIB network.
I realize, ladies, and if you're like me, you have a mixture of anger and frustration at a whole lot of people over the news of the discovered weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
And you're very frustrated over what some of the reaction to this has been.
Here's the timeline on this.
Senator Santorum and Republican Congressman Peter Hookstra both announced yesterday the finding of over 500 munitions or weapons of mass destruction, specifically sarin and mustard-filled projectiles in Iraq.
They were reading from unclassified portions of a document developed by the U.S. intelligence community.
Santorum said, since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent.
And despite many efforts to locate and destroy Iraq's pre-Gulf War chemical munitions, filled and unfilled pre-Gulf War chemical munitions are assessed to still exist.
According to Santorum, that means in addition to the 500, there are filled and unfilled munitions still believed to exist within the country.
Reading from the document, Santorum also added pre-Gulf War Iraqi chemical weapons could be sold on the black market.
Use of these weapons by terrorist or insurgent groups would have implications for coalition forces in Iraq.
The possibility of use outside of Iraq cannot be ruled out.
Obviously, folks, these are facts.
There's a lot more in these documents that has not been unclassified.
There's no interest in this.
There's hardly any interest in this from any quarter.
The White House doesn't seem all that interested in this.
Certainly the Drive-By media is not interested in this.
The Democrats don't want to hear a thing about this because it totally compromises their whole template of Bush lawyer.
There were no weapons of mass destruction, despite all of the talk from Clinton and the Democrats in the Senate in 1998, which we've documented here.
And so it's puzzling and it's very frustrating.
Why in the world is there such a reluctance, even on the part of some Republicans?
There are some and some Republican conservative media members to downplay this.
And I have a theory about it, multiple theories, in fact.
We've had a three-year propaganda program on no weapons of mass destruction.
None have been found.
This has just settled in now as fact, but it's not fact.
It is propaganda.
The facts are coming out, and there's probably a lot more to be unclassified if somebody will just do it.
Now, there are other problems that exist here.
In addition to people not wanting to stick their necks out, like San Torum has and Pete Hookstra has.
And Hookstra, by the way, chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, he's not a minor player here, not a minor figure.
But you watch, the Democrats and the media are going to try to taint both these guys as kooks.
Come on, they won't let it go.
Look at these.
They're just a bunch of conspiracy theorists.
It's already been established there were no weapons of mass destruction.
Well, here are the facts.
Well, but these were prior to 1990.
This is from the Gulf War.
This has nothing to do with what we went into Iraq for.
It's another refrain you may be here.
It has nothing to do with what they were there.
They were found there, ladies and the whole notion that there were no weapons of mass destruction is absurd.
The drive-by media wants no part of it.
Republicans, they're a little scared because of the propaganda for the past three years that has got everybody a little frightened to go out on a limb about this.
And some people, you know, because the propaganda has been so successful, some people are trying to say, this is not a big issue.
It is a big issue.
Forget the public relations on this.
You know, you have a lot of smart people on our side trying to play this down.
Not a lot, but you've got some.
And I think they are gun shy, fearing that this is not accurate or it's not what it's said to be.
And they're sort of like beaten dogs on this.
It takes inside the beltway.
It takes courage to go against three years of propaganda.
And when there's no leadership from the top on this, when the administration doesn't seem eager to carry the ball on this, then, you know, it makes it tougher for others to get going.
And the administration, there's a guy there named John Negropotty.
Negropotty has done his best to, you remember the 36,000 boxes of documents that we found a long time ago.
It took a long time to get those translated and released.
And it was elements in the administration that were trying to prevent that.
I don't know why.
I can't tell you, but it took a direct intervention on the part of President Bush to get those documents translated and released, which illustrate the connection between al-Qaeda and Saddam Hussein long before 9-11.
They don't establish a connection with 9-11, but the whole notion that Iraq had no connection with terrorists or al-Qaeda prior to 9-11 is foolish because it's in those documents.
