Rush Limbaugh Program - June 22, 2006, Thursday, Hour #1

All Episodes

Previous Next

June 22, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program

36:25

June 22, 2006, Thursday, Hour #1

Large

Audio Only |

Scroll

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 uh New York today with us, ladies and gentlemen.
	We're all here high atop the EIB building in Midtown Manhattan.
	Three hours of broadcast excellency.
	You know, we might want to, Mr. Sturdley, do like an open line Friday version of the program today because um not going to be here tomorrow.
	So let's just do that.
	Let's just open what you go to the phones, the program is all yours.
	Well um normally Monday through Thursday we talk about things that only I care about, but on Friday we let you talk about pretty much whatever you want, ask questions, make comments, what have you.
	We'll do that today, since uh I'm not gonna be around tomorrow.
	I'll tell you why I'm not gonna be here tomorrow in just a second.
	There are some uh well, moderating a panel at the at the Heritage Foundation uh with the 24 gang.
	We got uh President Logan is gonna be there, Greg Itsen, we got uh Chloe is gonna be on the panel.
	Uh Carlos Bernard, who played Tony Almeida's gonna be there, Michael Chertoff.
	This um be a big deal.
	Uh a couple of the scholars from Heritage, Joel Cerno, Robert Cochran, Howard Gordon from the producer and writer staff.
	Uh and it's at the Reagan building from 10 to noon tomorrow morning, and we are going to live stream it here at Rush Limbaugh.com for uh subscribers at Rush Limbaugh.com.
	Uh more on that as the program unfolds.
	Uh 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 Jinny there.
	Jenny works at the Heritage Foundation.
	Unbeknownst to me, this whole panel seminar got put together uh uh 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 uh okay.
	So 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, uh ladies and gentlemen, 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 uh Republican Congressman Peter Hookstra both announced yesterday the finding of over 500 munitions or weapons of mass destruction, uh specifically sarin and mustard-filled projectiles in Iraq.
	They were reading from unclassified portions of a document developed by the U.S. intelligence community.
	Uh 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.
	And according to Santorum, that means in addition to the 500, there are filled and unfilled munitions still believed to exist within the uh country.
	Uh 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 uh possibility of uh use outside of Iraq cannot be ruled out.
	Now obviously, folks, these are facts.
	Uh 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 that interested in this.
	Uh 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 lied.
	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.
	Uh 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 and some Republican conservative media members to downplay this.
	And I 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 is 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.
	Uh In addition to uh uh people not wanting to stick their necks out, like Santorum has, and uh 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 gonna try to taint both these guys as kooks.
	Come on, they won't let it go.
	Look at these 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 a rock for.
	It's another refrain you may be here.
	It has nothing to do with what would they were there.
	They were found there, ladies and the whole notion that there were no weapons of mass destruction is absurd.
	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 uh about this.
	And some people, you know, because the propaganda's 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.
	Uh, you know, you have a lot of smart people on our side trying to play this down.
	Not a f not a lot, but you've got some.
	Um, and I I think they are they are gun shy, fearing that this is not accurate or it's not what it's said to be, uh, and they're sort of like beaten dogs on this.
	It takes inside the belt, it takes courage to go against three years of propaganda.
	Uh and when there's no leadership from the top on this, when the administration doesn't seem eager to carry the ball on this, uh then, you know, that it makes it tougher for others to uh to get going.
	And the administration, there's a guy there named John Negro Patti, and Negro Pati has done his best to uh you remember those the the 36,000 boxes of documents that we found and um 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 uh is is is foolish because it's it's in those documents.
	There's also, I'm gonna tell you something else, folks.
	And I've said this before, I've just never said it in this uh strong a um uh uh fashion.
	There's a shadow government operating here.
	You've got Clintonids held over at state, at CIA and at the Pentagon.
	And I 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 uh open we can be.