There's also, I'm going to tell you something else, folks.
And I've said this before, I've just never said it in this strong a fashion.
There's a shadow government operating here.
You've got Clintonoids held over at state, at CIA, and at the Pentagon.
And how about Mary McCarthy from the Clinton administration working in the Inspector General's office of the CIA, ostensibly leaking things to Dana Priest at the Washington Post?
All of these leaks prior to going into Iraq from the Pentagon and from state to the New York Times and to the Washington Post About our war plan and what it was, people trying to sabotage it who never support this administration's foreign policy, trying to undermine it.
It's been going on since this administration was inaugurated in 2001.
Now, these are Clintonoid holdovers that Bush did not get rid of.
Bush and his team didn't get rid of these people.
I'm convinced it was because of the new tone.
They were out there trying to demonstrate how fair and open we can be.
And we want to set aside all the partisanship that went on during the 90s.
We want to clean Washington up.
We'd have a new tone.
Well, these people on the left aren't interested in getting along with anybody.
They're interested in power and they are interested in sabotaging the foreign policy of this administration because they dreadfully oppose it.
They also oppose it because it might succeed, which would make their guy Clinton look bad as well as they continue to struggle to find a legacy for him.
So, you know, it's a big problem here.
We complain all the time that nobody will step up and take the lead, but now two guys did: the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Pete Hookstra, and Rick Santorum.
So we have two guys who are out there leading, and people on our side, forget the left and the drive-by media, can understand that.
We have people on our side blowing them off, trying to say, ah, this is not a big deal.
No, this doesn't really.
This is pre-1990.
This doesn't have anything.
And that's the success of three years of propaganda.
I think the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is a pretty significant guy.
But he's being labeled a kook, and Santorum's being labeled a kook.
And meanwhile, people like Mirtha and John Kerry are held out as great heroes.
By the way, the Kerry amendment went down to a vote of 86 to 13.
I could not believe my eyes today.
I'm sitting here, I'm watching cable news networks.
I do that as part of show prep each and every day.
And they were watching this Senate vote like we were voting on continuing the Constitution.
The Constitution was up for a vote.
With all kinds of Senate vote about to commence, Senate vote has commenced.
Senate vote now ongoing.
Details of Senate vote coming soon.
It went down to defeat 86 to 13.
They'd never had a prayer.
It wasn't even relevant, folks.
86 to 13.
That's seven more votes than Kerry's resolution got last week.
Big deal.
This has been covered, and it's because that's a drive-by media template holding out hope that maybe at the last minute there would have been some people who, and Kerry's amendment was, you know, for veritable immediate withdrawal.
So, you know, the news that's being made today is irrelevant.
It's not news.
It doesn't surprise anybody.
It wasn't even that exciting.
What's exciting about listening to a Senate roll call?
Mr. Akaka, I. Mr. Akaka, I. Mrs. Lincoln.
Mrs. Lincoln, I. Mrs. Lincoln, aye.
Who cares?
Especially when the outcome was known.
Let me ask you people this question.
Why does the Haditha incident receive more press attention without skepticism, by the way, than the WMD info that Santorum and Hookstra released last night?
Why is the document found at Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's deathhouse immediately questioned and thought of as a forgery?
Certain information treated one way, other information treated another way.
Murtha talks about Haditha.
He has no first-hand knowledge of anything.
He's embraced.
But when Santorum and Hookstra talk about actual evidence released by our government, R.E. Weapons of Mass Destruction, it's either not enough or it's too old or who cares anymore.
It's not the point, Rush.
The Libs have been so successful with their talking point propaganda, R.E., there are no weapons of mass destruction, that even some on our side refuse to acknowledge the truth about it because they're afraid.
I've got to run here a little long in this segment.
We will be back.
Watch to do here, folks.
Sit tight, won't be long.
Ha!
Welcome back.
Great to have you, El Rushball, America's real anchor man.
With half my brain tied behind my back, just to make it fair, we're in New York.
There's our swan song in New York today, flying to Washington this afternoon.
Big doings tonight and tomorrow details coming up.
But I still have a few more syllables to articulate, enunciate, and project on this weapons of mass destruction business.
The same people, the same people who claim that the election in Ohio in 2004 was stolen, the same people who claim that the election in Florida in 2000 was stolen, without any evidence, by the way, played down this evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
Same people, same people who believe that we are systematically torturing detainees will play down this evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
Same people, same people who accuse our troops of war crimes before a trial and a verdict will play down this evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
I know the drive-by media and those lame Democrats are so committed to the Bush-lied position, nothing will allow them to move off of that position, no matter what evidence is forthcoming.
My friends, it is always, always an uphill battle to get the truth out.
And you can forget the drive-bys.
Their template is destroying Bush and destroying the war effort.
And that template is forged in common ground with the Democratic Party.
Just like we got the truth out on the Senate immigration bill, it is going to be up to us, ladies and gentlemen, to get the truth out on weapons of mass destruction and overcome the obdurate stubbornness and blindness of the Democrats and the drive-by media.
It's going to be up to us to give courage and a backbone to our own people on our side of the aisle to stand up as I am standing up now and saying these are facts.
And the same people relying on no evidence to charge election fraud, to charge detainee abuse, to charge criminal behavior on the part of our troops will look squarely at evidence and facts of weapons of mass destruction.
That's not big death.
That's a mess.
It's irrelevant.
It doesn't matter.
I'll tell you what they're going to do, folks.
They're now going to try to attack Santorum.
They're going to do so for two reasons.
They want to try to send a message.
Anybody else who dares go out like Santorum has and move off the accepted line that Bush lied and there were no weapons of mass destruction is going to be targeted, is going to be punished.
And they're going to try to defeat Santorum by saying that he is politicizing this.
In fact, that's become the latest mantra of the left, that the Republicans are politicizing the war.
More on that in mere moments.
They're going to pretend after they go after Santorum that the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee was not at yesterday's news conference, Pete Hookstra, because he, after all, has more access to this information than most.
And there is much more.
There's a lot that has not been unclassified yet.
There will be no calls by the drive-by media for the release in full of this document.
We've only got a little of it released right now because they don't want to know what all that's in it.
It would undermine their template.
They're going to be more interested in suppressing this, ignoring it, and moving on.
It is a secret.
The information in this document and others is a secret that they want kept secret.
John Murtha.
John Murtha is arguing out there.
If you've not seen combat, you can't voice opposition to his view.
This is pretty sick stuff.
It is repeated by the libs all the time.
I thought we were a government ruled by civilian leaders.
Isn't that what the libs tell us?
I thought the libs opposed military personnel voting in 2000 and 2004.
They tried to suppress absentee ballots in Florida from military personnel.
Remember that, folks.
I didn't know that Hillary Clinton or Nancy Pelosi or Chuck Schumer or scores of other Democrats had served in the miller military.
They keep talking about redeployment of our troops.
They keep talking about policy, keep talking about war policy.
But according to Murthy and the Drive-By Media and a lot of other Democrats, unless you've faced fire, unless you've been out there and faced those guns and faced those bullets.
And I've heard this myself, too.
You don't have a right to talk about this because you haven't paid the price.
You don't have any clue.
Well, I didn't know that Hillary was in the military.
I know she wanted to be a Marine, she said, but I didn't know she actually did it.
Same thing with Pelosi, Hillary Clinton.
Comes down to this, folks.
If you oppose the war, you can have served or you may not have served, doesn't matter.
But if you support the troops, then only those who saw combat are to be heard in their defense.
Well, as they say in Rio Linda, screw that.
They actually say something more powerful than screw that, but this is a family program with kids out of scroll today.