	We want to set aside all the partisanship that went on during the 90s, we want to clean Washington up, we're gonna 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 they're they dreadfully oppose it.
	They also oppose it because it might succeed, which would make their guy Clinton uh look bad as well, as they continue to struggle to find a uh a legacy for him.
	Uh so you know, we it's a big problem here.
	We 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 and that's the you know, I think the success of three years of um of propaganda.
	I think the chairman of the House Intelligence Committee is pretty significant guy.
	But he's being labeled a kook, and Santorum's being labeled a kook.
	And meanwhile, people like Mertha 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.
	Uh, 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 a veritable immediate uh withdrawal.
	Uh so, you know, the 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. Okaka?
	I, Mr. Akaka, Mrs. Lincoln, Mrs. Lincoln, uh, Mrs. Lincoln, uh who cares.
	Especially when the outcome was um 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 Abou Mousab Alzarkawi's death house immediately questioned and thought of as a forgery?
	Certain information treated one way, other information treated another way.
	Mertha talks about Haditha.
	He has no firsthand 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.
	Libs have been so successful with their talking point propaganda, RE, that 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 gotta run here a little long in the segment.
	We will be back.
	Watch to do here, folks.
	Sit tight, won't be more.
	Ha, welcome back.
	Great to have you.
	El Rush Ball, 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 I still have a few more syllables to articulate, enunciate, and project on this weapons and 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.
	We'll play down this evidence of weapons of mass destruction.
	It's the 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.
	Ah, that's not big.
	That's a matter.
	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, and they're going to do so for two reasons.
	They want to try to send a message and 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 Mertha.
	John Murph 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, that according to Mertha and a 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 face those bullets.
	Well, 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 could 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 Carey is out there talking about, well, I was elected, well, when I should have been, well, I'll 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'd do.
	You got to wait on 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 uh who else?
	Uh Schumer who didn't serve.
	If you're gonna let them talk about it, then hell's bells, I am joining the fray.
	And I'm not gonna 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 Mertha 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 Mertha'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 kook, hook street, you can't trust him.
	Mertha Wonderful.
	Unended co-conspirator ab scam.
	So we try to do here, folks, make the uh complex understandable.
	Not only we try to do it, we do it.
	Nobody does it better.
	Uh well, 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 uh program is all yours in terms of uh subject matter that we discuss.
	Here's what's happening.
	I gotta go to Washington this afternoon.
	Uh the 24 gang, we've got three of the we've got two co-creators, uh uh Joel Cerno and Robert Cochran, the chief writer and exec producer Howard Gordon.
	Uh Greg Itson, who plays President Logan, uh Mary Lynn Raskib, who is uh Chloe, and uh Carlos Bernard, who played uh Tony Almeida.
	Tony Almina is now dead, but he uh has been brought back to life for the seminar uh tomorrow.
	A couple people from Heritage and Michael Chertoff, the director of Homeland Security.
	Uh and it's in 10 to noon tomorrow to 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 uh for attendance that there are.
	Now, knowing that would be the case, we've been working feverishly all week uh 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 uh at rushlimbaug.com of the of the panel discussion and seminar tomorrow that I am moderating.
	Now, I I want to.
	We have I 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, yeah.
	We can 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 uh to our desires here.
	Uh 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.
	Uh and so we've tried to prepare them.
	We've tried to let them know.
	Uh and they say, oh, don't sweat it, we can handle it.
	But regardless, we it'll we're we're gonna we'll have it streamed, and if there are streaming problems tomorrow, fear not.
	Uh it will be uh it will be made available.
	We've already put a little banner up at the top of the home page at Rush Limbaugh.com explaining this.
	Now, this is for subscribers only.
	Now I realize many of you say, Well, how come it's just for subscribers?