I'm not going to sit here and have anybody tell me or anybody else whether I or they can speak on this matter, let alone liberals who undermine our military daily.
They don't intimidate me.
And they ought not intimidate anybody else who didn't serve but still supports the troops and their mission.
I mean, hell's bells, folks.
John Kerry is out there talking about, well, I was elected, well, when I should have been, well, I will do this.
Has he ever been president?
Well, what gives him the right to start planning military operations?
Well, I served in Vietnam.
So what?
You've never been president.
You're not allowed to talk about what you do.
You got to wait till your president to talk about it.
If those of us who haven't served can't talk about how you're undermining the war effort, but Hillary Clinton, who didn't serve, and Pelosi, who didn't serve, and who else?
Schumer who didn't serve, if you're going to let them talk about it, then Hell's Bells, I am joining the fray.
And I'm not going to be intimidated by you wimps.
You guys haven't been president.
You guys haven't been half of what you want to comment on.
So shut up throwing your philosophy right back at it.
By the way, Bob Novak has a piece today.
Do you know what he writes this?
I had forgotten that federal prosecutors designated Jack Murtha an unindicted co-conspirator in the AB scam investigation 26 years ago.
Well, it seems a lot of other people have forgotten this too.
How is it that for months, not a single drive-by media outlet mentioned Murtha's unethical past?
They had to know about it.
This underscores how biased the drive-by media are, manipulate the news.
Santorum is bad.
He's a kookhookster.
You can't trust him.
Mertha wonderful.
Unindicted co-conspirator AB scam.
So we try to do here, folks, make the complex understandable.
Not only we try to do it, we do it.
Nobody does it better.
Not only does nobody do it better, there is nobody else.
800-282-2882, it's open line Thursday.
Not going to be here tomorrow, ladies and gentlemen.
So when we go to the phones, the program is all yours in terms of subject matter that we discuss.
Here's what's happening.
I got to go to Washington this afternoon.
The 24 gang, we've got three of two co-creators, Joel Cernow and Robert Cochran, the chief writer and exec producer Howard Gordon.
Greg Yitson, who plays President Logan.
Mary Lynn Raishkob, who is Chloe, and Carlos Bernard, who played Tony Almita.
Tony Almita is now dead, but he has been brought back to life for the seminar tomorrow.
A couple people from Heritage and Michael Chertoff, the director of Homeland Security.
And it's from 10 to noon tomorrow.
It's at the Reagan building, and they went out and got the biggest auditorium they could there.
I think it holds about 650 or 700 people.
This is what they asked me not to mention until today because they couldn't handle whatever interests for attendance that there are.
Now, knowing that would be the case, we've been working feverishly all week because we don't control this venue like we control our own network.
So we have been working diligently with a number of people to provide a live stream at rushlimbaugh.com of the panel discussion and seminar tomorrow that I am moderating.
Now, I want to we have, I always felt I have to cover my bets on this because no matter what we tell people about the demand they should expect, oh, yeah, yeah, we can handle it until it happens.
My God, we've never seen anything like this.
So we have tried to cover our bases on this.
We have received confirmation from the Heritage Foundation and the people at the Reagan Center, and we will be able to stream according to our desires here.
The streaming is being handled by a third-party company for the Heritage Foundation, and they have never experienced the Titanic Gale Force power of the EIB audience.
And so we've tried to prepare them.
We've tried to let them know.
And they say, oh, don't sweat it.
We can handle it.
But regardless, we'll have it streamed.
And if there are streaming problems tomorrow, fear not.
It will be made available.
We've already put a little banner up at the top of the homepage at rushlimbaugh.com explaining this.
Now, this is for subscribers only.
Now, I realize many of you are saying, well, how come it's just for subscribers?
Well, because there are massive costs in this, folks.
It's especially going through third parties and so forth.
There are massive costs with this, be quite frank about it.
And so we, at some point, the panel discussion, the seminar will be made available on the website down the road some weeks from now, just as DVDs of Rush to Excellence performances are made available down the road, so forth.