	Well, because there are massive costs in this, folks.
	I mean, I there it's especially going through third parties and so forth.
	Uh there are massive costs with this, be quite uh quite frank about it.
	Um so we um uh at some point uh the the panel discussion is seminar will be uh made available on the website down the road some weeks from now, uh, 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 uh accessing the uh the streaming.
	Uh it's from 10 to noon at the at the uh at the Reagan building tomorrow.
	There's all kinds of fun events that are that we've planned before and after this.
	They're private.
	That's why I'm going down there tonight.
	Uh no, I'm not no, no, we're not gonna talk to Churtoff about beating uh about cutting New York's funding.
	This is this is that the the point of the seminar.
	I'll Tell you how this came together.
	And I I had, as I've told you people, I had a dinner party for the 24 gang at at my uh at my fashionable oceanside estate, which according to the New York Times is going to be underwater here soon because of of rising sea levels.
	Yeah, they sent a photographer down to Palm Beach.
	There's actually pictures of uh of uh homes near the beach that might be underwater soon.
	Uh 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.
	Uh 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, say this dinner party is back in March 29th, and among the many guests were uh Justice Thomas and his wife Jenny, who works at the Heritage Foundation.
	And party went on till three 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 Sterno and Jinny.
	Hey, you know, it would be interesting to do a uh panel discussion in Washington sometimes if you could get there about the effect of 24 on the public uh and the pressures that that might bring on the government and fighting terrorism and so forth, and it led to the Joel say, hey, that'd be cool.
	Uh so I they put this together, and I I knew nothing about it, which is no big deal.
	I I'm not suggesting I should have.
	I didn't know about it until about three weeks or a month ago.
	And I found out a totally uh unrelated reason.
	And uh Jenny said, Yeah, we're gonna do this, we're gonna do this, we're gonna would you like to come moderate it?
	I said, Yeah, I don't know.
	I don't know if my hearing will allow me to actually do that well, depending on where it is and so forth.
	We worked on that, so uh I'm I'm uh I'm moderating the thing.
	And again, it's 10 to noon tomorrow at the Reagan Reagan building, uh, and I forget the name of the auditorium, uh, but it's uh like six hundred and fifty people.
	And there's gonna be people from Congress there, people from the administration, people from State Department, uh they've had they've had massive media requests.
	Maureen Dowd wants to come.
	Uh yeah.
	Uh I don't know why she's coming, but she wants to come.
	She wants to show up.
	So um there's that.
	We've got big dinner tonight.
	Uh you know, get ready for all this.
	Uh that I am no, I'm not wearing a tux.
	I probably won't even wear a tie.
	I have concluded that God, I have concluded that God does not want to meet 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?
	Sturdly 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 got I actually got one tie now.
	I wear it all the time when I wear a tie, which is three to three or four times a year now.
	Um let's see, what else?
	Then we got we got uh we got a lunch uh tomorrow after the thing is over, and then a bunch of us are flying to the Dominican Republic uh tomorrow afternoon uh 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 W.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 you doing?
	Fine, sir.
	Very, very excited to be on the show here.
	Thank you.
	Um, I'm I'm sure it's already happened, but you know, all the Dems and especially the press are are are definitely gonna poo-poo this uh weapons of mass destruction uh findings because it's you know predated, as you said, 90, early 90s, uh whatever, you know, and they say it's gonna, you know, it's 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 it's they're so biased.
	I mean, uh I think uh my fellow uh fellow Republicans out there, if they just uh accept that the press is just so biased and you know, just deal with it.
	It comes back uh life would be life would be a lot better, but uh 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, you know.
	Well, just like killing Zerkawi didn't mean anything, and bin Laden wouldn't mean anything.
	And that's what it there's uh there's uh three years of propaganda have uh uh 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 it's not that uh uh 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 uh and to take this president out via elections and his party.
	That that's that's the agenda here.
	Anything comes along that challenges the lens through which they look at all this, it's gonna be ignored.
	And it's gonna be discounted.
	Yeah, like you said, well, these are old weapons and degraded.
	There's a lot more in these documents that have not been re-uh-classified, unclassified.