But if you're a member, you won't have any problem accessing the streaming.
It's from 10 to noon at the Reagan building tomorrow.
There's all kinds of fun events that we've planned before and after this.
They're private.
That's why I'm going down there tonight.
No, no, we're not going to talk to Chertoff about cutting New York's funding.
The point of the seminar, I'll tell you how this came together.
And I have, as I've told you people, I had a dinner party for the 24 gang at my fashionable oceanside estate, which according to the New York Times is going to be underwater here soon because of rising sea levels.
Yeah, they sent a photographer down at Palm Beach.
There's actually pictures of homes near the beach that might be underwater soon.
They're panic-oriented.
It's a beach erosion problem.
It's not rising sea levels.
I know it's beach erosion because those of us who live on the north end of the island have been taxed exorbitantly in order to move sand, which we have plenty of on our end down to the middle and south ends of the island.
But enough of that.
Enough of that.
Yeah, turtles will be right in the living room, and they have to turn the lights off inside the house at night.
Now, so they had his dinner party back in March 29th, and among the many guests were Justice Thomas and his wife Ginny, who works at the Heritage Foundation.
And the party went on until 3 o'clock in the morning, and people were all over the house, inside and outside, having conversations.
And one of the conversations took place between Joel Cernow and Jimmy.
Hey, you know, it would be interesting to do a panel discussion in Washington sometimes, if you could get there, about the effect of 24 on the public and the pressures that that might bring on the government and fighting terrorism and so forth.
And it led to Joel saying, hey, that'd be cool.
So they put this together, and I knew nothing about it, which is no big deal.
Not suggesting I should have.
I didn't know anything about it until about three weeks or a month ago.
And I found out a totally unrelated reason.
And Jenny said, yeah, we're going to do this.
We're going to do this.
Would you like to come moderate it?
I said, yeah, I don't know.
I don't know if my hearing would allow me to actually do that well, depending on where it is and so forth.
We worked on that.
So I'm moderating the thing.
And again, it's 10 to noon tomorrow at the Reagan building.
And I forget the name of the auditorium, but it's like 650 people.
And there's going to be people from Congress there, people from the administration, people from the State Department.
They've had massive media requests.
Maureen Dowd wants to come.
I don't know why she's coming, but she wants to come.
She wants to show up.
So there's that.
We've got a big dinner tonight to get ready for all this.
No, I'm not wearing a tucks.
I probably won't even wear a tie.
I have concluded that God, I have concluded that God does not want me to be choking while having a good time.
I probably won't wear it.
I may wear it.
Do you think I should wear a tie?
Sturdley is shocked and stunned that I won't wear a tie.
All right, well, I brought one.
I have one tie that I wear.
I've actually got one tie now.
I wear it all the time when I wear a tie.
I would be three or four times a year now.
Let's see what else.
We got a lunch tomorrow after the thing is over, and then a bunch of us are flying to the Dominican Republic tomorrow afternoon just for some downtime to veg, and we'll be back on Monday, then back to work on Tuesday.
So that's SCOOP.
All the details for this are at www.rushlimbaugh.com.
Let's go to the phones.
We'll go to Detroit.
We'll start with Mark.
Glad you called, sir.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Holy cow.
Hey, Rush, how are you doing?
Fine, sir.
Very, very excited to be on the show here.
Thank you.
You know, I'm sure it's already happened, but, you know, all the Dems and especially the press are definitely going to poo-poo this weapons of mass destruction findings because it's predated, as you said, 90, early 90s, whatever.
And they say it's going to, you know, it's degraded anyways, which it does degrade a little bit, but it still could wipe out a generation.
There's no question about that.
I mean, the press has just, I've come to the conclusion and just accepted that they're so biased.
I mean, I think my fellow Republicans out there, if they just accept that the press is just so biased and, you know, just deal with it.