	Uh, there's no curiosity.
	They don't want to know what's in these documents.
	They don't want to know what else is uh 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 Dashell 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.
	Every the whole world lied.
	Uh, and Bush uh uh sort of fudged the uh 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.
	Uh last night on uh Hannity and Combs, General Lieutenant General Thomas McInerney, who is a um 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 Bacaw 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 MacInerney 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 MacInery 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 uh actual manpower and equipment to do it.
	They were moved to Syria, Baca 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 uh weapons that could be converted to uh the so-called biological or chemical weapons of mass destruction.
	But Mackiny says, I just don't think this administration is gonna 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 uh that's folks, that's that's why it's it's it's gonna require uh alternative voices to uh 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 uh fuel the energy of those of us who want to spend time getting the information out.
	Quick timeout will be back.
	More your phone calls on open line Friday on Thursday after the and welcome back.
	L. Rushball, uh talent on lawn from a god.
	So again, referencing Robert Novak's piece today.
	He had forgotten that federal prosecutors designated Jack Mertha as an unindicted co-conspirator in the ABSCA investigation 26 years ago.
	Novak writes, I was reminded of it after Mertha became a candidate for majority leader, not by a Republican hitman, but a Democrat former colleague in the House.
	In a long political career, Mertha 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 Mertha 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 a rock from Okinawa.
	Everybody going out and asked the military.
	How long would it take to get the troops back to a rock from Okinawa?
	Oh, about a month.
	4500 troops.
	Just about a month.
	Well, that's the see the truth is, and the drive-by media is not going to report this stuff.
	But Kerry, his embarrassment well, the New York Times did yesterday because that was a warning shot across the bell, but Murtha, untouchable.
	He may as well be Elliot Ness here.
	Here's is more from Novak's Peace.
	Mertha 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, Mertha 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 Mertha declining to take cash, but expressing interest in further negotiations while bragging about his political influence.
	Mertha testified against the popular representative Frank Thompson in the ABSCAC, which created lifelong enemies in a Democrat cloakroom.
	The House Ethics Committee exonerated Mirtha of misconduct charges by a largely party-line vote, after which the committee's special counsel resigned in protest.
	So at any rate, uh uh see, Mertha, though, is unassailable.
	Sandor's a kook, Bush a kook, Rov's a kook, I'm a kook.
	Snerdley's a kook.
	Uh uh Hookstra's a kook.
	Uh but Mertha gold standard when it comes to the drive-by media's uh agenda and so forth.
	The ab scam tape, you suppose the tape's still around?
	Eh, 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.
	Uh that tape was shot.
	I remember it.
	It was it was uh uh in the 70s someday.
	1976, 70 whatever, I forget the year.
	I re I remembered it was it was uh it was huge.
	It's largely, though, been forgotten, sort of like the Keating Five, um, of which one of the prominent uh members was Senator McCain.
	Uh Shepard Montana Art, welcome to the EIB network, sir.
	Welcome to the program.
	Hi, Rush.
	You know, uh Fosgene 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 uh Fosgene or mustard gas is.
	And the Germans are so afraid of it that they require any process that uses uh Fosgen to be in a containment structure similar to uh a uh 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 it just it's it's it's it's it's uh what do they call it?
	Uh uh degraded it's it's degraded, just degraded.
	It doesn't.
	This is this is nothing big.
	Mustard gas, come on.
	The only difference between degraded mustard gas and regular mustard gas is that uh the chemical byproducts are just as fatal.
	They just don't burn like regular mustard gas does.
	And uh the truth of the matter is if I had been Saddam Hussein uh used and had thirteen months, I probably could have and had uh access to the uh utility tunnel diagrams and all the homes and total control of the transportation system.
	I probably could have had four million liters of material in Baghdad using the uh 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.
	This uh I'm being I mean 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 that 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.
	Uh, the 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 four hundred years.
	So what?
	Doesn't mean anything.

▲