It comes back to the business.
Life would be a lot better, but I don't know.
My life is pretty good right now.
I mean, if we found bin Laden tomorrow, they would come up with some way to poo-poo that thing.
Yeah, just like killing Zirkawi didn't mean anything and bin Laden wouldn't mean anything.
And that's what there's three years of propaganda have taken their toll on this.
There are no weapons of mass destruction, and Bush lied.
And that's the template of the meeting.
You have to understand, it's not that they're biased.
I mean, that goes without saying.
They're activists.
There's an agenda here.
And the agenda is to destroy our ability, to sabotage our effort to defeat this enemy and to take this president out via elections and his party.
That's the agenda here.
Anything comes along that challenges the lens through which they look at all this, it's going to be ignored.
And it's going to be discounted.
Like you said, well, these are old weapons degraded.
There's a lot more in these documents that have not been unclassified.
There's no curiosity.
They don't want to know what's in these documents.
They don't want to know what else is to be learned.
Of course, the facts, you know, facts are tough things to deny.
And the facts are that there were weapons of mass destruction.
And the facts are that Bill Clinton and Tom Daschell and John Kerry all warned us about it in 1998.
All of a sudden, now there never were any weapons of mass destruction.
Bush lied.
Clinton didn't lie.
There were weapons of mass destruction.
Oh, but Bush lied.
The British intelligence services lied.
The whole world lied.
And Bush sort of fudged the intelligence in order to get us into a war for a lie, for whatever kook, lunatic, conspiratorial reasons that people on the left want to believe.
But we know there were weapons of mass destruction.
They were used.
Saddam used them.
Last night on Hannity and Colms, Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney, who is a Fox News military analyst, said this, My personal opinion is, I think the fact is that the Russians moved large stocks of weapons of mass destruction out of Baghdad and Iraq in the fall of 2002.
We've all heard what General Sada, the Iraqi defector, said.
He said that they went into three locations into Syria and one location in the Baka Valley.
And if you get in there, and if you found those weapons of mass destruction, if you found the precursors, the fingerprints would go back to Russia and China and France.
This is McInerney last night on Fox.
Those are the three countries that had the most conventional weapon sales to Saddam Hussein.
We've done an inventory on that, so that's public.
McInerney said, I believe those three countries, Russia, China, and France, were complicit.
Because of that, I don't think the administration wants to trash three of the five members of this Security Council.
Let me translate.
What McInerney is saying is what a number of people think.
Those weapons were there, and they were moved out by the Russians and by the French, by the Chinese, primarily with the Russians providing most of the actual manpower and equipment to do it.
They were moved to Syria, Baka Valley, and three other locations.
And China and France and Russia, we all know this from the oil for food program, by the way, were all engaged in selling large stockpiles of conventional weapons to Saddam.
And in some cases, some people think maybe weapons that could be converted to the so-called biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction.
But McInerney says, I just don't think this administration is going to force the issue because he doesn't want to accuse three of our allies on the Security Council of being complicit here.
So if you that's, folks, that's why it's going to require alternative voices to keep the pressure on, keep the heat on, and it can be done.
Believe me, there are people livid about this, and the fact that it's being ignored and swept under the rug is only going to fuel the energy of those of us who want to spend time getting the information out.
Quick timeout, we'll be back.
More your phone calls on Open Line Friday on Thursday.
And welcome back, El Rushball.
Talent on lawn from God.
So again, referencing Robert Novak's piece today, he had forgotten that federal prosecutors designated Jack Murtha as an unindicted co-conspirator in the AB scam investigation 26 years ago.
Novak writes, I was reminded of it after Murthy became a candidate for majority leader, not by a Republican hitman, but a Democrat former colleague in the House.
In a long political career, Murtha has made bitter enemies inside his party who are alarmed by his new stature.
See, the truth is the Democrats are worried sick over Kerry embarrassing them, and Murtha embarrassed the hell out of them when he said, Yeah, we could redeploy our troops in Iraq to Okinawa.
It wouldn't take long to get them back to Iraq from Okinawa.
Everybody went out and asked the military, how long would it take to get the troops back to Iraq from Okinawa?
Oh, about a month.
4,500 troops.
Just about a month.
Well, that's.
See, the truth is, and the drive-by media is not going to report this stuff, but Kerry is embarrassed.
Well, the New York Times did yesterday because that was a warning shot across the ballot.
But Murthy, untouchable.
He may as well be Elliot Ness here.
Here's more from Novak's Peace.
Murtha got into politics in 1968 as a 36-year-old highly decorated Marine, and in 1974 became the first Vietnam War veteran elected to Congress.
By 1980, Murtha was a lieutenant of Speaker Thomas P. Tip O'Neill moving to the top in the House when the FBI named him as one of eight members of Congress videotaped being offered bribes by a phony Arab sheik.
The other seven congressional targets took cash and they were convicted in federal court.
The videotape showed Murtha declining to take cash but expressing interest in further negotiations while bragging about his political influence.
Murthy testified against the popular representative Frank Thompson in the AB scam case, which created lifelong enemies in a Democrat cloakroom.
The House Ethics Committee exonerated Murtha of misconduct charges by a largely party-lined vote, after which the committee's special counsel resigned in protest.
So at any rate, see, Murthy, though, is unassailable.
Santorum's a kook.
Bush a kook.
Rove's a kook.
I'm a kook.
Snurgly's a kook.
Hookstra's a kook.
But Mirtha, gold standard when it comes to the drive-by media's agenda and so forth.
The ab scam tape, you suppose the tape's still around?
Yeah, but I'll bet, yes, I'm sure people who have archives of those things reminded of his involvement will go find that tape somewhere.
That tape was shown.
I remember it.
It was in the 70s, something, 1976, 70, whatever, I forget the year.
I remembered it was it was huge.
It's largely, though, been forgotten.
Sort of like the Keating Fav, of which one of the prominent members was Senator McCain.
Shepard, Montana, Art, welcome to the EIB network, sir.
Welcome to the program.
Hi, Rush.
You know, FOSGEN or mustard gas was the chemical feedstock that the squatters over there in Bhopal, India tapped into when it killed so many of them.
That gives you an idea how nasty FOSGEN or mustard gas is.
And the Germans are so afraid of it that they require any process that uses FOSGEN to be in a containment structure similar to a nuclear containment structure.
Oh, come on, Art.
Now get with it.
You know this stuff's harmless.
It goes back to 1991.
It was just, what do they call it?
Degraded.
It's degraded.
It's degraded.
It doesn't.
This is nothing big, Doug.
Mustard gas, come on.
The only difference between degraded mustard gas and regular mustard gas is that the chemical byproducts are just as fatal.
They just don't burn like regular mustard gas does.
And the truth of the matter is, if I had been Saddam Hussein and had 13 months, I probably could and had access to the utility tunnel diagrams and all the homes and the total control of the transportation system.
I probably could have hid 4 million liters of material in Baghdad using the very common intelligence procedure called the purloin letter principle.
It's basically you hide it out in plain sight and it looks like something else.
Well, I think we've searched all that stuff.
Well, if you use the things and you do it right, remember.
Here's the thing that concerns me.
I'm being dead serious, folks.
Because this administration has seemed so uninterested in defending its own self on this.
I'm wondering how much we have found out we haven't told anybody about.
I know this Negro Ponty guy did not want those documents, those 36,000 boxes released.
I don't know why.
I'm not privy.
I'm not, my pay grade actually much higher than theirs, but I'm not in on their conversation.
I'll have to be back in a minute.
First hours in the can.
Look at this.
Study says Earth's temperature at 400-year high.
Hottest it's been in at least 400 years.
So what?
Doesn't mean anything.
▲
Export Selection